Today the People Pay Ten Million for the Emperors New Clothes

English: NHS logo

English: NHS logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On the face of it this seems a great deal for the voluntary sector and how they can provide help for the homeless, but the real truth is that it saves this government having to support the NHS!  As in the long run they want to change our health service into a privatised and fee paying one ,for those that can afford it! This is similar to the US Healthcare system that was based on the amount of money you could afford to pay for your health insurance, that Obama has tried to wipe out! So the UK Government will lead its people down this path, providing contracts for the likes of Atos!  
So watch this space because what is done today, is a blind and only those that look for the truth, will find out the real truth about how the taxpayers money is really being spent! As keeping people out of hospital and freeing up A & E looks good, but it allows other projects in a mess like the NHS Direct Number 111 and also other third-party contracts to thrive!
Enabling resources to be provided above the normal prices and below the standard the people who are ill should expect.
Extract from the Guardian 29/07/2013 The organisation originally won 11 of the 46 contracts to provide the 24-hour service in England. It had put a value of £43m a year on the contracts, but says its predicted income is £21.2m. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jul/29/nhs-direct-111-telephone-service-risk     
The story that comes to mind is the “Emperors New Clothes” and as we know the people was so scared of the Emperor they would not speak, as the Emperor had also been blinded by the truth of the tailors deception, but one poor and wide-eyed youth, saw the truth and spoke, these words out loud ” The Emperor Is Naked As Naked As He Was Born” then like all sheep the people agreed and they laughed and laughed! 
 Are you those people who are blind as it does not affect your life, or are you like the youth, that told it as it really is, or are you a sheep or a lamb!
Judge for yourself?
Then leave your comments in the box and l promise l will approve all those that are written on the subject, not spam and any really good ones will be featured on the front page of Ace News Services!
Well here is the article simply copied and pasted need the link to prove it here it is: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ten-million-pound-cash-boost-to-improve-the-health-of-homeless-people                     

Fifty two projects have been awarded a share of £10 million to make sure homeless people receive better help once they leave the hospital, Public Health Minister Anna Soubry announced today.

It is estimated that homeless people attend A&E up to six times more than people with a home – and that now 70 per cent of homeless people are discharged back onto the street without their housing or on-going care needs after hospital being properly addressed.

The projects are run by voluntary sector organisations who will work with the NHS and local government to make sure homeless people get the best possible support and care after they leave the hospital. This will help reduce the number of homeless people who are readmitted to hospital.

Some of the organisations receiving funding will provide:

  • Specialist training for hospital staff on the needs of homeless people;
  • Support to make sure their care continues after discharge;
  • Teams to support homeless people find accommodation that takes into account their health needs; and
  • 14 care beds for people discharged from hospital thanks to over £1million from the fund.
Anna Soubry

Anna Soubry (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Public Health Minister Anna Soubry said:

In today’s society, it is not acceptable that people are leaving hospital with no plans in place to discuss their ongoing care needs.

The £10 million we have awarded to these 52 projects will help stamp out the bad practice we know exists in some trusts when homeless people are discharged from hospital and make sure they have the support and care they need.

Housing Minister Mark Prisk said:

This Government is working hard to make every contact count, ensuring that homeless people have access to the help and support they need wherever they are – from the housing office to the hospital bed. Today’s funding, backed by a further £470 million Government investment in homelessness prevention, will reach people in need when they’re at their most vulnerable, getting them back on their feet more quickly, and saving local services the ongoing bills for repeat treatment.

Then he was replaced by a new minister! 

#acehealthnews, #10-million, #anna-soubry, #atos, #david-cameron, #department-for-communities-and-local-government, #department-of-health, #ed-miliband, #england, #health-care, #homeless-people, #homelessness, #housing-association, #len-mccluskey, #liam-byrne, #london, #mark-prisk, #mungo, #national-health-service, #national-health-service-england, #nhs, #public-health-minister-anna-soubry, #rick-henderson, #saint-mungo, #sam-gyimah

National Insurance Contributions Bill will deliver a £2,000 a year tax cut for businesses and charities.

The Bill contains legislation for the Employment Allowance which, from April 2014, will give businesses and charities a £2,000 tax cut off their National Insurance Contributions bill.

Infographic on the National Insurance Contributions employment allowance.

Benefiting up to 1.25 million businesses, this action taken by the government will result in around 450,000 businesses – or one-third of all employers – being taken out of paying National Insurance Contributions altogether.

See how the Employment Allowance will reduce National Insurance bills for businesses and charities from April 2014:Employment Allowance Calculator

#acefinancenews, #allowance-calculator, #business, #businesses, #david-cameron, #employment-allowance, #england, #insurance, #national-insurance, #national-insurance-contributions, #small-business, #tax-cut

Hidden tax on older – Care Home Residents – that councils rely upon

Care In The CommunityAccording  to a press release by Laing and Buisson in January 2013

Councils rely on a ‘hidden tax’ on older care home residents

Data presented in the latest edition of the Care of Elderly People UK Market Survey 2012-13* shows that 175,000 older residents (43.4%) paid the full costs of their long-term care fees in 2012. A further 56,000 (14%), while being supported by councils, also relied on ‘top-ups’ from family or friends. This means that a total of 231,000 older residents were paying in full or in part from their own or their families’ resources – this marks a record high of 57% of all (403,000) older residents of independent sector care homes in the UK.

The remaining 43% of residents either had their fees paid in full by councils (143,000) or by the NHS under the continuing healthcare programme (29,000).

Commenting on the findings, author and Laing & Buisson chief executive William Laing predicted a further shift to private pay in the future.

Mr Laing said:

‘The private payers’ share is projected to continue growing in the future as the rate of owner occupation continues to expand among the very old population at risk of entering care homes. Meanwhile, the quasi-private, top-up market will be reinforced by the minimal or zero local authority fee uplifts which look likely to continue in the medium term.’

There is, of course, wide regional variation with a much higher proportion of ‘pure’ private payers in affluent areas of the country including the South East (55% of residents), South West (53%) and East of England 50%). The North East, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, meanwhile, have the lowest level at just 22%, compared with the UK average of 43%.

What’s more, with the per week fees being paid by councils either frozen or subject to very minor uplifts, the gap between what councils pay and what private payers are being asked to pay is opening up to an alarming extent.

On average, according to the report, English councils are paying just £480 per week for residential care in 2012/13, approximately £50 – £140 less than the ‘fair market price’ range of £528 – £623 calculated by Laing & Buisson (with nursing care fees being about £150 per week higher).

‘The private payers’ share is projected to continue growing in the future as the rate of owner occupation continues to expand among the very old population at risk of entering care homes. Meanwhile, the quasi-private, top-up market will be reinforced by the minimal or zero local authority fee uplifts which look likely to continue in the medium term.’

There is, of course, wide regional variation with a much higher proportion of ‘pure’ private payers in affluent areas of the country including the South East (55% of residents), South West (53%) and East of England 50%). The North East, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, meanwhile, have the lowest level at just 22%, compared with the UK average of 43%.

What’s more, with the per week fees being paid by councils either frozen or subject to very minor uplifts, the gap between what councils pay and what private payers are being asked to pay is opening up to an alarming extent.

On average, according to the report, English councils are paying just £480 per week for residential care in 2012/13, approximately £50 – £140 less than the ‘fair market price’ range of £528 – £623 calculated by Laing & Buisson (with nursing care fees being about £150 per week higher).

Mr Laing commented:

‘The reality is that independent care home providers are having to rely more and more on cross subsidies from private payers. Without these subsidies, large numbers of care homes would be literally bust. It is understandable that cash-strapped councils are seeking to pay care homes as little as they can, since this is now the biggest single cost that councils have to bear, but it needs to be recognised that this amounts to a ‘hidden tax’ on private payers, who are in effect bearing the brunt of austerity measures.’

Addressing the long-term funding debate, the report says that implementation of the Dilnot proposals would certainly reduce the burden on private payers and their families, but it will by no means remove it, because the proposal is that only ‘care’ costs will be paid by the state once an (as yet undecided) cap is reached, leaving the individual to pay for ‘hotel’ and other costs which are included in care home fees.

For the first time, Laing & Buisson has split care home costs into their component parts (see table below) for a care home meeting all the latest physical and other standards:

‘The private payers’ share is projected to continue growing in the future as the rate of owner occupation continues to expand among the very old population at risk of entering care homes. Meanwhile, the quasi-private, top-up market will be reinforced by the minimal or zero local authority fee uplifts which look likely to continue in the medium term.’

There is, of course, wide regional variation with a much higher proportion of ‘pure’ private payers in affluent areas of the country including the South East (55% of residents), South West (53%) and East of England 50%). The North East, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, meanwhile, have the lowest level at just 22%, compared with the UK average of 43%.

What’s more, with the per week fees being paid by councils either frozen or subject to very minor uplifts, the gap between what councils pay and what private payers are being asked to pay is opening up to an alarming extent.

On average, according to the report, English councils are paying just £480 per week for residential care in 2012/13, approximately £50 – £140 less than the ‘fair market price’ range of £528 – £623 calculated by Laing & Buisson (with nursing care fees being about £150 per week higher).

Mr Laing commented:

‘The reality is that independent care home providers are having to rely more and more on cross subsidies from private payers. Without these subsidies, large numbers of care homes would be literally bust. It is understandable that cash-strapped councils are seeking to pay care homes as little as they can, since this is now the biggest single cost that councils have to bear, but it needs to be recognised that this amounts to a ‘hidden tax’ on private payers, who are in effect bearing the brunt of austerity measures.’

Addressing the long-term funding debate, the report says that implementation of the Dilnot proposals would certainly reduce the burden on private payers and their families, but it will by no means remove it, because the proposal is that only ‘care’ costs will be paid by the state once an (as yet undecided) cap is reached, leaving the individual to pay for ‘hotel’ and other costs which are included in care home fees.

For the first time, Laing & Buisson has split care home costs into their component parts (see table below) for a care home meeting all the latest physical and other standards:

Table. Breakdown of care home fees £ per resident per week, England average

 Care Costs
 Accommodation Costs
Ancillary Costs
 Operator’s Profit  Total Costs and Profit
Residential care
frail elderly
 £197 £151 £205 £44 £596
Nursing care
frail elderly
 £347 £153 £205 £59 £764
Residential care
dementia
 £221 £151 £205 £47 £623
Nursing care
dementia
 £356  £153 £205 £60 £774

On these figures, residents and their families would under the Dilnot proposals still have to pay £399 – £418 per week in care home fees on average, even after the state picks up the full cost of ‘care’. And in affluent parts of the country the costs to the individual will much higher. It would still be necessary post-Dilnot, therefore, for most private payers entering care homes to sell any house they own to pay for fees – either at the outset, or at death for those benefiting from deferred payment arrangements.

There are also hidden dangers from Dilnot for care home operators, according to the report. In particular, moving the upper limit of the asset threshold from £23,250 to £100,000 would mean that large numbers of care home residents who are presently private payers would be drawn within the ambit of local authority payment, meaning that a significant proportion of the premium fee rates which are presently needed to cross subsidise inadequate local authority fee rates may gravitate towards the low fee regime of councils.

Looking at the financial health of care home operators, and with one eye on government proposals to instigate some form of financial regulation on the largest corporate providers, the report highlights the very different fortunes of providers across the ‘north/south’ or ‘affluent/non-affluent’ divide. Those facing the toughest market, and bearing the brunt of council expenditure cuts, are operators with large slices of their care home portfolio in the North and the Midlands. Providers with a portfolio concentrated in more affluent areas are performing comparatively well, subject to the debt overhangs from pre-crisis days that still affect some healthcare providers.

Mr Laing added:

‘Market polarisation means that three of the four largest groups, including the market leader Four Seasons Health Care, are becoming increasingly unrepresentative of the market as a whole – and this is reflected in operating margins. Four Seasons, Bupa Care Homes and HC-One all have significantly higher than average exposure to publicly paid residents, and each has reported a significant decline in EBITDAR as a percentage of revenue since the austerity measures began. Meanwhile, the operating profitability of private-pay focused Barchester Healthcare remained above 30%. The 2012 results of the largest groups will be awaited with great interest.’

Elsewhere the report once again shows that, despite public policy which seeks to divert elderly care away from residential settings, the overall number of people being supported in their older age in care homes is on the up. In 2012 there were 432,000 older or physically people in all residential settings (independent and public supply combined), compared to 422,000 in the previous year, representing growth of 2.2%.

This fuelled an occupancy rate growth in the year taking it to an average 89.9% in 2012, compared to 88.5% in 2011.

Of the total capacity of 487,800 care beds currently operating in the country, those owned and run by the state dropped by a further 11% in the year to 38,800. Independent providers took advantage of this fall, adding 8,300 beds to its market share (now at 449,000).

Mr Laing concluded:

‘A two decade declining trend in the volume of demand appears to have been transformed into a rising trend. Independent sector capacity from new registrations continues to run at about double the loss of capacity from closures, making this unexpected surge one of the most significant trends to emerge from recent marketing monitoring. Without rising demand the additional capacity would impact negatively on occupancy rates and profitability at a time when the sector is also being challenged by council finding. However, this had not happened and new capacity has been coming onto the market at a faster rate over the last four years and there is no sign of this falling off so far in 2013.’

  • END OF RELEASE

Care of Elderly People UK 2012/13 – Key facts:

Care Homes

  • At September 2012 care home capacity in the UK stood at 487,800 places in residential settings for long stay care of elderly and physically disabled people across all sectors (independent and public) – up 3,600 places over April 2011.
  • Of this, 432,000 places were occupied in April 2011, up 10,000 over April 2011.
  • The estimated annual value of the market is £15.2bn (2011: £14.6bn). This breaks down as: for-profit sector – £11.1bn (2011: £10.5bn); voluntary sector – £2.2bn (2001: £2bn); public sector – £1.9bn (2001: £2bn).
  • Average care home fees across the UK for the financial year 2012/13 are ££731 (2011/12: £722) per week for nursing care and £531 (2011/12: £542) per week for residential care.

Non-residential care services

  • Public and private spending on non-residential social care and community health services for elderly and physically disabled people is estimated at £7.4bn in England (2011: £7.7bn). Of this, £4bn was spent by English local authorities on services, of which 60% were provided by the independent sector. A further £2.6bn was spent by the NHS on almost exclusively in-house services such as district and community nurses. Private spending accounted for an estimated £1.2bn on home care services. A further £500m was spent via Direct Payments.
  • Hours of homecare commissioned from the independent sector dropped from 175m to 168m in the year to March 2012 with council-supplied hours falling from 26m to 20m.

*Care of Elderly People UK Market Survey 2012/13. Priced at £835 for hard copy and £1,195 for hard copy and PDF. Available from Laing & Buisson, 29 Angel Gate, City Road, London, EC1V 2PT. Tel: 020 7833 9123. Web: www.laingbuisson.co.uk

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

William Laing Justin Merritt
Laing & Buisson Laing & Buisson
Chief Executive Operations Director
Tel: 020 7923 5347 Tel: 0207 841 0049
william@laingbuisson.co.uk justin@laingbuisson.co.uk

#acenewsservices, #austeritymeasures, #england, #home-care, #isle-of-man, #nhs, #northern-ireland, #nursing, #nursing-home, #residential-care

Tavistock: The Best Kept Secret in America

Formed in 1947, the Tavistock Institute is an independent not-for-profit organization which seeks to combine research in the social sciences with professional practice. Problems of institution-building and organizational design and change are being tackled in all sectors – government, industry and commerce, health and welfare, education, etc. – nationally and internationally, and clients range from multinationals to small community groups. A growth area has been the use of a developmental approach to evaluation of new and experimental programs, particularly in health, education and community development. This has also produced new training events alongside the regular program of group relations conferences. The Institute owns and edits the monthly journal Human Relations (published by Plenum Press) which is now in its 48th year, and has recently launched (in conjunction with Sage Publications) a new journal Evaluation.

Three elements combine to make the Institute unusual, if not unique: it has the independence of being entirely self-financing, with no subsidies from the government or other sources; the action research orientation places it between, but not in, the worlds of academia and consultancy; and its range of disciplines include anthropology, economics, organizational behavior, political science, psychoanalysis, psychology and sociology.

The ideology of American foundations was created by the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London. In 1921, the Duke of Bedford, Marquess of Tavistock, the 11th Duke, gave a building to the Institute to study the effect of shellshock on British soldiers who survived World War I. Its purpose was to establish the “breaking point” of men under stress, under the direction of the British Army Bureau of Psychological Warfare, commanded by Sir John Rawlings-Reese.

Tavistock Institute is headquartered in London. Its prophet, Sigmond Freud, settled in Maresfield Gardens when he moved to England. He was given a mansion by Princess Bonaparte. Tavistock’s pioneer work in behavioral science along Freudian lines of “controlling” humans established it as the world center of foundation ideology. Its network now extends from the University of Sussex to the U.S. through the Stanford Research Institute, Esalen, MIT, <http://watch.pair.com/Hudson.html>Hudson Institute, <http://watch.pair.com/heritage.html>Heritage Foundation, Center of Strategic and International Studies at Georgetown, where State Dept. personal are trained, US Air Force Intelligence, and the Rand and Mitre corporations. The personnel of the corporations are required to undergo indoctrination at one or more of these Tavistock controlled institutions. A network of secret groups, the Mont Pelerin Society, Trilateral Commission, Ditchley Foundation, and the Club of Rome is conduit for instructions to the Tavistock network.

Tavistock Institute developed the mass brain-washing techniques which were first used experimentally on American prisoners of war in Korea. Its experiments in crowd control methods have been widely used on the American public, a surreptitious but nevertheless outrageous assault on human freedom by modifying individual behavior through topical psychology. A German refugee, Kurt Lewin, became director of Tavistock in 1932. He came to the U.S. in 1933 as a “refugee”, the first of many infiltrators, and set up the Harvard Psychology Clinic, which originated the propaganda campaign to turn the American public against Germany and involve us in World War II.

In 1938, Roosevelt executed a secret agreement with Churchill which in effect ceded U.S. sovereignty to England, because it agreed to let Special Operations Executive control U.S. policies. To implement this agreement, Roosevelt sent General Donovan to London for indoctrination before setting up OSS (now the CIA) under the aegis of SOE-SIS. The entire OSS program, as well as the CIA has always worked on guidelines set up by the Tavistock Institute.

Tavistock Institute originated the mass civilian bombing raids carried out by Roosevelt and Churchill purely as a clinical experiment in mass terror, keeping records of the results as they watched the “guinea pigs” reacting under “controlled laboratory conditions”. All Tavistock and American foundation techniques have a single goal—to break down the psychological strength of the individual and render him helpless to oppose the dictators of the World Order. Any technique which helps to break down the family unit, and family inculcated principles of religion, honor, patriotism and sexual behavior, is used by the Tavistock scientists as weapons of crowd control.

The methods of Freudian psychotherapy induce permanent mental illness in those who undergo this treatment by destabilizing their character. The victim is then advised to “establish new rituals of personal interaction”, that is, to indulge in brief sexual encounters which actually set the participants adrift with no stable personal relationships in their lives, destroying their ability to establish or maintain a family. Tavistock Institute has developed such power in the U.S. that no one achieves prominence in any field unless he has been trained in behavioral science at Tavistock or one of its subsidiaries.

Henry Kissinger, whose meteoric rise to power is otherwise inexplicable, was a German refugee and student of Sir John Rawlings-Reese at SHAEF. Dr. Peter Bourne, a Tavistock Institute psychologist, picked Jimmy Carter for President of the U.S. solely because Carter had undergone an intensive brainwashing program administered by Admiral Hyman Rickover at Annapolis. The “experiment” in compulsory racial integration in the U.S. was organized by Ronald Lippert, of the OSS and the American Jewish Congress, and director of child training at the Commission on Community Relations. The program was designed to break down the individual’s sense of personal knowledge in his identity, his racial heritage. Through the Stanford Research Institute, Tavistock controls the National Education Association. The Institute of Social Research at the National Training Lab brain washes the leading executives of business and government.

Such is the power of Tavistock that our entire space program was scrapped for nine years so that the Soviets could catch up. The hiatus was demanded in an article written by Dr. Anatol Rapport, and was promptly granted by the government, to the complete mystification of everyone connected with NASA. Another prominent Tavistock operation is the Wharton School of Finance, at the University of Pennsylvania. A single common denominator identifies the common Tavistock strategy—the use of drugs. The infamous MK Ultra program of the CIA, in which unsuspecting CIA officials were given LSD, and their reaction studied like “guinea pigs”, resulted in several deaths.

The U.S. Government had to pay millions in damages to the families of the victims, but the culprits were never indicted. The program originated when Sandoz AG, a Swiss drug firm, owned by S.G. Warburg Co. of London, developed Lysergic Acid [LSD]. Roosevelt’s advisor, James Paul Warburg, son of Paul Warburg who wrote the Federal Reserve Act, and nephew of Max Warburg who had financed Hitler, set up the <http://watch.pair.com/FreedomHouse.html#ips>Institute for Policy Studies to promote the drug. The result was the LSD “counter-culture” of the 1960s, the “student revolution”, which was financed by $25 million from the CIA.

One part of MK Ultra was the Human Ecology Fund; the CIA also paid Dr. Herbert Kelman of Harvard to carry out further experiments on mind control. In the 1950s, the CIA financed extensive LSD experiments in Canada. Dr. D. Ewen Cameron, president of the Canadian Psychological Association, and director of Royal Victorian Hospital, Montreal, received large payments from the CIA to give 53 patients large doses of LSD and record their reactions; the patients were drugged into weeks of sleep and then given electric shock treatments.

The U.S. Government had to pay millions in damages to the families of the victims, but the culprits were never indicted. The program originated when Sandoz AG, a Swiss drug firm, owned by S.G. Warburg Co. of London, developed Lysergic Acid [LSD]. Roosevelt’s advisor, James Paul Warburg, son of Paul Warburg who wrote the Federal Reserve Act, and nephew of Max Warburg who had financed Hitler, set up the <http://watch.pair.com/FreedomHouse.html#ips>Institute for Policy Studies to promote the drug. The result was the LSD “counter-culture” of the 1960s, the “student revolution”, which was financed by $25 million from the CIA.

One part of MK Ultra was the Human Ecology Fund; the CIA also paid Dr. Herbert Kelman of Harvard to carry out further experiments on mind control. In the 1950s, the CIA financed extensive LSD experiments in Canada. Dr. D. Ewen Cameron, president of the Canadian Psychological Association, and director of Royal Victorian Hospital, Montreal, received large payments from the CIA to give 53 patients large doses of LSD and record their reactions; the patients were drugged into weeks of sleep and then given electric shock treatments.

Today the Tavistock Institute operates a $6 Billion a year network of Foundations in the U.S., all of it funded by U.S. taxpayers’ money. Ten major institutions are under its direct control, with 400 subsidiaries, and 3000 other study groups and think tanks which originate many types of programs to increase the control of the World Order over the American people. The Stanford Research Institute, adjoining the Hoover Institution, is a $150 million a year operation with 3300 employees. It carries on program surveillance for Bechtel, Kaiser, and 400 other companies, and extensive intelligence operations for the CIA. It is the largest institution on the West Coast promoting mind control and the behavioral sciences.

One of the key agencies as a conduit for secret instructions from Tavistock is the Ditchley Foundation, founded in 1957. The American branch of the Ditchley Foundation is run by Cyrus Vance, former Secretary of State, and director of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Winston Lord, president of the Council on Foreign Relations.

[Editor, Tim Aho’s note: The wife of Winston Lord (CFR, Bilderberg, Skull & Bones), Bette Bao Lord (CFR, Bilderberg), is Chairman of the Board of Freedom House whose manipulation of the Christian Right via the Religious Persecution issue is documented in our report <http://watch.pair.com/FreedomHouse.html>Freedom House: A CFR Front.]

One of the principal but little known operations of the Rockefeller Foundation has been its techniques for controlling world agriculture. Its director, Kenneth Wernimont, set up Rockefeller controlled agricultural programs throughout Mexico and Latin America. The independent farmer is a great threat to the World Order, because he produces for himself, and because his produce can be converted into capital, which gives him independence. In Soviet Russia, the Bolsheviks believed they had attained total control over the people; they were dismayed to find their plans threatened by the stubborn independence of the small farmers, the Kulaks.

Stalin ordered the OGPU to seize all food and animals of the Kulaks, and to starve them out. The Chicago American, February 25, 1935 carried a front page headline, SIX MILLION PERISH IN SOVIET FAMINE; Peasants’ Crops Seized, They and their Animals Starve. To draw attention from this atrocity, it was later alleged that the Germans, not the Soviets, had killed six million people, the number taken from the Chicago American headline by a Chicago publicist.

The Communist Party, the Party of the Peasants and Workers, exterminated the peasants and enslaved the workers. Many totalitarian regimes have found the small farmer to be their biggest stumbling block. The French Reign of Terror was directed, not against the aristocrats, many of whom were sympathetic to it, but against the small farmers who refused to turn over their grain to the revolutionary tribunals in exchange for the worthless assignats. In the United States, the foundations are presently engaged in the same type of war of extermination against the American farmer.

The traditional formula of land plus labor for the farmer has been altered due to the farmer’s need for purchasing power, to buy industrial goods needed in his farming operations. Because of this need for capital, the farmer is especially vulnerable to the World Order’s manipulation of interest rates, which is bankrupting him. Just as in the Soviet Union, in the early 1930s, when Stalin ordered the Kulaks to give up their small plots of land to live and work on the collective farms, the American small farmer faces the same type of extermination, being forced to give up his small plot of land to become a hired hand for the big agricultural trusts. The Brookings Institution and other foundations originated the monetary programs implemented by the Federal Reserve System to destroy the American farmer, a replay of the Soviet tragedy in Russia, with one proviso that the farmer will be allowed to survive if he becomes a slave worker of the giant trusts.

Once the citizen becomes aware of the true role of the foundations, he can understand the high interest rates, high taxes, the destruction of the family, the degradation of the churches into forums for revolution, the subversion of the universities into CIA cesspools of drug addiction, and the halls of government into sewers of international espionage and intrigue. The American citizen can now understand why every agent of the federal government is against him; the alphabet agencies, the FBI, IRS, CIA and BATF must make war on the citizen in order to carry out the programs of the foundations.

The foundations are in direct violation of their charters, which commit them to do “charitable” work, because they make no grants which are not part of a political goal. The charge has been made, and never denied, that the Heritage-AEI network has at least two KGB moles on its staff. The employment of professional intelligence operatives as “charitable” workers, as was done in the Red Cross Mission to Russia in 1917, exposes the sinister political economic and social goals which the World Order requires the foundations to achieve through their ” bequests “.

Not only is this tax fraud, because the foundations are granted tax exemption solely to do charitable work, but it is criminal syndicalism, conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States of America, Constitutional Law 213, Corpus Juris Secundum 16. For the first time, the close interlocking of the foundation “syndicate” has been revealed by the names of its principle incorporators—Daniel Coit Gilman, who incorporated the Peabody Fund and the John Slater Fund, and became an incorporator of the General Education Board (now the Rockefeller Foundation); Gilman, who also incorporated the Russell Trust in 1856, later became an incorporator of the Carnegie Institution with Andrew Dickson White (Russell Trust) and Frederic A. Delano. Delano also was an original incorporator of the Brookings Institution and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Daniel Coit Gilman incorporated the Russell Sage Foundation with Cleveland H. Dodge of the National City Bank. These foundations incorporators have been closely linked with the Federal Reserve System, the War Industries Board of World War I, the OSS of World War II and the CIA. They have also been closely linked with the American International Corporation, which was formed to instigate the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. Delano, an uncle of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was on the original Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in 1914. His brother-in-law founded the influential Washington law firm of Covington and Burling. The Delanos and other ruling families of the World Order trace their lineage directly back to William of Orange and the regime which granted the charter of the Bank of England.

#acenewsservices, #climate, #duke-of-bedford, #england, #hudson-institute, #libya, #london, #politics, #research, #science, #sri-international, #tavistock, #tavistock-institute, #tavistock-institute-of-human-relations, #united-states

EUropean Economic Community – Prelude To The EU

Euro Disaster  Peace, When It Loses The War.’ and details of the massive amounts of cash moved out of Germany during the war to safeguard the future of German domination against the economic collapse of losing the Second World War against EUropean Union. AND connections with organisations like The Bilderberger’s, Council for Foreign relations, Tri Lateral Commission and other arms of the New World Order.

Around the end of 1939, most of Europe was either consciously or unconsciously under the influence of the economic concept of England. Over recent years, however, it has been swept out of European countries, politically, militarily and economically. Politically the three-power pact has given honour once again to the ancient figures of life, people and room. It has also established a natural order and a neighbourly way of co-existing as the ideal of the new order. The foundation of English economics, which is the basis of the balance of powers, has been militarily destroyed. And economically, a change has come about after the political and military development, the shape of which is easy to describe, but whose final significance is very difficult to evaluate. I can only repeat, that the changing order that is happening now has to be ranked as one of the greatest economic revolutions in history. It signifies a reversion of the economy of Europe to a time before the English concept of building an overseas Europe, i.e. an awareness of one’s own country.

The Discussion so far and its Results

Discussions about questions relating to Europe started as the power of the NSADP grew. At the Congress of Europe in Rome from 14th to 20th November 1932, Alfred Rosenberg developed, for the first time in front of an international forum, thoughts and ideas that have moved us since. No one, who fights for a new economic order in Europe, can ignore these perceptions and conclusions. The economic and political wheel was set in motion, when the NSDAP declared the militarization of the German economy. It is to the credit of the journal ‘Germany’s Economy’ that it first seized these questions in 1932, kept on bringing them up and stuck doggedly to those original perceptions. The idea of German economic self- sufficiency in the new political sense and the German economic militarization are synonymous with this journal. Besides this, Daitz, the ambassador, has earned the special credit of being the first to have related German economic history to the present time. Part II of his selected speeches and essays, which appeared in 1938 under the title ‘Germany and the European Economy’, summarizes his concepts formed between 1932 and 1938. The Italian, Carlo Scarfoglio, delivered with his book ‘England and the Continental Mainland’, a decisive historical contribution to the consciousness of the European continent. Meanwhile German and Italian economic policy drew the political consequences from the historical lessons that were learnt during the blockade and learnt again during the sanctions. The speech made in Munich in 1939 by the leader of the Reich’s farmers, R. Walther Darre, at the 6th Great Lecture at the Commission of Economic Policy of the NSDAP, takes a special place in the discussion at that time. Its theme was “The market order of the National-Socialist agricultural policy – setting the pace for a new foreign trade order.”

While our leader maintained the hope of reaching a peaceful agreement with England, the route for European economic unity remained problematic. The end of 1939 was a decisive point and it was natural that the years 1940-1941 heralded the new economic and political order. The writer, in particular, developed and extended in speech and writing the intellectual fund of the new economic policy, which has been translated into most languages, so that today everywhere the great constructive texts are known. These contexts revolve around the following issues:

  1. Theory about the Reich and the European economy.

  1. The historic, cultural, and economic significance of the German economic order.

  1. The foundations of the future economic relationships between the states.

  1. The nature of the European economic community.

On 25th June 1940 the Reich’s Economic Minister, Funk, publicised in his official capacity his thoughts, which underlined the development so far and thus gave them state sanction. In October, the journal ‘German Economy’ summarised for the first time the principles of European co-operation, the fundamental principles of German foreign trade, Germany’s export economy and ways and means of promoting export. It did so in a popular review “About A New Europe”, providing an overview of the important problem of European economic fusion. Around the end of 1940 the Berlin historian Fritz Rorig finally outlined in his book “Hanseatic Essence” the historical foundations of the greatest economic and political achievement by the Germans.

I am clear in my mind that total clarity is to be found in the principle questions: The necessity is recognised for a political order for the economic co-operation of the people. The nature of the new order : awareness of tradition, using up one’s own economic resources, long-term economic agreements and fair relations, is affirmed. The economic inter-dependence is underlined by fate. The economic unity of Europe is thus clear.

Economic Practice:

Even practical economic life has increasingly allowed entry to new thoughts. I am able to see the decisive steps in the start and realisation of the following points:

  1. In the increasing payment traffic through Berlin.

  1. In the exchange of experiences in various areas of economic life. Thereto belong also the statements of ministers and business people, the calls made by special advisers and the collective tackling of important tasks relating to the economy. Even the specialist is surprised, once he has taken the trouble to put together all the connections. Today they are already legion.

  1. In the signing of long-term economic agreements between the Reich and the other European states, which the public is aware of, there can be no doubt that such agreements are those of the future.

Of course, that cannot prevent unclear points and new problems from arising, which become clear at the time when the situation is reviewed.

Problems Related to the Economic Community of Continental Europe

These unclear points primarily relate to the concept of economic direction, the extent of solidarity and neighbourly attitude, the development of one’s own powers, the care to maintain the standard of living and the question of raw material purchase from foreign countries. It is natural that one or another issue will take priority of interest, depending on the set of conditions that prevail. It should be attempted at this point to give a reply, albeit a summary one.

There can be no doubt that the concept of direction of the economy, or rather its leadership, is as novel as it is revolutionary. Its classification is all the more important, as the fate and consequence of European co-operation depend principally on a new consistent form of economic understanding. The Anglo-Saxon view of economics is dead: consequently, even the so-called ‘classical’ national economy is no longer classical, but it has survived. So what it comes down to is that a new understanding arises to do with ideology and terminology, which represents a sound basis for agreement and co-operation. Relating to this, one must point out the following in detail:

  1. Economic direction is not a momentary emergency solution, instead it forms the core of new theory and practice. First of all, it takes the place of individual egotism and the automatic autonomy of the Anglo-Saxon precept.

  1. Economic direction is not identical to the tendencies of a centrally planned economy. It does not seek to cancel the individual or to administer through the state operators.

  1. Economic direction really means the following: the new instruction of the creative and constructive power of the individual in relation to the whole system; the creation of a consistent economic view and an attitude towards the economy; the selection of important tasks through political leadership and the state’s final decision on all questions about economic power. Beyond this, the economy is free and responsible to itself.

The degree of solidarity of the individual economies and their neighbourly attitude is characterised by three guidelines:

Firstly, it is limited in regard to its own economic development by the recognition that the utilisation of individual resources represents not only a requirement of the new economic precept, but is the very foundation for economic activity. The European economic community has no interest in leaving any abilities or possibilities unutilised.

Secondly, it contains the obligation that, because of Europe’s freedom, consideration is given firstly to continental Europe regarding any matter related to economic activity. Not only should the shared fate of the European people be emphasized, but the fact should also be stressed that the supplementation of the European economies beyond their borders is possible and sought after.

Thirdly, it must be maintained that, above all else, the spirit of the individual economies may not be allowed to go against the spirit of neighbourly co-operation.

The question of developing one’s own powers refers to the problem of mono-cultures, of industrialisation of the agrarian south-east and the awakening of new needs.

An answer can easily be given to the first question. Mono-cultures are the result of the same economic precept that made the world market price the determining factor in the economy. According to that precept, people and land are the vestiges of some by-gone age. Europe is well on the way to destroying these mono-cultures with initiatives ranging from land improvements and growing new crops to discovering new local resources. All these have the same aim, which is to develop the economy and broaden its basis. Germany and the whole of Europe can only greet these efforts with gratitude.

The industrialisation of the south-east poses a particular problem regarding these questions. As I am unable to handle this problem – like all other problems – here in a comprehensive and exhaustive manner, because the industrialisation of economies is theoretically a difficult problem, I can only say as follows:

  1. Just as it is in the nature of things that each country will strive to utilise its available resources for its own production, so will there will be a knock-on effect for other economic partners.

  1. If, as is the case in the South-east European countries, there is heavy over-population in the countryside, then there are only three possibilities to solve it: itinerant workers, a permanent emigration and an ‘intensivisation’ of the local economy, a term correctly created by Dr. Ilgner for the problem of industrialisation. Itinerant workers can only form a part solution. Besides, it only applies to agricultural and construction workers and gone on for ages. Permanent emigration from Europe is just as false as impossible. There just remains the intensivisation of the economies of south-east Europe as the way to self-help.

3. The economies should make it possible for an independent life according to the modern economic view. The intensivisation of their economies therefore is right for the time.

4. The old features of industrialisation, which evolved from the price collapses in countries with agriculture and raw materials, have to now belong to the past. Europe is a communal living area. Only through a joint development of economies – and not through independence from one another – can protection against crises be achieved.

5. The tasks that have to be solved in Europe are so big that the powers needed to do so have to be released by an intensivisation of the each economy. This can be easily done by employing the workers that have been liberated in new branches of the economy.

Without affecting the difficult questions of purchasing power, it can be regarded as proven that the joint work to build up Germany’s and the south-eastern states’ in the area of industrialisation lies in the direction of the intensivation of interest of the whole continent.

One important and until now completely overlooked task in this regard exists and that is the awakening of new needs in the south-eastern countries. It is because, in those countries, wealth has grown and will gradually continue to grow, as a result of the reliable purchase of agricultural products and available raw materials at adequate price levels. According to the principle in economics that giving equals taking, peoples’ living habits there will have to change, otherwise one day the process will come to a halt. Germany’s ability to absorb the products from the south-east is practically infinite, whereas creating a demand for German goods there is not only a matter for economic intensivation but also one of modifying the people so they consume more. This task is of such importance that it has to be considered from the very outset, so that the south-eastern European economies are elevated after the war.

Equally important as the industrialisation of south-east Europe is the question of the standard of living in the north. Their economic development and high standard of living, which underpin their lives though all economic conditions, should not be mistaken. This standard of living has grown considerably during the 19th century and around the time of the world war due to free trade, so that various circles view world economic events with particular concern. From a German viewpoint, only the following points can be made:

Firstly, a higher standard of living is also the aim of the German government. The German people not only understand this well, but also through its fight wants to ensure European civilisation and culture. This fight will benefit the whole of Europe, and with it the north.

Secondly, despite being connected successfully to England and its economic system (one should not ignore the countless economic troughs that feature there), the economies of the north whose fate and greatness are very closely linked to Germany.

Thirdly, the northern states’ difficulties are going through a temporary phase of adjustment. In the long-term, this will bring about a lasting advancement, rather than destruction, for their economies’ foundations.

Maintaining a high standard of living is not an insoluble problem. To finish, I now come to the problem of purchasing raw materials from overseas markets. A leading south-east European economist once wrote about this principal question: “Unlike the war, we were in the following situation: in order to import raw materials from overseas countries, we bought goods from west European countries with foreign exchange. In the area of continental Europe there is no gold. Everything had to pass through the system of clearing – goods sold against goods. We have no product that can be sold to North or South America. That means that the leading nations are obliged to acquire and distribute to us the raw materials that we need. The leading nations of Europe can supply, with its capacity, enough products to overseas countries with which to acquire raw materials. The one question is whether exchange will ever happen… Even before the new order is introduced, and without even joining in with the Axis powers, we stand in solidarity outside Europe with its traffic of goods…”

 

 

#acenewsservices, #angela-merkel, #economic, #economic-revolutions, #economy-of-europe, #economy-of-germany, #england, #european-union, #eurozone, #german, #germany, #libya, #middle-east, #new-world-order, #politics

70 Fire Stations Are At Risk Under Government Spending Cuts

Fire stations at risk

Union leaders have warned that almost 70 fire stations in England are at risk of closure and scores more face being downgraded if the Government presses ahead with spending cuts. The Fire Brigades Union said that seventeen stations were at threat in London, 11 in West Yorkshire and South Yorkshire and ten in Greater Manchester and Merseyside.

#england, #fire-brigades-union, #fire-station, #greater-manchester, #london, #manchester-fire, #merseyside, #rural-communities, #south-yorkshire, #union-leaders, #west-yorkshire

“COUNCIL TAX CHANGE”

English: This is what council tax is for: Mont...

English: This is what council tax is for: Montague Road, Warwick (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Government is to give people in England the legal right to pay annual council tax bills in 12, rather than the current 10, monthly instalments. The change would mean the expense is spread over the entire year, with the government saying it wants to “help people with their cost of living“. Ministers also want councils to use more electronic billing. In addition, the government has also confirmed that up to 300,000 families in England could benefit from plans to scrap separate council tax charges for occupied annexes. Currently only people over the age of 65, in so-called “granny flats”, are exempt from payments.

So what is your view on this government proposal?

 

#cost-of-living, #council-tax, #electronic-billing, #england, #eric-pickles, #government, #local-government-news, #secretary-of-state-for-communities-and-local-government, #taxation