It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Obama, UN to tax US for Green Climate Fund

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by frankensence
 



As far as the Climate fund goes, the member nations have agreed to fund that Green Climate Fund even tho no actual agreement has been hammered out, but the fund is not funded by taxes, each participating nation contributes an agreed upon amount.


Since you know so much about this , perhaps you could enlighten your friend, who claims to have searched but not found any references to this allegedly imaginary (to him) fund.

Given that the US informally agreed to fund the bulk of the $100 billion pledged in Cancun, it makes sense that some invisible mechanism would be employed. The fact that the UN has never undertaken such overreaching should be no impediment, given Obama's fealty and willingness to submit US sovereignty to others' control.

If we are in the Appeasement business with Iran, Russia, et al, why not just do it globally?

jw




posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 

Maybe you forgot, but the Obama administration and other governments have toyed with the idea of taxing fianacial transaction for years. It wasn't until Copenhagen and Cancun that people began to consider "earmarking" the taxes for the Global Climate Fund.


Just an all-around BULL-HOCKEY statement. No quotations, no citations, if CFACT did say this then PROVE IT, show me a link to this statement at CFACT. Secondly if CFACT did say this, then THEY need to prove where the Obama admin ever proposed this. Let's see the bill. Let's see the UN negotiations or confirmations of a global tax on currency transactions,
...
I chalk these rumors up to a narrow band of rumor-mongers that never back up their claims, in the hopes that the rumor gains traction and is simply believed at face value.


Were you not paying attention, or is this something else you chose to ignore? You may "shoot the [CFACT] messenger" all you like, but even the New York Times recognizes the discussions as legitimate news.


Driven by populist anger at bankers as well as government needs for more revenue, the idea of a tax on trades of stocks, bonds and other financial instruments has attracted an array of influential champions, including the leaders of France and Germany, the billionaire philanthropists Bill Gates and George Soros, the consumer activist Ralph Nader, Pope Benedict XVI and the archbishop of Canterbury.

“We all agree that a financial transaction tax would be the right signal to show that we have understood that financial markets have to contribute their share to the recovery of economies,” the chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, told her parliament recently.

On Sunday, Mario Monti, the new prime minister of Italy, announced plans to impose a tax on certain financial transactions as part of a far-reaching plan to fix his country’s budgetary problems, and he endorsed the idea of a Europe-wide transactions tax.

So far, the broader debt crisis engulfing the euro zone nations has pushed discussion of the tax into the background. But if European leaders can agree on a plan that calms the financial markets, they would be in a stronger position to enact a levy, analysts said.

Tax on Financial Trades Gains Advocates

deny ignorance

jw
edit on 6-12-2011 by jdub297 because: quote



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I'm sure CoR is behind this, as well as Bilderbergs. They have wanted a global tax however they can get it. European Socialists want a global financial transaction tax, and UN Agenda 21 and radical environmentalists and believers in Gaia want a global warming tax.


Oh yah, and Bill Gates is CoR and deeply involved with the UN Agenda 21 and UN in general.

thinkprogress.org...

edit on 6-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 

Don't forget that Obama's "Climate Czar" Carol Browner was a member of "Socialist International who advocated exactly this approach to subjugating the American public to the will of the UN and socialism:
Obama’s ‘Dictatorship by Decree’ is Here. What’s next?

This has been a long time coming.

jw



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 



What do you think "closed door" means? Do you really expect somone to publish an agenda, videotape, and provide transcripts of a closed-door meeting?


Of course it has to be a "closed door" meeting, that's how fear-based rumors like this can run amok and no one can fact-check it. So you admit - no itinerary, no video, no transcript, no proof exists.

I would think the major banks would have a lot more 'moles' inside the UN than an ideology-driven climate group and had anyone talked about imposing a worldwide tax on currency transactions, you'd here an uproar from them first.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
The UN has had plans for a Global Tax for a while. Climate Fund is a great reason.



Ron Paul wrote about in in 2002........





Rest assured that the UN is absolutely serious about imposing a global tax. In fact, it has been discussing a global currency tax for years. The "Tobin tax," named after the Yale professor who proposed it, would be imposed on all worldwide currency transactions. Such a tax could prove quite lucrative for the UN, given the vast amount of currency that trades hands at certain times. It also might be a politically acceptable starting point, because most average people do not engage in cross-border currency transactions. A dangerous precedent would be set, however: the idea that the UN possesses legitimate taxing authority to fund its operations.


The Tobin tax is not the only idea being considered. Some have suggested taxing all airline travel or carbon emissions. The ultimate goal is an income tax, which will be imposed after we've all swallowed the concept of UN taxing authority. The Bush administration thus far has been firmly opposed to any global UN taxes, and the State department has officially voiced our opposition. We should all be very thankful for that, because another administration might not have had the same response. It would be a mistake, however, to think the UN tax idea will go away. Some usually sensible nations like Britain and Germany support the concept, and the drumbeat for global government in general has been growing louder since September 11th. Hopefully, this latest bogus UN conference will make more Americans aware of exactly what the organization really intends, which is the imposition of worldwide income taxes.

We need to focus the nation on how truly anti-American the UN is, to generate public support for a complete U.S. withdrawal from the organization. The history of the past 50 years clearly shows that our national sovereignty is incompatible with participation in the UN.


The UN Tax Grab


edit on 6-12-2011 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


You're making a straw-man argument.

The 'Tobin tax' is a theoretical construct by James Tobin as "a measure to reduce international market instability. The tax would be levied on international financial transactions in order to decrease unproductive currency speculation." - in other words, as a brake on speculation and not as a revenue source.

The UN has never agreed to levy taxes, 'Tobin tax', or otherwise. We pay dues. That's what funds the UN (which, incidentally, is the Unites States own creation).

Member nations, when they agree, contribute set amounts to fund whatever project the UN undertakes, usually peacekeeping related. The US in fact has historically not contributed it's full amount, we still owe the UN $1.3 billion.

If the UN ever tried to levy a tax on currency transactions, you'd witness the bulk of member nations quit the UN. It would spell the end of it.

The Tobin Tax was conceived of back in 1972. That's over 40 years ago, and to date, no Tobin Tax has ever been levied by any body or agency. Every couple years it gets pulled out, dusted off, and used to scare kids about the big-bad UN bogeyman.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Whos words Am I twisting? Strawman??? They had meetings on it in the past. Dont be so gullible to say they arnt talking about it now........Just because The US is in the UN,or even started it,doesnt mean its working.


DURBAN: Pakistan won the ‘Robin Hood’ award at the UN climate talks for proposing financial transaction tax (FTT) as an innovative source of financing the Green Climate Fund (GCF), on Saturday.



“The Green Climate Fund is very important for developing countries. Finding sources and channels to mobilise money into the fund is crucial,” said Director UN-II Mirza Salman Babar Beg, who is part of the negotiating team in Durban.



“Out of all the options relating to innovative sources on long-term finance that are on the table, the FTT is easy to implement and monitor and can raise money in hundreds and billions,” added Beg. “There are various studies that support this argument, and so we feel this option should be considered in the negotiations.”

The Financial Transaction Tax, also known as the Robin Hood tax, is a small levy of 0.01%-0.05% imposed on the trade of stocks, derivates, currency, and other financial instruments.



UN climate conference: In Durban, Pakistan wins ‘Robin Hood’ award

Hmmmmm. I keep seeing words like TAX,being used by the UN. You keep using words like "dues".

Lets see you spin this one..................................


edit on 7-12-2011 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Is there any money on the table?


Yes $100 (£60) billion by 2020 to help poor countries adapt to climate change and cut emissions. The main discussion at Durban is how this money for the Green Climate Fund will be raised. One of the most popular suggestion is through a tax on aviation and shipping or the ‘Robin Hood’ or Tobin Tax on financial transactions. There is also a question over who will dole out funds. Will it be the World Bank or a whole new institution? This money will be used to help persuade developing nations to cut emissions and it is essential progress is made on setting up the institutions for the talks to move forward. In the short term there is $10 (£6) billion per annum up to 2013 to help poor countries start adapting to climate change now. The UK has pledged £1.5 billion towards this ‘Fast Start Fund’, of which half has already been spent. The UK has pledged £2.9 billion in total to fighting climate change up to 2015.


Durban for Dummies: Your guide to the UN climate talks



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Thank you, finally a decent link with relevant content - that's what I'd been asking for. But I still stand by the sentiment the UN will never pass a 'Tobin tax' on it's members, as that would lead to an exodus of nations. It would also be futile with the EU not affected by it. Pakistan can nominate this all they want but they won't find a receptive audience.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Now that you have no fewer than 5 cites to independent sources, you grudgingly admit the veracity of the thread topic.

It is both amusing and frustrating that ATS members can post false claims that they "research" (usually by going to such authorities as Wikipedia and YouTube), then claim there are no search results for such realities as the "Green Climate Fund."

You have to wonder if they just wait until someone tells them what to believe or to hear; or until others provide such an overwhelming rebuttal to baseless contentions that they can no longer deny them?

Classic trolling to the limit of credibility.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Your claim is still untrue and bogus, and your thread title is a lie.

No. 1 - You, as the OP never provided a link to an article that backed up this claim, other than to the front page of CFACT, and CFACT in turn never provided a single source or confirmation of their claim - just hearsay.

No. 2 - When Sonny did provide a link to this, we see the FTT came NOT from Obama, nor from the UN, but from Pakistan.

Pakistan can make all the suggestions they want. Doesn't mean it'll ever happen.

You wrote the thread title in the past tense. Obama, UN to tax US. So this is a done deal? There's a UN resolution signed and agreed upon to tax the US? Care to link us to that resolution? No?

Even CFACT didn't go so far as to claim Obama was responsible for this, you tacked that on yourself.

That makes your thread title false and nothing more than partisan sniping.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   
got to ask a question here..

the economies are a mess and people all around the world have been searching high and low for a safe place to put their money.. dollars to euros, euros to dollars, to yen, whatever looks like it might provide a little stability at the moment...

so, if this report is truthfull, what are the chances that it has a motive that has nothing to do with the ecology, but rather just trying to trap people into their failing currencies??



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Your claim is still untrue and bogus, and your thread title is a lie.
...
You wrote the thread title in the past tense. Obama, UN to tax US. So this is a done deal? There's a UN resolution signed and agreed upon to tax the US? Care to link us to that resolution? No?

Even CFACT didn't go so far as to claim Obama was responsible for this, you tacked that on yourself.


You really must be incapable of looking for yourself, or you innately resist accepting the truth.
Do you have to be spoonfed? Doesn't your mom let you use the computer for anything other than trolling?


A new fund to mobilize resources to help developing countries mitigate the impact of global warming made "solid progress" at the three-day meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, reported the transitional committee tasked with designing the fund.

The Green Climate Fund is one of several significant decisions that countries reached at the UN climate conference in Cancun, Mexico, last year.

"The Transitional Committee of the Fund is now fully on track to conclude the design of the Fund for the approval by the UN climate change conference in Durban," said Christiana Figueres, the UN climate chief.

"Clearly, there is ambition on the part of governments to create a fund that will reach a scale that is sufficient to put the economic development of their countries onto a low-carbon and climate-resilient path," said Ms. Figueres, speaking from Bonn, Germany. She said that governments also wanted the fund to be country-driven and integrated into national development planning processes.

UN green climate fund on track for Durban


Did you even bother trying? Or are you afraid of exposing the truth yourself and thereby shattering your Obama-centric delusions? Do you not recall Obama's pronouncements before and after Cancun, and at the G20?


The leaders of the G-20 group of major economies wrapped up their two-day annual meeting on Friday with promises to finance the fight against climate change through the Green Climate Fund, protect the marine environment from oil spills, and promote low-carbon development strategies, writes Xinhua.

President Barack Obama said Friday, "We agreed to keep phasing out fossil fuel subsidies - perhaps the single most important step we can take in the near term to fight climate change and create clean energy economies."

The G-20 has established a mechanism to share best practices and information on legal frameworks, experiences in preventing and managing accidents and disasters relating to offshore oil and gas drilling, production and maritime transportation.

G20 leaders endorse UN green climate fund

Maybe you just weren't paying attention, but this started in Cancun with Obama's agreement to fund the majority of the $100 billion/year budget of the "Green Climate Fund." Didn't anyone tell you, or do you just choose to ignore unpleasant facts?


At COP 16 held in Cancun, Mexico, from 29 November to 10 December 2010, the COP adopted decision 1/CP.16 in which it decided to establish a Green Climate Fund, to be designated as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the Convention under Article 11, with arrangements to be concluded between the COP and the Green Climate Fund to ensure that it is accountable to and functions under the guidance of the COP.

The Fund will be governed by the Green Climate Board comprising 24 members, as well as alternate members, with equal number of members from developing and developed country Parties. The assets of the Green Climate Fund shall be administered by a trustee only for the purpose of, and in accordance with, the relevant decisions of the Green Climate Fund Board.

The COP also decided that the Green Climate Fund shall be designed by a Transitional Committee in accordance with the terms of reference in Annex III to decision 1/CP.16 . The Transitional Committee comprises 40 members, with 15 members from developed country Parties and 25 members from developing country Parties, with members having the necessary experience and skills, notably in the area of finance and climate change.

The Transitional Committee shall develop and recommend for approval to the COP at its 17th session to be held in Durban, South Africa, from 28 November to 9 December 2011, a number of operational documents for the Green Climate Fund.

Transitional Committee for the design of the Green Climate Fund

Even the uber-liberal Daily Kos has called this for what it portends to be:

If the GCF is to have adequate and predictable resources to carry out its mandate, then countries will need to commit to long-term and scaled-up finance to the Fund. Parties noted the report of the High Level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing, established by the UN to explore options for innovative sources for long-term finance.

Green Climate Fund Fraud: Another World Bank Coup.
deny ignorance

jw
edit on 7-12-2011 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
the economies are a mess and people all around the world have been searching high and low for a safe place to put their money.. dollars to euros, euros to dollars, to yen, whatever looks like it might provide a little stability at the moment...

so, if this report is truthfull, what are the chances that it has a motive that has nothing to do with the ecology, but rather just trying to trap people into their failing currencies??


You are very observant; the countries that have enacted transaction taxes have seen their markets dry up, while others flourished. Should the largest markets accept this (N.Y., London, Geneva, Tokyo), I would think that there would be few alternatives left, and you would be, in effect, "locked in" (unless your broker was willing to pay the fees and charge them back against your account).



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


No one is disputing the existence of the Green Climate Fund.

Now, can you back up your claim that OBAMA and the UN are going to TAX the United States???

COP and Green Climate Fund is not the question here. Your absurd claim that Obama is trying to tax worldwide currency transaction is.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by jdub297
 


No one is disputing the existence of the Green Climate Fund.

Now, can you back up your claim that OBAMA and the UN are going to TAX the United States???

COP and Green Climate Fund is not the question here. Your absurd claim that Obama is trying to tax worldwide currency transaction is.


First, you might recall that you first claimed that you couldn't find any "Green Climate Fund" in your alleged search results.

Second, although the working groups motives and goals have been leaked/leaking since Cancun (COP16), it was not until Dec. 7 that the UN Framework Convention on Clmate Change (UNFCCC) actually published the working groups' draft agreement.
Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention

Included among the provisions of this working paper are requirements for funding, the 50% reduction of CO2 in the US by 2020 and "more than 100%" reduction by 2050, the creation of the UN International Court on Climate Climate Change to punish offenders and non-contributors and to enforce "reparations" for historical injury to "Mother Earth" and disruptions of natural processes.

The funding sources are left to the individual "developed nations" to determine, but are described as "private," "private through public acquisition" and "public." It also recognizes that private financial transactions acount for "trillions" of USD from which the developed nations could source their "contribtions" to the annual $100 billion USD pledged by Obama at Cancun.


Recalling that developed country Parties commit, in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, to a goal of mobilizing jointly USD 100 billion per year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries;
Recognizing that recent estimates of international financial flows and investments required to fully address the adaptation, mitigation, technology and capacity-building needs of developing countries are in the range of several hundreds of billions of USD per year,
Also recognizing the importance of public finance in meeting the urgent and immediate needs of developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change,
Noting that institutional investors such as pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and insurers control trillions of USD and are seeking long-term investment opportunities,
Also noting that alternative sources have the potential to generate significant funds,
Emphasizing that any funding pledged outside of the Convention shall not be regarded as a fulfillment of the legally binding commitments of developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II to the Convention (Annex II Parties) under Article 4, paragraph 3, of the Convention and under the Cancun Agreements (decision 1/CP.16), paragraph 98,
Recognizing the evolution over time in developing countries’needs and their ability to contribute to climate finance,
Also recognizing the priority of developing country Parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change and the adverse impacts of response measures including economic diversification,
1. (Option 1) Decides that in accordance with Article 4, paragraph 3, of the Convention, and to ensure adequacy and predictability of the flow of support to developing countries, a burden sharing mechanism be established to identify the flows of financial support from developed countries, including through the application of an assessed scale of
contributions by developed countries;
(Option 2) Recognizes that each Party determines the mode and source of its contributions in support of the goal of mobilizing USD 100 billion referenced in decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 98;
2. (Option 1) Decides that adequate and predictable financial support shall be provided to developing countries and that equitable allocation of financial resources will be followed, including through criteria based on geographical distribution and/or needs, including urgent and immediate needs related to climate change, while ensuring balance between adaptation and mitigation;

FCCC/AWGLCA/2011/CRP.38
Now, just how do you suppose Obama decided to use the "trillions of USD" in private transactions and investments when he agreed in "COP16, paragraph 98" to "contribute" the greater portion of $100 billion?

Again, do you have to be spoonfed, or just ignore the obvious until it is no longer rational to deny it?
For more: climatedepot.com...
You might also want to check out today's NPR "Morning Edition."

deny ignorance
jw
edit on 10-12-2011 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
You have yet to post proof OBAMA or the UN are planning to 'tax Americans', via a Tobin Tax (or any sort of FTT) on currency transactions. Your headline is both bogus and misleading - No UN resolution has been passed and Obama has made any suggestion of a FTT on Americans, quite the opposite - the US has been accused of blocking and obstructing ANY progress on climate talks.

When another poster did manage to find a reference to the Tobin Tax with regards to the Durbin talks, it turns out it was PAKISTAN that made the suggestion for it - and NOT, as your misleading headline would have us believe, passed or approved by either Obama or the UN.

 



First, you might recall that you first claimed that you couldn't find any "Green Climate Fund" in your alleged search results.


I never denied the existence of any climate fund, go back and READ what I wrote - "First, the article you link to at "campaign2012" has NO CITATIONS, yet they claim to quote CFACT. They offer ZERO citations or links for their statement about the UN or the Green Climate Fund." There is no article on the site you linked to making the claim you posted in your OP. As I said, CFACT itself offers no links or citations about their statements on the UN or the GCF. A search of their site for "Green Climate Fund" returns zero results - so there is no article there in support of your claim - that Obama is plotting with the UN to pass a 'Tobin Tax'. Instead of backing up your claim, you go off on a tangent, posting "proof" of the existence of the Green Climate Fund, something that was never being questioned in the first place.



posted on Dec, 12 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
These traitors already assume there is a one world government, I'm not surprised, fortunately global warming is their most unbelievable ridiculous scare mongering tactic destined to fail.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join