Banks

corruption: when a vote stops counting and democracy is going ad absurdum.

the psychological dynamic is dangerous – if someone is cheating – and get’s away with it – everyone starts cheating.

in Greece it is “well known” that the state is corruption beyond limits – hence the super rich say “why give my money to the mafia? (the state)”

Englisch:

“… After the financial crisis, the governments of the 20 most important industrial Nations were convinced that the revenue side of the States had to be reformed as a matter of urgency.

The multinationals, in particular, who have been able to push about a “fair” taxation of their profits by shifting Profits into tax havens and dubious methods of Offsetting between their subsidiaries for decades, should at last be asked to pay.

The Organisation for economic cooperation and development (OECD) has been tasked with drawing up an action plan.

According to the G20,” profits “should in future be taxed where the economic activities from which they arise take place and where value added is generated.“

In April 2013, journalists from 46 countries in a concerted action under the name “Offshore Leaks” revealed with what criminal energy banks and law firms hid the money of super-rich clients and multinational corporations from the tax.

Public budgets lost $ 170 billion a year – money that was missing for the Expansion of infrastructure, health care or educational facilities. …

Only if civil society could exert pressure, would change.

If everyone were able to see which group is operating “aggressive tax Dumping” with the help of which countries, it would be possible to raise concerns and, if necessary, boycott those Concerned.

For a” public CbCR ” fought in the European Parliament Left, Greens and social Democrats, as well as numerous non-governmental organizations such as Oxfam, WEED, Attac, Tax Justice Network and Transparency International. Together, they managed the impossible:

Under the leadership of the Austrian social-Democrat, Evelyn Regner and of the Belgian socialists, Hugues Bayet, a majority of 404 deputies voted on 8. July 2015 for a public CbCR. Some Liberals and Christian Democrats also joined. …

The scientific service of the Bundestag stated that, in view of tax Secrecy and informational self-determination, “it is not absolutely necessary” to “make all country-specific corporate figures clearly available to the Public”. …

300 Top Economists, including Thomas Piketty, Jeffrey Sachs, and Nobel prize winner, Angus Deaton, appealed in an open letter to the heads of state, and finally a “public Country by Country Reporting“.

The Verdi Chairman Frank Bsirske wrote to Finance Minister Schäuble, a public Reporting, is one of the “core measures, in order to improve the confidence of the citizens in the European Union.“

In the end, the European Parliament followed the Commission’s proposal and voted on 4 October.

The majority of the votes cast in favour of the tax transparency of the multinationals will be in favour of the transparency of the taxation Of Multinationals as of 31 July 2017.

In view of this overwhelming Power, the Ministers of Finance considered a new tactic: their Legal service now boldly claimed that the planned Reform did not fall into social law but into tax law. Unanimity was therefore required. ….

Only one could save it: Olaf Scholz. On 14. On March 18, 2018, the SPD became Vice-Finance Minister.

He could support the Reform that his European Comrades committed to, with a Yes.

But what does he do?

He stands up against his Comrades, against the trade unions, against the NGOs.

Without acceptance of the companies, he says, a solution is not feasible.

What was the SPD programme for the previous Bundestag election?

“Europe needs tools to effectively combat tax avoidance and tax fraud.

We want companies to pay their taxes where they generate their profits.

We want to systematically limit the possibilities of companies to shift their taxable profits to other countries.

“It’s the usual hollow chatter.” (src translated with Yandex Translate)

German:

” … Nach der Finanzkrise waren die Regierungen der 20 wichtigsten Industrienationen davon überzeugt, dass die Einnahmenseite der Staaten dringend reformiert werden müsse. Vor allem die multinationalen Konzerne, die sich durch Gewinnverlagerungen in Steueroasen und dubiose Verrechnungsmethoden zwischen ihren Tochtergesellschaften seit Jahrzehnten um eine „gerechte“ Besteuerung ihrer Gewinne herumdrücken konnten, sollten endlich zur Kasse gebeten werden. Die Organisation für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (OECD) wurde mit der Ausarbeitung eines Aktionsplans beauftragt. „Gewinne“, so die G20, sollten künftig „dort versteuert werden, wo die Wirtschaftstätigkeiten, aus denen sie hervorgehen, stattfinden und wo die Wertschöpfung entsteht.“

Auf die Prioritätenliste kam das Vorhaben allerdings erst, als im April 2013 Journalisten aus 46 Ländern in einer konzertierten Aktion unter dem Namen „Offshore Leaks“ enthüllten, mit welch krimineller Energie Banken und Anwaltskanzleien das Geld superreicher Mandanten und multinationaler Konzerne vor der Steuer versteckten. Den öffentlichen Haushalten entgingen dadurch 170 Milliarden Dollar pro Jahr – Geld, das für den Ausbau von Infrastruktur, Gesundheitsfürsorge oder Bildungseinrichtungen fehlte. …

Nur wenn die Zivilgesellschaft Druck ausüben könnte, würde sich etwas ändern. Wäre allen ersichtlich, welcher Konzern mithilfe welcher Länder „aggressives Steuerdumping“ betreibt, könnte man die Betroffenen zur Rede stellen und notfalls boykottieren.

Für ein „öffentliches CbCR“ kämpften im Europaparlament Linke, Grüne und Sozialdemokraten, dazu zahlreiche Nichtregierungsorganisationen wie Oxfam, WEED, Attac, Tax Justice Network und Transparency International. Gemeinsam schafften sie das Unmögliche: Unter Federführung der österreichischen Sozialdemokratin Evelyn Regner und des belgischen Sozialisten Hugues Bayet stimmte eine Mehrheit von 404 Abgeordneten am 8. Juli 2015 für ein öffentliches CbCR. Auch einige Liberale und Christdemokraten schlossen sich an. …

Der Wissenschaftliche Dienst des Bundestages gab zu verstehen, dass es mit Blick auf das Steuergeheimnis und die informationelle Selbstbestimmung „nicht zwingend erforderlich“ sei, „alle länderspezifischen Unternehmenskennzahlen eindeutig zuordenbar der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung zu stellen“. …

300 Top-Ökonomen, darunter Thomas Piketty, Jeffrey Sachs und Nobelpreisträger Angus Deaton, appellierten in einem offenen Brief an die Staatschefs, endlich ein „öffentliches Country by Country Reporting“ einzuführen. Der Verdi-Vorsitzende Frank Bsirske schrieb an Finanzminister Schäuble, ein öffentliches Reporting gehöre „zu den Kernmaßnahmen, um das Vertrauen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger in die Europäische Union wieder zu verbessern.“ Am Ende folgte das EU-Parlament dem Vorschlag der Kommission und stimmte am 4. Juli 2017 mit noch größerer Mehrheit als 2015 für die Steuertransparenz der Multis.

Angesichts dieser Übermacht überlegten sich die Finanzminister eine neue Taktik: Ihr Juristischer Dienst behauptete nun frech, die geplante Reform falle nicht ins Gesellschafts-, sondern ins Steuerrecht. Einstimmigkeit sei daher vorgeschrieben. ….

Nur einer könnte es noch retten: Olaf Scholz. Am 14. März 2018 wurde der SPD-Vize Finanzminister. Er könnte die von seinen europäischen Genossen engagiert vorangetriebene Reform mit einem Ja unterstützen. Aber was tut er? Er stellt sich gegen seine Genossen, gegen die Gewerkschaften, gegen die NGOs. Ohne eine Akzeptanz der Konzerne, sagt er, sei eine Lösung nicht machbar. Was stand im SPD-Programm zur vorigen Bundestagswahl? „Europa braucht Instrumente, um Steuervermeidung und Steuerbetrug effektiv zu bekämpfen. Wir wollen durchsetzen, dass Unternehmen dort ihre Steuern bezahlen, wo sie ihre Gewinne erwirtschaften. Wir wollen die Möglichkeiten von Unternehmen systematisch einschränken, ihre steuerpflichtigen Gewinne in andere Länder zu verschieben.“ Es ist das übliche hohle Geschwätz.”

Quelle: https://www.freitag.de/autoren/wolfgangmichal/minister-der-diebe

sign the petition:

https://www.change.org/p/bundesregierung-will-den-kampf-gegen-steuervermeidung-in-br%C3%BCssel-blockieren

and: throw more raw eggs and govern yourself!

Are large parts of mankind willing and courage enough to make brave decisions and changes?

or: is the elite right that it can control the masses (90%) by fear and fear alone?

(the sole aim of terrorism is to cause fear. (in latin “terror” means “horror”)

so the elite is pretty interested in more not less terror.

Why is there no concept by the state for it’s citizens? how to live as sustainable as possible?

tossing people into poverty by the masses can not be “the solution”.

Efficiency is (mostly) focusing on:

  • saving money
  • saving time

but it actually should focus more on:

  • resource efficiency – save resources – especially the NON renewable

resource efficiency is about keeping things in balance, sustainability and saving mankind (the planet does NOT care if were go extinct like the dinosaurs) … is what we need now.

A 2014 report by The Carbon Trust suggested that resource challenges are intensifying rapidly – for example, there could be a 40% gap between available water supplies and water needs by 2030, and some critical materials could be in short supply as soon as 2016.[needs update] These challenges could lead to disruptions to supply, growing regulatory requirements, volatile fluctuation of prices, and may ultimately threaten the viability of existing business models.[1] (src)

This means: Water – is precious – it is not there to be wasted under no circumstances, or as Mark Boyle put it: “do not shit into drinking water”

dry toilets: poop in the bucket – then compost…

because shit is not shit – it is resources.

also: trash is not trash – it is resources.

Currently only 50% of the plastic wrapping in Germany (!) get’s recycled – the rest goes up in smoke (burned as fuel to generate electricity/heat) – which (right now) produces CO2 and other cancer causing chemicals that can kills the climate and people.

Trees will happily use our CO2 but not the cancer chemicals.

Sometimes saving resources also means saving money – but sometimes it does not: example: “planned obsolescence

planned obsolescence is the purposeful and cartel-like worsening of the quality of products by the manufacturer – to make the consumer consume more. you don’t think it exists? you better do. one example is well documented: 1925: Phoebus Cartel (ask Wikipedia) – producers of light bulbs meet in secrecy and decide that light bulbs shall not live longer than 1000 hours of operation – whoever goes against it has to pay a fine. it worked fine. sales increased by 20-25%. was it worth it?

the same is true for cars, dishwashers, phones… the list is endless.

another example: refund-bottle-system in Germany.

The bottle-producers and lobbyists were at first against it, fear of less sales, but actually they profit: 20% of all bottles are NOT returned, so the bottle-producer cashes in those 10-15Cents per bottle.

80% of the refund-bottles are returned – and the super-poor actually do this as a job.

While the bottle-return-refund system in Germany has TOO many exceptions… tiny aluminum cans and some plastic bottles are excluded? why? (lobby-broken) … there is no incentive at all for people e.g. in Greece and other parts of the world to collect plastic, glass or aluminum bottles and return them to the store – so they get tossed out into nature and fill the road sides with trash or even at worst: the oceans.

http://www.z2zero.com/r-is-for-resource/

So the questions that are there really is:

  • is mankind as intelligent as it thinks it is?
  • are large parts of mankind willing and courage enough to make brave decisions and changes? (i guess not, that’s what the elite is speculating on… that they can control the masses (90%) by fear and fear alone)
  • can mankind be saved?
  • will mankind – driven by hunger for money – knowingly or un-knowingly destabilize it’s habitat to a point of no return?
  • can quality of life and the way of life of mankind be saved?
  • can mankind coexist peacefully with itself and other species on this planet?

… i often say: it’s never too late – unless the last human took the last breath in this universe. then it is too late.

online: http://www.moneylessmanifesto.org/book/foreword-by-charles-eisenstein/

offline: Moneyless Menifesto (Mark Boyle).pdf

or paperback and back support  the authors (that are NOT living 100% money free forever, because it is nearly impossible nowadays… good work! capitalism! making us all addicted and dependant slaves!): http://www.moneylessmanifesto.org/get-a-free-copy/

pretty cool: recycle plastic yourself

… i wonder if in the economical bring-to-state-collapse, people have time/resources for this. i hope.

Links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_efficiency

https://www.zeit.de/2015/49/pfand-einzelhandel-flaschen-dosen-mehrweg-stimmts

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-way-of-living-life-without-money

 

Update: 8 killed in explosion in Weapons Factory in SouthAfrica

September 3, 2018: “The company, which specializes in the development, design and manufacture of large- and medium-caliber ammunition, is 51 percent-owned by Rheinmetall Waffe Munition GmbH of Germany and 49 percent by Denel SOC Ltd., South Africa’s state weapons company, according to its website. The Macassar site, one of five it operates in South Africa, has 600 employees… The South African unit was its most profitable business across its defense operations in the second quarter, with an operating margin of +9.2% (p.a.).” (src)

Arms business of German banks and funds

/ Rüstungsgeschäfte deutscher Banken und Fonds:

It is just sickening.

‘A new report by Amnesty International blames “decades of poorly regulated arms flows” into Iraq for providing Isis with a huge arsenal of weapons – including some marked “made in Germany”.’ (src)

Germany comes in 5th in terms of weapons sales and Trump wants Germany/Europe to boost military/weapons spending because “he ain’t going to pay anymore for (US) military adventurers around the world that are partly NATO supported” (Afghanistan for example)

World’s largest arms exporters

2012–2016
Rank
Supplier Arms Exp
1  United States 47,169
2  Russia 33,186
3  China 9,132
4  France 8,564
5  Germany 7,946
6  United Kingdom 6,586
7  Spain 3,958
8  Italy 3,823
9  Ukraine 3,677
10  Israel 3,233

While it is a valid statement – that Germany is not spending a lot of it’s GDP on weapons – it is also a dangerous one – because it asks for re-armament of GERMANY! Hello? GERMANY! You want the people you often call NAZIS to spend more on WEAPONS? ARE YOU SURE THAT’S A GREAT IDEA in times that right-wing politicians gain ground because of fear of people of globalization (suprime-financial crisis) and war and poverty refugees from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Africa?

It is also valid that NATO is a dangerous alliance similar to those before World War I.

Before WW1 Germany sided with Austria “in case of an attack” and the “terrorist attack” came promptly – that killed heir of the throne to Austria – which set of World War I – because Russia was siding with Sarajevo.

Now Turkey is NATO member and any false flag “terrorist” attack that blames non-NATO members (Russia, Iran) would immediately force all NATO-members to fight back in a Washington-controlled way.

Yes America is far away from Afghanistan and Europe – so they use Europe as a playground for their troops and geopolitical maneuvers.

If USA gives weapons to Syrian Rebel groups including ISIS – than Russia or China or Iran may as well give weapons to Rebel groups in Southamerica and Mexico that suffer dearly from poverty under privatization and globalization as well (they can’t afford their own land).

Believe me in Paraguay there are so many poor people – that if they were armed would overthrow the government in 3 days and kill or kick out all white men and woman in 3 weeks.

Do we really want to escalate and get our weapons or steel-copper-nickel-investing hands stained with blood for profit?

Rheinmetall financial overview and CEOs:

(src)

Terrence Hill was there – Bombing of Dresden 1945

he now campaigns against the arms business.

German Institutions and their investments that are paid by the blood of the poor (war, including civil war):

Institut Betrag (Euro) Profitierende Unternehmen
UniCredit Group/ Hypovereinsbank 4,463 Mrd. Airbus, MTU Aero Engines, Northrop Grumman, Rheinmetall, Rolls Royce und Thyssenkrupp (Uboote/Submarines)
Deutsche Bank 1,932 Mrd. Airbus, Boeing, MTU Aero Engines, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Rheinmetall, Rolls Royce und Thyssenkrupp (Uboote/Submarines)
Commerzbank 1,747 Mrd. Boeing, MTU Aero Engines, Rheinmetall, Rolls Royce und Thyssenkrupp (Uboote/Submarines)
Bayern LB 825 Mio. Boeing, MTU Aero Engines, Rheinmetall, Rolls Royce und Thyssenkrupp (Uboote/Submarines)
DWS (Investment-Tochter der Deutschen Bank) 3,5 Mrd. Daimler, Jenoptik, MTU Aero Engines, Siemens und Thyssenkrupp (Uboote/Submarines)
Deka Investment (Sparkassen-Fondsanbieter) 760 Mio. Airbus, BAE Systems, Boeing, MTU Aero Engines, Northrop Grumman, Rheinmetall und Thyssenkrupp (Uboote/Submarines)
Allianz 596 Mio. Airbus, BAE Systems, Boeing, MTU Aero Engines, Raytheon und Rheinmetall
Union Investment (Volksbanken-Fondsgesellschaft) 540 Mio. Airbus, Lockheed Martin, MTU Aero Engines, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon und Thyssenkrupp (Uboote/Submarines)

Quelle: https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/ruestungsgeschaefte-banken-101.html