The UN released the "negotiation text" of its United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Geneva, Switzerland over the Valentine's Day weekend and it is nothing short of UN oversight and control of world resources. This is not hyperbole.
As investors, let me set the stage for the goings-on. The "negotiating text" is hoped to be the baseline requirement for the UN's global climate summit of world leaders during November and December this year. It includes "Climate Reparations" from a calculation measuring the damage to the climate extending back to the year 1750.
From the Text (Via The New American)
* " … the total amount of greenhouse gases, expressed in carbon dioxide equivalent, emitted by a Party to the Convention since 1750 A.D. shall be added and divided by the current population of that Party …" Which means its citizens will be assigned a 300-year "carbon debt" for the period 1750-2050 … "And called on to pay it."
* The April 2010 "Cochabamba Statement" will be the used as the standard by which "the equitable allocation [of] atmospheric space between developed countries and developing countries during the period 1750 to 2050."
*"Establishes the International Climate Justice Tribunal in order to oversee, control and sanction the fulfillment of and compliance with obligations of Annex I and Annex II Parties under this agreement and Convention."
* "The Compliance Committee shall have two branches, namely an enforcement branch and a facilitative (sic) branch."
What is being discussed is trillions of dollars of "reparations" for the audacity of using fossil fuels. Of course, the UN will gladly oversee the monies ($76 trillion by one estimate) and its redistribution to "developing countries" by also providing the required "enforcement branch" (read: Military) but any agreement would go further still by limiting world-wide fossil fuel usage via C02 emissions.
As my clients know, I am not a conspiracy theorist. Although I don't live on the conspiracy branch it is, nevertheless, my job to know every leaf of it … The current UN push to control resources is not a theory. Forget for a moment that the entire UN policy is based on flawed IPCC data meant to blame the use of fossil fuels for any aberration in weather patterns (How can we draw, with certainty, the "flawed data" conclusion? The IPCC refuses to release the raw data from which it draws its models). If raw data were made available, any competent climate scientist would see what the IPCC models project and all would be in agreement. Denying access to the raw data indicates a fear of potential ridicule or fraud or worse.
Investors should think through how a world-body would act with such power. Would the current world population of some 8 billion survive without the Energy from fossil fuels for Food production and distribution, heat and transportation?
Surely, our own government would refuse such extra-Constitutional powers, would it not? Surely, acquiescence to such an authority would rightly be seen as a surrender of national sovereignty? How far would our current government go to address UN demands?
Secretary of State John Kerry said just last Friday, that with "the danger of climate change, there is no Planet B" drawing a religious connection to the issue of climate change, adding that "when it comes to the fundamental health of Earth, folks, we'd better stick to the Creator's original plan."
Last fall (then) Secretary of Defense Hagel called climate change a "National security issue" and "Threat multiplier".
In this year's State of the Union Address in January, the president said, "No challenge -- no challenge -- poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change", further warning that, "I will not let this Congress endanger the health of our children by turning back the clock on our efforts."
Let us not forget our EPA and its effort to shut Energy production and control all water on the continent, using various laws and appointments which affect our food production.
This administration has told us repeatedly, from every level, that it considers climate change a threat greater than terrorism. If this is the "fundamental change" promised us, change cannot be more fundamental than changing modern human existence by its reliance on fossil fuels.
Do I think the US will jump at the chance to write a check for trillions of dollars to the United Nations? No – at least not all at once, but the current administration seems eager to sign on by signing away American control of its own resources and standard of living.
But "slow" is the key: Like any social change sought, the seekers understand very well the 'generational approach' but reparations to Mother Earth are already underway. The (perceived) social justice is being promulgated from early schooling, media/movies and peer pressure. The UN plan will take a bit longer so why is the UN pushing it now?
Manufacturing scarcity is a grand business model and second only to War as a profit generator. Manufactured scarcity gives monetary value to almost any thing. Think de Beers' diamonds. If de Beers let out one tenth of one percent of its diamond horde, diamonds would be utterly worthless. Horde them and add a slick advertising campaign, and you've got a winner.
The takeaway for investors is to understand what is being made scarce now. We are entering a period of higher Inflation (in general) coupled with dwindling employment (limiting the ability to buy) and expectations that, if not dealt with now, death from fossil fuels is right around the corner.
The MDEF™ strategy was formulated with the expectations that scarcity will be manufactured by the powers that be. Couple this with collapsing DEMAND in non-essentials and Inflation, and investors are left with few options that provide secure value and consistent returns.
If you want to know more about how the MDEF™ Investing strategy is positioned in this, or other geopolitical possibilities, please contact us directly.