G7 sets sights on new world "economic" order

Run_to_da_hills

And again it gets quoted...........almost.

ROME (AFP) – The world's richest nations called Saturday for urgent reform of global finance to save the world from the economic devastation that is dragging more and more countries into recession.

Italy's Finance Minister called for a "new world economic order" as he wrapped up the crisis meeting of finance leaders from the Group of Seven leading economies over which he presided here.

In a joint declaration, the G7 called for "urgent reforms" of the international financial system.

Tremonti said a so-called set of "legal standards" discussed in Rome would be presented at a meeting of 20 key advanced and emerging economies (G20) in London in April and a summit of the Group of Eight (G8) world powers in July.

"A new world economic order might seem rhetorical," he told reporters. "But it is a true goal we should be aiming towards... today right here in Rome we've embarked on a very significant journey, both technical and ethical."

Sydney Morning Herald. http://business.smh.com.au/business/world-business/g7-sets-sights-on-new-world-economic-order-20090215-87x0.html

,8,1

Filth.

Diogenes

,8,1 wrote: »

Filth.

Ah because the last couple of decades of massive bank deregulation has worked out so well for us.

RtdH there were epic flaws in the ways international financial markets were run. Alan Greenspan, Alan fecking Greenspan has been forced to admit this. You're now finding it suspicious that the worlds leading economies are now calling for a massive overall of the international banking system.

Very few of any of the G7 countries have escaped the last few years without a major financial scandal in a major bank or a partial or complete nationalisation of a bank.

The measure being discussed at the G7 include caps on bonus' for failing banks, you don't think governments should do something about this.

You've got this "damn them if they do" and "damn them if they don't" attitude.

Could you perhaps RtdH outline your proposed alternative international bank bail out and economic recovery package?*


*If it's to give everyone their own weight in beans n ammo and a rifle, as well as a a tinfoil anti nwo suite it doesn't count.

Run_to_da_hills

IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn warns second wave of countries will require bailout
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/4625430/IMF-chief-Dominique-Strauss-Kahn-warns-second-wave-of-countries-will-require-bail-out.html

Eastern Europe is about to blow. If it does, it could take much of the EU with it. It's an emergency situation but there are no easy solutions. The IMF doesn't have the resources for a bailout of this size and the recession is spreading faster than relief efforts can be organized.

Finance ministers and central bankers are running in circles trying to put out one fire after another. Its only a matter of time before they are overtaken by events.

If one country is allowed to default, the dominoes could begin to tumble through the whole region. This could trigger dramatic changes in the political landscape. The rise of fascism is no longer out of the question.:eek:

,8,1

The rise of fascism is no longer out of the question.

What sort of definition of "fascism" are you going by?

Looks more like Communism to me.

Run_to_da_hills

,8,1 wrote: »

What sort of definition of "fascism" are you going by?

Fascism - A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

Communism - A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members

,8,1 wrote: »

Looks more like Communism to me.

Possibly a bit of both worlds.

Vadrefjorde

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=ax0ZrocriLAI&refer=europe

You just have to love the irony of this :D:D

mysterious

Sarkosy and all these f*****heads.

It's gone to a stage where we have no leader in this modern world that we can look up too or trust anymore. Yet we respect these?

The world is going backwards...........

Gordon

I don't know why that phrase gets so much bad press, right now the global banking system is in disorder and causing global problems, why not get them ordered and working correctly?

Sofa_King Good

,8,1 wrote: »

What sort of definition of "fascism" are you going by?

Looks more like Communism to me.

The way I'd see it you are both right.

In their collectivist extremes there is no difference between extreme right "fascism" or extreme left "communism" both are totalitarian economic and political systems.

The national socialist (Bush) and the international socialist (Obama).

It is why Obama's principles are in line with wall st

,8,1

Fascism - A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

Where is the "belligerent nationalism" in the upcoming NWO?? It's all internationalism my friend.

Communism - A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members

That's the idealised definition provided by Communists themselves. However more often than not it morphs into what you call "fascism" - i.e. "centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship". See the USSR, Cuba and Venuzuela.

The national socialist (Bush) and the international socialist (Obama).

Oh please not this "Bush is a Nazi" thing. He left office and allowed Obama to become President - case for him being a Nazi disproved right there. Don't confuse militarist Zionistic regimes with "Fascism" and "Nazism" they are two different things.

It is why Obama's principles are in line with wall st

Because he was elected by the Establishment; like every President throughout the United States history.

In their collectivist extremes there is no difference between extreme right "fascism" or extreme left "communism" both are totalitarian economic and political systems.

Fascism and Communism get alot of flak for being "collectivist" but really, this is lazy. All forms of Government - be they extreme "free market" or "socal democratic" - are collectivist, even if their collectivist nature is not overtly shown.

mysterious

,8,1 wrote: »

Oh please not this "Bush is a Nazi" thing. He left office and allowed Obama to become President - case for him being a Nazi disproved right there. Don't confuse militarist Zionistic regimes with "Fascism" and "Nazism" they are two different thing

He didn't just go hey Obama I'm hanging up my jacket take my place.

Obama and Bush both work for the same mother company (((ZIONISM)))
We could go on. But no we won't we will leave it there.

Because he was elected by the Establishment; like every President throughout the United States history.

Your right there, no president is different to the next, especially since everyone of them are scripted and paid do what accordingly. They just show a public image, for the shadow agendas by the shadow powers.

Fascism and Communism get alot of flak for being "collectivist" but really, this is lazy. All forms of Government - be they extreme "free market" or "socal democratic" - are collectivist, even if their collectivist nature is not overtly shown.

It all comes down to the same thing eventually. Power and control.

Kernel

Gordon wrote: »

I don't know why that phrase gets so much bad press, right now the global banking system is in disorder and causing global problems, why not get them ordered and working correctly?

Well, the EU started out as the EEC, so you're effectively arguing in favour of the NWO. I asked the question before, is the NWO going to be a bad thing? That's the interesting question, since it is already here (and as such arguing it's existance or non-existence is pointless to me).