Managed Retreat- "Governments are broke"
The role of infrastructure ownership in the upcoming wide spread managed retreat swindle
In Australia there is an approaching storm which has the potential to obliterate private home ownership- unless you are VERY, VERY wealthy, or living in a government decreed smart resilient zone.
In previous articles I have covered government plans on managed retreat based on extreme climate modelling and uninsurable homes (links at bottom of this article). In a future article I will cover the government plans for energy ratings which home owners will need to comply with in order to be able to sell or rent houses, meaning costly upgrades to your house.
For this article I am covering “Governments are broke- corporate interests need to fund and own infrastructure” and the implications.
Last week I was asked by a Western Australian Councillor, Jason Weeks to present on managed retreat to his community in Lancelin. Lancelin is a small coastal community, roughly a population of 700 people, and managed retreat (removal of people and infrastructure away from areas) is firmly on the agenda.
The full presentation is further down this article. But for the purpose of understanding the infrastructure angle, here is an excerpt from the presentation:
Resilience
Firstly, it’s crucial to understand that the definition of resilience has changed. According to Rockefeller report City Resilience Framework 2014. Resilience is no longer about a specific risk and hazard. It is now about multilayered “possible” stresses and shocks, they may occur- they may not. Regardless of whether they will never occur, infrastructure must be upgraded to resilience infrastructure. It is a blank cheque:
Infrastructure Australia is also using this definition. Which is not surprising given Rockefeller has infiltrated Australia through its Resilient Cities Network, covered here.
The government is playing around with the term resilience, to make it as opaque and confusing as possible:
Governments are broke
Here is Local Government NSW setting out the framework for how local government’s can not afford upkeep of infrastructure. Report here.
Local Government NSW is making the argument for higher rates:
The report “At the edge of the cliff” states that financing Australia’s aging infrastructure is an urgent issue:
Infrastructure globally
Infrastructure investment globally is forecast to reach USD 94 trillion by 2040. This is on top of the USD 3.5 trillion recquired to meet the UN SDGs for electricity and water. Are the SDGs the government signed us up to in 2015 still sounding benevolent? Report here.
Next we have the Global Infrastructure Hub, which is a G20 initiative (which Australia is part of). GIH has formed a partnership with the World Bank. The GI Hub makes clear that government’s are broke and the vast majority of the world’s wealth is held privately, of course our government’s sped this up through their covid policies. In this report they make clear that government needs to assist private entities to take over public infrastructure by “de-risking” the investments and giving public funds to private corporations. What a nice government!
Finally, we have the Addis Ababa Action Agenda our countries signed in 2015, where it was agreed upon that the “transformative” power of the private sector needs to be supported by legislative and policy changes under the guise of implementing the UN SDGs.
Who is going to pay?
Us of course! The UN paper Principles for Sustainable Development makes it clear that the public needs to be engaged with (indoctrinated) so we happily hand over our money to private corporations to “keep us safe”. And that the infrastructure must be continuously upgraded- we will be continuously fleeced.
Who is going to own the infrastructure?
Lots of powerful entities. But here’s a couple:
Disaster Philanthropy
If you want to listen to a vision of the New World Order you can’t get clearer then this interview with co-founder of Nexus, Rachel Gerrol. Nexus “communities” hold a combined family network of $750 billion dollars. Below are excerpts from a longer video found here.
In this extraordinary interview we hear clangers such as:
“The promise of private sector and philanthropy to create change.”
The wealthiest in the world congregating to create impact investing markets is truely in sync with the needs of the people of the world.
If we look at capital around the world- private interests hold two thirds of the wealth and governments one third. “When you say we the people from the UN it really makes sense that the people have the money.” YES, read that again. That was really said. They’re talking about the families who are the wealthiest in the world.
“We’re in this amazing moment in history, where there will be hundreds of trillions of dollars transferring generations in the next twenty years… so I’m seeing young people sitting at the boardroom tables, getting seats on their family foundations and family businesses earlier… to start to drive for some innovation today.. there’s a need for moonshot thinking which the private sector can do which the governments can not. “ In my research in to the impact investors in Australia, there are a lot of billionaire kids in the mix.
The same philanthropists are now “identifying as an impact investor”.
The impact investors will push tech advances (precision medicine, synthetic food). They’re in to Futurism.
“Natural disasters has been a really beautiful problem for us….” An example is then given of a hurricane hitting an island in the Bahamas. The philanthropists brought in private planes and yachts to save the people, they then planted the Nexus logo all over the island. This leaves me rather speechless- I’m all for people being saved, however I find it horrendous to think that this is the model for assisting people in disasters- coupled with the advertising of an organisation of billionaire social impact “philanthropists”
Rachel doesn’t mention the impact investing market is for profit. She does mention how much sway it is going to have over public policy and “innovation.”
Listening to Rachel always leaves me cold, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. I can’t believe how far removed she is from understanding the needs of the populace who are not filthy rich.
A little more on Rachel Gerrol, “Catalyst at Large”
And her co founder of Nexus Josh Wittkamper
I try to include the social impact- philanthropist angle in my articles, as this is increasingly how public policy and finances are going to be directed. Our government is just the middle man for the impact markets. There are clear distinctions between those who “IMPACT” and those who are “IMPACTED UPON”. But because it’s a FOR profit “PHILANTHROPY” virtue signal model, there is close to zero public debate as to how appropriate it is for billionaire kids to wield this much power and control.
You can find more about Nexus Global here. And Nexus Australia here.
And the events they hold here.
Oh and here is the United Nations making sure that no person, anywhere on earth, is immune from the disaster infrastructure trap;
I’ll leave you with my longer presentation to the community of Lancelin:
Previous articles written on the managed retreat agenda
1 in 25 Australian homes uninsurable by 2030
Coastal Erosion, Uninsurable Homes, Managed Retreat
6 Cities Plan, WEF, Rockefeller and Managed Retreat NSW Australia
Managed Retreat- Adaption Plans- Privatised Infrastructure- Wealth and Asset Transfer
Put simply, “resilience” means anything they want it to mean. Like “vaccine”, they not only reserve the right to change its definition, but HAVE changed its definition. BTW, for those who may be unaware, when asked who “they” are/is, the answer is simple: think of THEY as an acronym … The Hierarchy Enslaving You. Eazy peazy.
Can't seem to escape their satanic-inversion buzzword-of-choice … “wellbeing”. Who but a technocracy cult member isn't sick to the gills of that word?
“Cost shifting”, or more accurately, “cost shAfting”.
Clearly, “sustainable” in “sustainable development” needs to be modified. In the interest of transparency, I propose “$u$tainable” be universally adopted as its new spelling.
As you say, resilience is “a blank cheque”. All eyes on the prize, “You will own nothing and be happy!”. And of course, the beatings will continue until morale improves...
Thank you so much for this absolute horror. I was thinking about it all just last night. I find it difficult as my family grew up around the UN, my sister and I worked there at different times (I went to the first UN school). That's all dead.
You're far too kind on that absolute ghoul, Gerrol - The Gurning Shyster. Every utterance of hers is ghastly, over-confident NewSpeak. I didn't know of Nexus nor this ridiculous "let's get the billionaire children to care" which is just another mendacious cover for asset grabbing.
I will post this article on X etc but I'm shadow banned for protesting these same people committing genocide as I tap away.
At least quite a few people understand the bullshit that is "Climate" but not enough the synthetic "events" and the real "nexus" of criminals behind the scenes (less and less so, Larry...) as they drive us towards Neo-feudalism for the Goyim.
What can we do? We must destroy the careful innocence of their language first IMHO.
Managed Retreat is forced displacement.