It is the Global Take Over and it is hear!!  Don’t worry about which country is refenced in any of the articles or videos below.  It does not matter because, as I said, IT IS GLOBAL.  The very same things are coming to every country in the WORLD and they are coming fast!!

It is not like they didn’t know, or that we weren’t warned.  For the most part, people preferred not to think about it, like it would somehow go away, if we just ignored it.  Well, now there is no way to stop it and there will be nowhere to hide.

Truthers have been warning us that the World Elite are plotting to kill us all, though it sounds so absurd it is the TRUTH.

Killing the “poor” has been a reoccurring theme in books, songs and movies, for decades.

Those who do not know God Love Death!

35 For whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favour of the Lord.

36 But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.

“The sun beams down on a brand new day,
No more welfare tax to pay,
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light.
Jobless millions whisked away,
At last we have more room to play,
All systems go to kill the poor tonight.”

— Dead Kennedys, “Kill The Poor”

When someone takes Lyndon Johnson‘s “War on Poverty” a bit too literally and fights poverty with the most dubious and immoral methods imaginable.

Instead of seeking to eliminate poverty by educating and supporting the impoverished so they can attain a greater quality of life and income, some believe it would be easier to eliminate poor people with mass executions.

On the plus side, this approach would have a whopping 100% success rate. On the other hand, it’s horrifically unethical, and also counter-productive to a more prosperous economy (if you kill workers of low-paying jobs, now nobody is doing their job, which hurts the economy; also, many businesses would be doomed without poor customers.)

Less lethal alternatives may involve poverty being made illegal and poor people being treated as criminals, possibly forced into slave labor or a similar venture so that they can be “put to better use.” This has some historical precedence with things like the workhouse system in 1800s Britain, but fiction will usually take it to even more horrifying extents.

In either case, this trope is usually rife with sociopolitical and socioeconomic  Satire  and Symbolism, exaggerating how Upper Class Twits and other wealthy elites both want to view the lower classes and, more cynically, how they may actually view such groups. In this fashion, the concept could be used as a form of Black Comedy. To other extents, this could involve a character crossing the Moral Event Horizon and establishing themself as a Politically Incorrect Villain. It might also lead to A Nazi by Any Other Name or a High-Class Cannibal.

Sub-Trope of The Social Darwinist and Slobs Versus Snobs.

Compare Disposable Vagrant, for the murder/exploitation of impoverished people on a smaller/more discreet scale For Science! or other personal motivations.

Contrast Eat the Rich.


TROPE Definition & Meaning – Dictionary.com

The first records of the term trope come from around 1525. It ultimately comes from the Greek trópos, meaning “turn, manner, style, figure of speech.” In rhetoric, a trope is another term for a figure of speech. The use of trope to mean a “recurring theme” is a more modern usage.
Technically, in rhetoric, “a figure of speech which consists in the use of a word or phrase in a sense other than that which is proper to it” [OED], “as when we call a stupid fellow an ass, or a shrewd man a fox” [Century Dictionary].


Most-read 2022: Why is Canada euthanising the poor?

Yuan Yi Zhu

(Photo: iStock)

We’re finishing the year by republishing our ten most popular articles from 2022. Here’s number one: Yuan Yi Zhu’s piece from April on Canada’s euthanasia policy.

There is an endlessly repeated witticism by the poet Anatole France that ‘the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.’ What France certainly did not foresee is that an entire country – and an ostentatiously progressive one at that – has decided to take his sarcasm at face value and to its natural conclusion.

Since last year, Canadian law, in all its majesty, has allowed both the rich as well as the poor to kill themselves if they are too poor to continue living with dignity. In fact, the ever-generous Canadian state will even pay for their deaths. What it will not do is spend money to allow them to live instead of killing themselves.

As with most slippery slopes, it all began with a strongly worded denial that it exists. In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada reversed 22 years of its own jurisprudence by striking down the country’s ban on assisted suicide as unconstitutional, blithely dismissing fears that the ruling would ‘initiate a descent down a slippery slope into homicide’ against the vulnerable as founded on ‘anecdotal examples’. The next year, Parliament duly enacted legislation allowing euthanasia, but only for those who suffer from a terminal illness whose natural death was ‘reasonably foreseeable’.

Despite the government‘s insistence that assisted suicide is about individual autonomy, it has also kept an eye on the fiscal advantages

It only took five years for the proverbial slope to come into view, when the Canadian parliament enacted Bill C-7, a sweeping euthanasia law which repealed the ‘reasonably foreseeable’ requirement – and the requirement that the condition should be ‘terminal’. Now, as long as someone is suffering from an illness or disability which ‘cannot be relieved under conditions that you consider acceptable’, they can take advantage of what is now known euphemistically as ‘medical assistance in dying’ (MAID for short) for free.

Soon enough, Canadians from across the country discovered that although they would otherwise prefer to live, they were too poor to improve their conditions to a degree which was acceptable.

Not coincidentally, Canada has some of the lowest social care spending of any industrialised country, palliative care is only accessible to a minority, and waiting times in the public healthcare sector can be unbearable, to the point where the same Supreme Court which legalised euthanasia declared those waiting times to be a violation of the right to life back in 2005.

Many in the healthcare sector came to the same conclusion. Even before Bill C-7 was enacted, reports of abuse were rife. A man with a neurodegenerative disease testified to Parliament that nurses and a medical ethicist at a hospital tried to coerce him into killing himself by threatening to bankrupt him with extra costs or by kicking him out of the hospital, and by withholding water from him for 20 days. Virtually every disability rights group in the country opposed the new law. To no effect: for once, the government found it convenient to ignore these otherwise impeccably progressive groups.

Since then, things have only gotten worse. A woman in Ontario was forced into euthanasia because her housing benefits did not allow her to get better housing which didn’t aggravate her crippling allergies. Another disabled woman applied to die because she ‘simply cannot afford to keep on living’. Another sought euthanasia because Covid-related debt left her unable to pay for the treatment which kept her chronic pain bearable – under the present government, disabled Canadians got $600 in additional financial assistance during Covid; university students got $5,000.

When the family of a 35-year-old disabled man who resorted to euthanasia arrived at the care home where he lived, they encountered ‘urine on the floor… spots where there was feces on the floor… spots where your feet were just sticking. Like, if you stood at his bedside and when you went to walk away, your foot was literally stuck.’ According to the Canadian government, the assisted suicide law is about ‘prioritis[ing] the individual autonomy of Canadians’; one may wonder how much autonomy a disabled man lying in his own filth had in weighing death over life.

Despite the Canadian government’s insistence that assisted suicide is all about individual autonomy, it has also kept an eye on its fiscal advantages. Even before Bill C-7 entered into force, the country’s Parliamentary Budget Officer published a report about the cost savings it would create: whereas the old MAID regime saved $86.9 million per year – a ‘net cost reduction’, in the sterile words of the report – Bill C-7 would create additional net savings of $62 million per year. Healthcare, particular for those suffering from chronic conditions, is expensive; but assisted suicide only costs the taxpayer $2,327 per ‘case’. And, of course, those who have to rely wholly on government-provided Medicare pose a far greater burden on the exchequer than those who have savings or private insurance.


Now we all know that the world is facing an aging society.  The cost of providing care for our senior citizens is rising and though we had years to prepare for this inevitability… very little has been done to offset it.

Global News


It is not just the seniors of our society that are finding themselves in poverty, also among the poorest are children.  Helpless children.   Sadly, our Godless, self-centered society has no compassion on the most vulnerable among us.

Child poverty report


Don’t even get me started on the entire Mortgage industry and all the players involved.  There has been an ongoing conspiracy to price people out of their homes for decades.  I worked in the industry for a little while, long enough to see it all first hand.  This housing disaster was deliberately created.

As corrupt as the housing industry is it has nothing on the INSURANCE industry.  Again, I worked in that industry and have seen it all first hand.  INSURANCE is the biggest crime ever committed.  It has destroyed so much and provided so little.


HOMELESSNESS is OUT OF CONTROL!!  And none of it has occurred organically.  People are being forced out of their homes in so many ways.  Whether it is by the destruction of our jobs, or man made weather and so called natural disasters, or chemical spills of every imaginable kind, or the mysterious rampage of wild fires, or political BS and “URBAN DEVELOPMENT”, or the just the cost of living that has blown through the roof.  
See the following related post:








Context: Beyond the Headlines
Canada has a poverty problem. The numbers are staggering. 3.2 million Canadians live in poverty. And one in five children are …









I got a pretty big laugh out of the graphs in this next article.  Anyone who buys their numbers is hopeless deceived.
Just look around you, if you have any cognitive thinking skills, any discernment whatsoever, you KNOW that these numbers are extremely low compared to reality.  Especially here in 2024.  

National Poverty in America Awareness Month: January 2024

Key Stats

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement

Figures, Official Poverty Measure:
Figure 1. Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate Using the Official Poverty Measure: 1959 to 2022

Note: Figure 1 shown above is cropped. Click on the image  for the full figure, including notes and source.


It is not like they did not see this come, or that they did not have time to prepare…but even beyond that…they have been largely responsible for the circumstances.

Poverty in the United States

Poverty is still a big problem in the United States, especially for minorities and people living in rural areas. Improving education and health are keys to individuals and families rising above the poverty level.

Home > Debt FAQs > Key Figures Behind America’s Consumer Debt > Poverty in the United States

Poverty is the human condition of being unable to obtain or provide a standard level of food, water and/or shelter for you or your family.

It exists in every country to varying degrees and is unlikely to disappear any time soon. The United States is considered the richest country in the world, and yet 37.9 million (11.5%) of its residents live in poverty.  That is the understatement of the year folks!!

Poverty is measured in two ways – absolute poverty and relative poverty.

Absolute poverty looks at the goods and services someone (or a family) cannot obtain.

Relative poverty looks at the context of the need, how one social group compares to others.

The official method of calculating America’s poverty levels was developed in the 1960s and has not been refined substantially since then. Critics maintain that the government overstates the U.S. poverty level because it counts people as impoverished who in generations past, would be considered as not living in poverty.

The highest poverty rate on record was 22% (1950s). The lowest was 10.5% (2019).

Absolute Poverty

Absolute poverty is a measure of the minimal requirements necessary to afford the minimal standards of life-sustaining essentials — food, clothing, shelter, clean water, sanitation, education and access to health care.

The standards are consistent over time and are the same in different countries. For example, one absolute measurement is the percentage of a population that consumes enough food daily to sustain the human body. This standard – 2,000 – 2,500 calories per day – is applied worldwide and across all cultures.

The World Bank defines poverty in absolute terms:

  • People anywhere in the world who are living on less than $1.90 per day are living in extreme poverty.
  • People living on less than $3.20 per day in lower middle-income countries and less than $5.50 in upper middle-income countries are living in moderate poverty.

For instance, in 2017, 6.5 million people in Europe and Central Asia lived in extreme poverty, compared with almost 431 million in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Relative Poverty

Relative poverty is a measurement of income inequality within a social context. It does not measure hardship or material deprivation, but rather the disparities of wealth among income groups.

For example, in the United States, a household that has a refrigerator, televisions, and air conditioning can be considered impoverished if its income falls below a certain threshold. In other countries, those households might be thought of as wealthy.

Poverty Lines and Measures of Income Inadequacy in the United States Since 1870: Collecting and Using a Little-Known Body of Historical Material, by Gordon M. Fisher

A paper presented October 17, 1997,
at the 22nd Meeting of the Social Science History Association
Washington, D.C.


If you doubt that our world leaders have been caught unprepared for our current predicament, read on my friend.  They have been spent decades even centuries collecting, classifying, measuring and predicting.   Then KNOW exactly what is happening and why.  I would venture to say that they have manipulated the circumstances to bring us to this point.


OSEP: Funding and career development for innovators in aging science

Learn how NIA’s Office of Strategic Extramural Programs can help your career development.

Shaping the future of behavioral and social research at NIA

A look ahead from the DBSR perspective.

NIA at 50: Celebrating aging research advances and career opportunities

Kicking off NIA’s 50th anniversary year with excitement for the future.


NIA (National Institute of Aging) was formally established in 1974 but has much earlier origins. This timeline features information about major milestones in NIA’s history. For a more comprehensive history, view NIA in the NIH Almanac.

Browse our history by timeframes:
2020s | 2010s | 2000s | 1990s | 1980s | 1970s | Earlier Origins

Learn about NIA’s funded and conducted high-impact scientific advances in aging and dementia research.

New CARD Building

Roy Blunt Center for
Alzheimer’s and Related Dementias 




Dr. Richard J. Hodes - Director of the NIA
Dr. Richard J. Hodes – Director of the NIA




  • 1976: Dr. Robert N. Butler is appointed as the first NIA director.
  • 1975:The Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging, which launched in 1958, moves from NIH’s National Heart Institute to NIA.
  • 1975: NIA holds the first meeting of the National Advisory Council on Aging (NACA).
  • 1974: Congress passes Public Law (PL) 93-296 authorizing the establishment of a National Institute on Aging on May 31, 1974, and NIA is officially established on Oct. 7, 1974.
Gerontology Research Center
Gerontology Research Center

Earlier Origins

  • 1971: The White House Conference on Aging once again recommends the creation of a separate National Institute on Aging.
  • 1968: The Division of General Medical Sciences has responsibility for research grant projects in aging. Aging-related research is conducted and supported throughout NIH.
  • 1968: Construction of the Gerontology Research Center in Baltimore is completed.
  • 1967: The Gerontology Research Center in Baltimore, long a part of the National Heart Institute, is transferred to NICHD.
  • 1965: The Older Americans Act establishes the Administration on Aging as “the Federal focal point for activities in aging.”
  • 1963: The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development is established to focus on health issues across the life course, including in old age. President John F. Kennedy remarks, “For the first time, we will have an Institute to promote studies directed at the entire life process rather than toward specific diseases or illnesses.”
  • 1962: The Gerontology Research Center Nathan Shock Laboratory facility is donated to NIH by the City of Baltimore (deed dated 12/6/62; recorded 2/1/63).
  • 1961: The first White House Conference on Aging recommends the creation of an Aging Institute. Its report reads, in part, “a National Institute of Gerontology should be set up within the National Institutes of Health to conduct research on aging; Federal financial support should be increased for biomedical research in governmental agencies, universities, hospitals, research centers and for building necessary facilities; human population laboratories should be established to study problems associated with aging.”
  • 1959: A Section on Aging, headed by James E. Birren, is established within NIMH.
  • 1959: Aging research conducted through NIH intramural programs (Gerontology Branch of the National Heart Institute and NIMH Section on Aging).
  • 1959: Almost 600 research and training grants on aging are underway through the Center for Aging Research, “the focal point for information on the NIH activities in gerontology.”
  • 1958: Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging is established.
  • 1956: Federal Council on Aging is convened.
  • 1956: TheDepartment of Health, Education, and Welfare has a Special Staff on Aging; the Center for Aging Research, which exists within the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH).
  • 1951: In his Trends in Gerontology, Dr. Shock outlines his recommendations for an Institute of Gerontology.
  • 1950: President Harry S. Truman convenes the First National Conference on Aging.
  • 1948: The Gerontology Branch is moved to the National Heart Institute.
  • 1941: The Unit on Aging (eventually, later the Gerontology Branch) moves to Baltimore City Hospital under the direction of Nathan Shock.
  • 1941: Surgeon General Thomas Parran forms the National Advisory Committee on Gerontology.
  • 1940: A Unit on Aging, headed by Edward J. Stieglitz, is established in the NIH Division of Chemotherapy.
  • 1930: Congress changes the name of the Hygienic Laboratory to the National Institute of Health.
  • 1887: A federal research laboratory, known as the Laboratory of Hygiene, is established at the Marine Hospital, Staten Island, N.Y., in August, for research on cholera and other infectious diseases. It will be renamed the Hygienic Laboratory in 1891.



Chapter 13. Aging and the Elderly

Nov 6, 2014

The first census in Canada was conducted in 1666 on the colony’s 3,215 inhabitants and included questions about age as well as sex, marital status, and occupation. Since the first national census in 1871, the Canadian government has been tracking age in the population every 10 years (Statistics Canada 2013a). Age is an important factor to analyze with accompanying demographic figures, such as income and health. The population pyramid below shows projected age distribution patterns for the next several decades.

Two population pyramids, each showing separate data for males and females. One is for age distribution for 2011; the second is for 2050.
Figure 13.3. These population pyramids show the age distribution for 2011 and projected patterns for 2050 (Graph courtesy of the U.S. Census Bureau, International Data Base).

Statisticians use data to calculate the median age of a population, that is, the number that marks the halfway point in a group’s age range. In Canada, the median age is about 40 (Statistics Canada 2013b). That means that about half of Canadians are under 40 and about half are over 40. The median age of women is higher than men, 41.1 compared to 39.4, due to the persistent higher life expectancy of women (although the gap between genders has been diminishing).

Overall the median age of Canadians has been increasing, indicating that the population as a whole is growing older. It is interesting to note, however, that the proportion of senior citizens in Canada is lower than most of the other G8 countries. In 2013, 15.3 percent of Canadians were over 65 while 25 percent of Japanese, 21 percent of Germans, 21 percent of Italians, 17 percent of French, and 16 percent of British were over 65. Only the United States (14 percent) and Russia (13 percent) had lower proportions (Statistics Canada 2013c).

A cohort is a group of people who share a statistical or demographic trait. People belonging to the same age cohort were born in the same time frame. The population pyramids in Figure 13.3 show the different composition of age cohorts in the population, comparing the population in 2011 with figures projected for 2050. The bulge in the pyramid clearly becomes more rounded in the future, indicating that the proportion of senior cohorts will continue to increase with respect to the younger cohorts in the population. Understanding a population’s age composition can point to certain social and cultural factors and help governments and societies plan for future social and economic challenges. This is key to planning for everything from the funding of pension plans and health care systems to calculating the number of immigrants needed to replenish the workforce.

The population pyramid in Figure 13.4 compares the age distribution of the aboriginal population of Canada in 2001 to projected figures for 2017. It is much more pyramidal in form than the graphs for the Canadian population as a whole  (see Figure 13.3) reflecting both the higher birth rate of the aboriginal population and the lower life expectancy of aboriginal people. The aboriginal population is much younger than the Canadian population as a whole, with a median age of 24.7 years in 2001 (projected to increase to 27.8 in 2017). Sociological studies on aging might help explain the difference between Native American age cohorts and the general population. While Native American societies have a strong tradition of revering their elders, they also have a lower life expectancy because of lack of access to quality health care.

Two population pyramids, one overlapping the other, for the Canadian Aboriginal population. The graph is divided to show separate data for male and female.
Figure 13.4. This population pyramid shows the age distribution for the Canadian aboriginal population in 2001 and projected patterns for 2017 (Graph courtesy of Statistics Canada, 2005).

Phases of Aging: The Young-Old, Middle-Old, and Old-Old

In Canada, all people over age 18 are considered adults, but there is a large difference between a person aged 21 and a person who is 45. More specific breakdowns, such as “young adult” and “middle-aged adult,” are helpful. In the same way, groupings are helpful in understanding the elderly. The elderly are often lumped together, grouping everyone over the age of 65. But a 65-year-old’s experience of life is much different than a 90-year-old’s.

The older adult population can be divided into three life-stage subgroups: the young-old (approximately 65–74), the middle-old (ages 75–84), and the old-old (over age 85). Today’s young-old age group is generally happier, healthier, and financially better off than the young-old of previous generations. In North America, people are better able to prepare for aging because resources are more widely available. (Now that is certainly not true today, it may or may not have been in 2014, but today, totally false.)

Also, many people are making proactive quality-of-life decisions about their old age while they are still young. In the past, family members made care decisions when an elderly person reached a health crisis, often leaving the elderly person with little choice about what would happen. The elderly are now able to choose housing, for example, that allows them some independence while still providing care when it is needed. Living wills, retirement planning, and medical powers of attorney are other concerns that are increasingly handled in advance.

However, the gender imbalance in the sex ratio of men to women is increasingly skewed toward women as people age. In 2013, 67 percent of Canadians over the age of 85 were women (Statistics Canada 2013b). This imbalance in life expectancy has larger implications because of the economic inequality between men and women. The population of old-old women are the cohort with the greatest needs for care, but because many women did not work outside the household during their working years and those who did earned less on average than men, they receive the least retirement benefits.

The Greying of Canada

Figure 13.5. The Raging Grannies advocate for a national housing program at a rally in Vancouver. (Photo courtesy of Yaokcool/flickr)

What does it mean to be elderly? Some define it as an issue of physical health, while others simply define it by chronological age. The Canadian government, for example, typically classifies people aged 65 years old as elderly, at which point citizens are eligible for federal benefits such as Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security payments. The World Health Organization has no standard, other than noting that 65 years old is the commonly accepted definition in most core nations, but it suggests a cut-off somewhere between 50 and 55 years old for semi-peripheral nations, such as those in Africa (World Health Organization 2012). CARP (formerly the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, now just known as CARP) no longer has an eligible age of membership because they suggest that people of all ages can begin to plan for their retirement. It is interesting to note CARP’s name change; by taking the word “retired”out of its name, the organization can broaden its base to any older Canadians, not just retirees. This is especially important now that many people are working to age 70 and beyond.

There is an element of social construction, both local and global, in the way individuals and nations define who is elderly; that is, the shared meaning of the concept of elderly is created through interactions among people in society. This is exemplified by the truism that you are only as old as you feel.

Demographically, the Canadian population over age 65 increased from 5 percent in 1901 (Novak 1997) to 14.4 percent in 2011. Statistics Canada estimates that by 2051 the percentage will increase to 25.5 percent (Statistics Canada 2010). This increase has been called “the greying of Canada,” a term that describes the phenomenon of a larger and larger proportion of the population getting older and older.

There are several reasons why Canada is greying so rapidly. One of these is life expectancy: the average number of years a person born today may expect to live. When reviewing Statistics Canada figures that group the elderly by age, it is clear that in Canada, at least, we are living longer. Between 1983 and 2013, the number of elderly citizens over 85 increased by more than 100 percent. In 2013 the number of centenarians (those 100 years or older) in Canada was 6,900, almost 20 centenarians per 100,000 persons, compared to 11 centenarians per 100,000 persons in 2001  (Statistics Canada 2013b).

Another reason for the greying of Canada can be attributed to the aging of the baby boomers. Nearly a third of the Canadian population was born in the generation following World War II (between 1946 and 1964) when Canadian families averaged 3.7 children per family (compared to 1.7 today) (Statistics Canada 2012a). Baby boomers began to reach the age of 65 in 2011. Finally, the proportion of old to young can be expected to continue to increase because of the below-replacement fertility rate (i.e., the average number of children per woman). A low birth rate contributes to the higher percentage of older people in the population.

As we noted above, not all Canadians age equally. Most glaring is the difference between men and women; as Figure 13.6 shows, women have longer life expectancies than men. In 2013, there were ninety 65-to-79-year-old men per one hundred 65-to-79-year-old women. However, there were only sixty 80+ year-old men per one hundred 80+ year-old women. Nevertheless, as the graph shows, the sex ratio actually increased over time, indicating that men are closing the gap between their life spans and those of women (Statistics Canada 2013c).

Figure 13.6. Sex ratio by age group, 1983 and 2013, Canada. This Statistics Canada chart shows that women live significantly longer than men. However, over the past two decades, men have narrowed the percentage by which women outlive them. (Graph courtesy of Statistics Canada, 2013c)
Figure 13.6. Sex ratio by age group, 1983 and 2013, Canada. This Statistics Canada chart shows that women live significantly longer than men. However, over the past two decades, men have narrowed the percentage by which women outlive them. (Graph courtesy of Statistics Canada, 2013c)

Baby Boomers

Of particular interest to gerontologists right now are the consequences of the aging population of baby boomers, the cohort born between 1946 and 1964 and just now reaching age 65. Coming of age in the 1960s and early 1970s, the baby boom generation was the first group of children and teenagers with their own spending power and therefore their own marketing power (Macunovich 2000). The youth market for commodities such as music, fashion, movies, and automobiles, was a major factor in creating a youth-oriented culture. As this group has aged, it has redefined what it means to be young, middle-aged, and, now, old. People in the boomer generation do not want to grow old the way their grandparents did; the result is a wide range of products designed to ward off the effects—or the signs—of aging. Previous generations of people over 65 were “old.” Baby boomers are in “later life” or “the third age” (Gilleard and Higgs 2007).

The baby boom generation is the cohort driving much of the dramatic increase in the over-65 population. As we can see in Figure 13.7, the biggest bulge in the population pyramid for 2011 (representing the largest population group) is in the age 45 to 55 cohort. As time progresses, the population bulge moves up in age. In 2011 the oldest baby boomers were just reaching the age at which Statistics Canada considers them elderly. In 2020, we can predict, the baby boom bulge will continue to rise up the pyramid, making the largest Canadian population group between 65 and 85 years old.

Figure 13.7. Portrait of generations, using the age pyramid, Canada, 2011. (Graph courtesy of Statistics Canada, 2012b)
Figure 13.7. Portrait of generations, using the age pyramid, Canada, 2011. (Graph courtesy of Statistics Canada, 2012b)

This aging of the baby boom cohort has serious implications for society. Health care is one of the areas most impacted by this trend. For years, hand-wringing has abounded about the additional burden the boomer cohort will place on the publicly funded health care system. The report by the Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada noted in 2001 that the combined public and private expenditure per person each year for medical care was approximately three times as much for persons over 65 than for the average person ($10,834 per person versus $3,174). As health care costs increase with age, the reasoning is that more people entering the 65 and older age group will increase the cost of medical care dramatically. In fact, the cost to the health care system specifically due to aging is projected to be no more than 1 percent per year (Romanow 2002). The main sources of cost increase to the health care system come from inflation, rising overall population, and advances in medical technologies (new pharmaceutical drugs, surgical techniques, diagnostic and imaging techniques, and end-of-life care). With respect to end-of-life care, the average Canadian now receives approximately one and a half times more health care services than the average Canadian did in 1975 (Lee 2007). Even with modest economic growth, existing levels of health care service can be maintained without difficulty if the total increase in costs of health care from all sources, including aging, result in an annual increase in health care budget expenditures of 4.4 percent over the medium term as expected (Lee 2007).  (Is that why they started paying for sex changes in prisoners, and children, abortions, as well as for all medical expenses for all the immigrants they are bringing into our country?)

Other studies indicate that aging boomers will bring economic growth to the health care industries, particularly in areas like pharmaceutical manufacturing and home health care services (Bierman 2011). Further, some argue that many of our medical advances of the past few decades are a result of boomers’ health requirements. Unlike the elderly of previous generations, boomers do not expect that turning 65 means their active lives are over. They are not willing to abandon work or leisure activities, but they may need more medical support to keep living vigorous lives. This desire of a large group of over-65-year-olds wanting to continue with a high activity level is driving innovation in the medical industry (Shaw 2012). It is not until the final year of life that health care expenditures undergo a dramatic increase. Approximately one-third to one-half of a typical person’s total health care expenditures occur in the final year of life (Lee 2007). The implication is that with people living increasingly longer and healthier lives, the issue of the cost of health care and aging needs to be refocused on end-of-life care options.

The economic impact of aging boomers is also an area of concern for many observers. Although the baby boom generation earned more than previous generations and enjoyed a higher standard of living, they also spent their money lavishly and did not adequately prepare for retirement. (Not quite accurate.  Well, at least for Americans. Many baby boomers lost their retirement when their companies were bought out, and in the past few decades there have been no retirement benefits offered and no raises.  Many boomers were sold on the idea that they could use a balloon Mortgage because surely they could expect their income to increase, or at least that is what they were told.  Then when the balloon payments came due, there was no way for them to meet the increase and they lost their homes. And of course the cost of living just keeps rising and jobs have all but disappeared first going overseas to save the Big Corporation from the expense of paying Americans not to mention the taxes. Then the jobs continued to be lost to foreigners coming to the US on green card lotteries and political bargaining, college paid for and jobs guaranteed.  Now even more are being forfeited to all the immigrants who were also promised education, jobs and housing.)  According to a 2013 report from the Bank of Montreal, the average baby boomer falls about $400,000 short of adequate savings to maintain their lifestyles in retirement.  (Shoot, most people don’t have enough savings to cover emergency expenses like car repairs or hospitalization, let alone $400,000 for retirement) The average senior couple spends approximately $54,000 a year, requiring accumulated savings of $1,352,000 to sustain themselves (not taking into account Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Pension payments). Canadian boomers anticipated they needed savings of $658,000 to feel financially secure in retirement but had only saved an average of $228,000. Seventy-one percent of boomers said they plan to work part time in retirement (BMO Financial Group 2013). This will have a ripple effect on the economy as boomers work and spend less.

Aging around the World

Figure 13.8. Cultural values and attitudes can shape people’s experience of aging. (Photo courtesy of Tom Coppen/flickr)

From 1950 to approximately 2010, the global population of individuals age 65 and older increased by a range of 5 to 7 percent (Lee 2009). This percentage is expected to increase and will have a huge impact on the dependency ratio: the number of productive working citizens to non-productive (young, disabled, elderly) (Bartram and Roe 2005). One country that will soon face a serious aging crisis is China, which is on the cusp of an “aging boom”: a period when its elderly population will dramatically increase. The number of people above age 60 in China today is about 178 million, which amounts to 13.3 percent of its total population (Xuequan 2011). By 2050, nearly a third of the Chinese population will be age 60 or older, putting a significant burden on the labour force and impacting China’s economic growth (Bannister, Bloom, and Rosenberg 2010).

As health care improves and life expectancy increases across the world, elder care will be an emerging issue. Wienclaw (2009) suggests that with fewer working-age citizens available to provide home care and long-term assisted care to the elderly, the costs of elder care will increase.

Worldwide, the expectation governing the amount and type of elder care varies from culture to culture. For example, in Asia the responsibility for elder care lies firmly on the family (Yap, Thang, and Traphagan 2005). This is different from the approach in most Western countries, where the elderly are considered independent and are expected to tend to their own care. It is not uncommon for family members to intervene only if the elderly relative requires assistance, often due to poor health. Even then, caring for the elderly is considered voluntary. In North America, decisions to care for an elderly relative are often conditionally based on the promise of future returns, such as inheritance or, in some cases, the amount of support the elderly provided to the caregiver in the past (Hashimoto 1996).

These differences are based on cultural attitudes toward aging. In China, several studies have noted the attitude of filial piety (deference and respect to one’s parents and ancestors in all things) as defining all other virtues (Hamilton 1990; Hsu 1971). Cultural attitudes in Japan prior to approximately 1986 supported the idea that the elderly deserve assistance (Ogawa and Retherford 1993). However, seismic shifts in major social institutions (like family and economy) have created an increased demand for community and government care. For example, the increase in women working outside the home has made it more difficult to provide in-home care to aging parents, leading to an increase in the need for government-supported institutions (Raikhola and Kuroki 2009).

In North America, by contrast, many people view caring for the elderly as a burden. Even when there is a family member able and willing to provide for an elderly family member, 60 percent of family caregivers are employed outside the home and are unable to provide the needed support. At the same time, however, many middle-class families are unable to bear the financial burden of “outsourcing” professional health care, resulting in gaps in care (Bookman and Kimbrel 2011). Chinese Canadians, for example, are thought to have a higher sense of filial responsibility and to perceive providing family assistance for the elderly as a more normal aspect of life than Caucasian Canadians (Funk, Chappell, and Liu 2013). It is important to note that even within a country, not all demographic groups treat aging the same way. While most Americans are reluctant to place their elderly members into out-of-home assisted care, demographically speaking, the groups least likely to do so are Latinos, African Americans, and Asians (Bookman and Kimbrel 2011).

Globally, Canada and other wealthy nations are fairly well equipped to handle the demands of an exponentially increasing elderly population. However, peripheral and semi-peripheral nations face similar increases without comparable resources. Poverty among elders is a concern, especially among elderly women. The feminization of the aging poor, evident in peripheral nations, is directly due to the number of elderly women in those countries who are single, illiterate, and not a part of the labour force (Mujahid 2006).

In 2002, the Second World Assembly on Aging was held in Madrid, Spain, resulting in the Madrid Plan, an internationally coordinated effort to create comprehensive social policies to address the needs of the worldwide aging population. The plan identifies three themes to guide international policy on aging: 1) publically acknowledging the global challenges caused by, and the global opportunities created by, a rising global population; 2) empowering the elderly; and 3) linking international policies on aging to international policies on development (Zelenev 2008).

The Madrid Plan has not yet been successful in achieving all its aims. However, it has increased awareness of the various issues associated with a global aging population, as well as raising the international consciousness to the way that the factors influencing the vulnerability of the elderly (social exclusion, prejudice and discrimination, and a lack of socio-legal protection) overlap with other developmental issues (basic human rights, empowerment, and participation), leading to an increase in legal protections (Zelenev 2008).

13.2. The Process of Aging

What may be surprising is how few studies were conducted on death and dying prior to the 1960s. Death and dying were fields that had received little attention until psychologist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross began observing people who were in the process of dying. As Kübler-Ross witnessed people’s transition toward death, she found some common threads in their experiences. She observed that the process had five distinct stages: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. She published her findings in a 1969 book called On Death and Dying. The book remains a classic on the topic today.

Kübler-Ross found that a person’s first reaction to the prospect of dying is denial, characterized by not wanting to believe that he or she is dying, with common thoughts such as “I feel fine” or “This is not really happening to me.” The second stage is anger, when loss of life is seen as unfair and unjust. A person then resorts to the third stage, bargaining: trying to negotiate with a higher power to postpone the inevitable by reforming or changing the way he or she lives. The fourth stage, psychological depression, allows for resignation as the situation begins to seem hopeless. In the final stage, a person adjusts to the idea of death and reaches acceptance. At this point, the person can face death honestly, regarding it as a natural and inevitable part of life, and can make the most of their remaining time.

The work of Kübler-Ross was eye-opening when it was introduced. It broke new ground and opened the doors for sociologists, social workers, health practitioners, and therapists to study death and help those who were facing death. Kübler-Ross’s work is generally considered a major contribution to thanatology: the systematic study of death and dying.

Of special interests to thanatologists is the concept of “dying with dignity.” Modern medicine includes advanced medical technology that may prolong life without a parallel improvement to the quality of life one may have. In some cases, people may not want to continue living when they are in constant pain and no longer enjoying life. Should patients have the right to choose to die with dignity? Dr. Jack Kevorkian was a staunch advocate for physician-assisted suicide: the voluntary or physician-assisted use of lethal medication provided by a medical doctor to end one’s life. Physician-assisted suicide is slightly different from euthanasia, which refers to the act of taking someone’s life to alleviate that person’s suffering, but that does not necessarily reflect the person’s expressed desire to commit suicide.

This right to have a doctor help a patient die with dignity is controversial. In the United States, Oregon was the first state to pass a law allowing physician-assisted suicides. In 1997, Oregon instituted the Death with Dignity Act, which required the presence of two physicians for a legal assisted suicide. This law was successfully challenged by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft in 2001, but the appeals process ultimately upheld the Oregon law. Subsequently, both Montana and Washington have passed similar laws.

In Canada, physician-assisted suicide is illegal, although suicide itself has not been illegal since 1972. On moral and legal grounds, advocates of physician-assisted suicide argue that the law unduly deprives individuals of their autonomy and right to freely choose to end their own life with assistance; that existing palliative care can be inadequate to alleviate pain and suffering; that the law discriminates against disabled people who are unable, unlike able-bodied people, to commit suicide by themselves; and that assisted suicide is taking place already in an informal way, but without proper regulations. Those opposed argue that life is a fundamental value and killing is intrinsically wrong, that legal physician-assisted suicide could result in abuses with respect to the most vulnerable members of society, that individuals might seek assisted suicide for financial reasons or because services are inadequate, and that it might reduce the urgency to find means of improving the care of people who are dying (Butler, Tiedemann, Nicol, and Valiquet 2013).

There are two main legal reference points for the issue in Canada. One is the case of Robert Latimer, the Saskatchewan farmer convicted in 1997 for the mercy killing (or euthanasia) of his 12-year-old daughter, Tracey Latimer, who had a severe form of cerebral palsy, and was unable walk, talk, or feed herself. The second case is that of Sue Rodriguez who sought the legal right to have a physician-assisted suicide because she suffered from ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). She argued in the Supreme Court that the law against physician-assisted suicide violated her right to “life, liberty, and security of the person” but lost her case in a five-to-four decision in 1992. She did choose physician-assisted suicide two years later from an anonymous physician. In 2012, however, a B.C. court found that the law did discriminate against those who are “grievously and irremediably ill” in the case of Gloria Taylor, another woman with ALS. The court granted a constitutional exemption to permit her to seek physician-assisted suicide while the constitutional challenge to the law is clarified. However, Taylor died from an infection in 2012. The constitutional challenge to the law remains unresolved. In Quebec, the Select Committee on Dying with Dignity tabled a report in 2012 that supported assisted suicide. In 2013 a panel of experts appointed by the Quebec government agreed that in certain circumstances assisted suicide should be understood as part of the continuum of care (Butler et al. 2013). In 2014, Quebec became the first province in Canada to pass right-to-die legislation. Terminally ill adults of sound mind may request continuous palliative sedation that will lead to death (Seguin 2014).

The controversy surrounding death with dignity laws is emblematic of the way our society tries to separate itself from death. Health institutions have built facilities to comfortably house those who are terminally ill. This is seen as a compassionate act, helping relieve the surviving family members of the burden of caring for the dying relative. But studies almost universally show that people prefer to die in their own homes (Lloyd, White, and Sutton 2011). Is it our social responsibility to care for elderly relatives up until their death? How do we balance the responsibility for caring for an elderly relative with our other responsibilities and obligations? As our society grows older, and as new medical technology can prolong life even further, the answers to these questions will develop and change.

The changing concept of hospice is an indicator of our society’s changing view of death. Hospice is a type of health care that treats terminally ill people when cure-oriented treatments are no longer an option (Canadian Hospice Palliative Care Association N.d.). Hospice doctors, nurses, and therapists receive special training in the care of the dying. The focus is not on getting better or curing the illness, but on passing out of this life in comfort and peace. Hospice centres exist as places where people can go to die in comfort, and increasingly, hospice services encourage at-home care so that someone has the comfort of dying in a familiar environment, surrounded by family (Canadian Hospice Palliative Care Association N.d.). While many of us would probably prefer to avoid thinking of the end of our lives, it may be possible to take comfort in the idea that when we do approach death in a hospice setting, it is in a familiar, relatively controlled place.


Some of the reasons and the forces behind the make up of our current population.

Check out the following related posts:

The BEGINNING OF THE END – Part 1; Part 2, Part 3, Part 3a; Part 4; Part 5; Part 6; Part 7; Part 8


World War II

Sep 1, 1939 – Sep 2, 1945
World War II or the Second World War was a global conflict between two major alliances: the Allies and the Axis powers. The vast majority of the world’s countries, including all the great powers, fought as part of these military alliances. Wikipedia
DatesSep 1, 1939 – Sep 2, 1945



Geordie Rose said that his D-Wave quantum computers are able to summon a “Tsunami of Demons” or aliens that are the equivalent of the “Old Ones” spoken of by horror author H.P. Lovecraft. Additionally, the creator of D-Wave computers says that standing next to one is like standing at the altar of an alien God. These tools are pushing us ever so rapidly into creating, building, and what some tech leaders call “summoning” a race of super-intelligent AI. On tonight’s show, Clyde Lewis talks with CERN researcher and author, Anthony Patch about TSUNAMI OF DEMONS. #ExclusiveArticle for #GroundZero #TsunamiOfDemons    SOURCE


Check out the following related post:




If you would like to know more about how far back the work on Artificial Intelligence goes click the link below:


Having watched the video above, you might come away thinking that AI was first invented in 1955.  Not so, only the TERM: ARTIVICIAL INTELLIGENCE was coined at that time.  As you will see below, machines capable of thinking and problem solving were already in existence long before 1955.


Related Article

Computers: Thinking Machines


Legal Suicide Pods And How Soylent Green Predicted It


Ephesians 5:11, 13-16: “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light. See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.”

The 1828 Noah Webster Dictionary defines: “Reprove”: To blame, to convince of a fault, or to make it manifest, to excite a sense of guilt.“Circumspectly”: Cautiously; with watchfulness every way; with attention to guard against surprise or danger.

Matthew 24:24: “...if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.”

II Corinthians 2:11: “Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.”

II Chronicles 7:14: “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”

Luke 21:36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Matthew 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

Psalm 101:3: I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me.

Psalm 11:5: The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.

1 Cor 15:33: Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. Lexicon Strong’s G3657–Outline of Biblical Usage of the Word: “Communications”: companionship, communion

“It does not take a majority to prevail… but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” Samuel Adams “The average age of the world’s great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage.” Alexander Fraser Tytler


check out the following related post:



SICK: Climate Scientist Suggests “Culling” the Human Population with a Deadly Pandemic to Solve the “Climate Crisis”

Credit: @ProfBillMcGuire

One government climate scientist made the mistake of blurting out the real end-game of so many radical environmental activists in a bid to preserve the planet: Killing off the human population.

Bill McGuire, a Professor of Geophysical & Climate Hazards at University College London (UCL), authored a tweet Sunday that lamented the fact carbon emissions were not falling nearly as fast as needed and suggested solving the “climate crisis” with a deadly pandemic to wipe out swaths of the human population.

“If I am brutally honest, the only realistic way I see emissions falling as fast as they need to, to avoid catastrophic #climate breakdown, is the culling of the human population by a pandemic with a very high fatality rate,” he wrote.


After righteous backlash from social media users, McGuire deleted his post and whined that people were deliberately taking his words out of context.

He then lied and claimed that his initial post was about falling economic activity despite clearly referencing a pandemic killing off mankind.

As the National Pulse notes, McGuire is infamous for being a member of a British government body that advised politicians on the COVID-19 response. He also co-authored a report for the radical United Nations’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which helps influence climate policy worldwide.

McGuire is also not the first leftist to suggest exterminating the human population to solve the planet’s issues. For example, infamous animal rights activist Jane Goodall once floated reducing the Earth’s population to what it was 500 years ago. A University of Texas professor also called for killing 90 PERCENT of all humans to save the planet.

The Biden regime is funding dangerous experiments that could turn these vile individuals’ dreams into a reality. The National Pulse reveals Peter Daszak, a researcher with ties to Anthony Fauci, is still receiving millions in taxpayer dollars to “research” not only coronavirus samples in Wuhan, but also to source new bat viruses from Burma, Laos, the Philippines, Thailand, and other countries. Some of these pathogens are highly infectious.

American taxpayers are also funding risky Chinese research on the bird flu more transmissible, a disease that kills over 50% of the people it infects. COVID-19, by comparison, has a fatality rate of less than 1%.

These facts add fuel to the theory that COVID-19 was created as a trial run and globalists are planning to develop a far more deadly virus to provide a “final solution” to the human race.


Save the Planet, Kill Yourself

Over the past few weeks I’ve been really into researching religious zealots and cults (brought on by this Netflix documentary called Jesus Camp –10/10 would recommend) and I just read an article about one group in particular that shocked me a little more than all the rest. The Church of Euthanasia was founded in the mid-1990s by an ex-DJ named Chris Korda, who says the church’s guiding principle is “Thou shalt not procreate.” Apparently, Korda and her followers (of which there were more than I had hoped) were so worried about climate change and overpopulation that they decided to start a movement based solely on encouraging people to die.

A Church of Euthanasia protest for abortion

“Fetuses AREN’T People. They aren’t even CHICKENS. Who Cares?”

The Church of Euthanasia gained traction by protesting at major political events, including the 1992 Democratic National Convention, where they popularized their slogan, “Save the Planet, Kill Yourself.” This fits in nicely with the four pillars of their religion, which are as follows: “Suicide (optional but encouraged), abortion (may be required to avoid procreation), cannibalism (mandatory if you insist on eating flesh, but only if someone is already dead), and sodomy (optional, but strongly encouraged).” It seems as though the CoE was trying to get rid of the Earth’s population through every way possible, except outright homicide. Side note: I’m a little unsure of where cannibalism fits into the whole philosophy, but I guess that by consuming dead bodies you’re freeing up space for other activities???

The part that really shocked me was the hotline the Church attempted to set up, which would have provided round the clock instructions for people looking to commit suicide. It’s kind of a cruel twist of fate, because suicide hotlines are normally resources used to prevent suicide, not to encourage it. I really couldn’t believe that people’s lives meant so little to the members of this group that they were willing to encourage this sort of behavior for the sake of an imperceptible amount of extra breathing room on the planet.

I was expecting a disclaimer at the end of the article, something along the lines of, “Korda, along with her most loyal followers, committed suicide in 1995..,” but there was none. The founder of the Church of Euthanasia, who had no problem telling everyone else it was their duty to die, is still living today. Whether that means she felt she needed to be here to keep up the mission, or if the whole thing was just some elaborate hoax, I don’t know.

Link to article: http://www.vice.com/read/save-the-planet-kill-yourself-the-contentious-history-of-the-church-of-euthanasia-1022

This article is part of a Vice News column called “Post Mortem” and there are some really great pieces on there as well!



Please check out the following related posts:

PANDEMIC – OUTBREAK – Diseases, Epidemics, Pandemics and Plagues


Part 2 – Candida Auris


Welcome to YOUR FUTURE – Medical Tyranny



Once you are broke, penniless and have lost your home you will be at the mercy of the Government.  They will provide what you need to live as long as you follow their commands, most especially when it comes to your health.  You will eat what they tell you, drink what they allow, you will see the doctor that is assigned to you, take the medications recommended for you, follow the immunization schedules, exercise, and sleeps when and how you are told.  They way they will know if you are doing as you are told is by the feedback they get from the nanobots in your system.  You will do as your told or lose your healthcare.  If you lose your healthcare you will be ostracized from the community.  You will not be allowed housing, food, clothing or medications.  In other words you will be left to die.