"While globalists like Soros maintain that there are long term benefits to harmonization, including a better standard of living for everyone, in effect, harmonization only seems to make all countries equally poor."

Economic Consequences Of The “New World Order”
By Giordano Bruno

“Harmonization” is a very pleasant sounding term for a very insidious financial practice, and it is also something we will be hearing a lot about if the NWO design is allowed to continue. In order to understand what economic harmonization entails, one should research the mechanics and purpose behind monopolies. Monopolies are formed first and foremost to remove a very particular free-market factor; competition. Competition allows for the organic growth of markets by relying on the general populace to decide which business and financial models work best. Those models that do not pass the social test are ignored and allowed to die away, while those that pass are supported by the public and allowed to carry on. This natural order of commerce is supplanted when the largest suppliers (businesses or countries) form unions, fix prices, and squeeze out smaller entrepreneurs before they find an opportunity to present a superior idea or business model. By removing competition, monopolies take away the citizen’s ability to choose, or to even participate in the economy in any capacity beyond the role of mindless consumer.

Global harmonization works in a similar way, except in this case the monopoly is not over a specific product or resource, but the resources of entire continents. Competition among nations is squashed. As in the European Union, more successful countries are forced through unilateral trade agreements to transfer their wealth to faltering nations. Not only this, but the economic policies which once made them more competitive are scrapped and replaced with policies that deliberately stunt national growth. Decisions on what kind of commerce works best are no longer made by the citizenry, and are instead centralized into the hands of a select few. Any state that resists or strives for sovereignty is branded irresponsible, or even dangerous; a threat to the so called “balance”.

While globalists like Soros maintain that there are long term benefits to harmonization, including a better standard of living for everyone, in effect, harmonization only seems to make all countries equally poor.

IMF and World Bank lackeys love to bring up the plight of Africa when peddling harmonization and certainly African countries would benefit temporarily by siphoning capital from richer nations, but ultimately, it is the IMF, World Bank, and the UN that ravaged Africa in the first place with their loan sharking, resource theft, and attempts to interfere with African industrialization in the name of unsupported global warming arguments. (Hey, as soon as NASA or the Climate Research Unit in East Anglia makes the source data for their experiments available to the public instead of copping out and claiming national security privileges, I’m perfectly willing to give them a fair shake.) In the FT interview, Soros boasts about IMF allocations of SDR’s to needy African countries, as if they do it out of the kindness of their hearts. Anyone who has studied the history of the IMF knows that they do not do charity.

In the end, dirt poor nations might progress, but never enough to actually prosper, and all at the cost of finding themselves beholden to the IMF. This is the essence of the New World Order. This is the dark side that elitists never openly delve into; total centralization, total poverty, total control, no other options…

Read more:
http://neithercorp.us/npress/2011/01/economic-consequences-of-the-%E2%80%9Cnew-world-order%E2%80%9D/