The World’s Youngest Billionaire is…

And where are all the females in this world of the rich? or is this really a mans world when it comes to money?

I Know one day my name is also come there….

Oh, how trite!

All the comments seem to support making lots of money – the American Dream … Oh, how nice to live in a beautiful multi-room mansion by the sea, lake or woods or whatever … maybe with a Lamborghini or Rolls parked in the garage … etc., etc.

Well, I hope you live long enough to realize your dreams if you don’t die from cancer from the 200+ industrial chemicals found in YOUR blood (as it is found in the blood of new born infants). Even cancer-causing DDT or its metabolites, which was banned in 1972 in the U.S., is STILL found in human breast milk and in animals throughout the world! (Yet some countries still use the American product – DDT, because American companies, like Union Carbide etc. make lots of money selling it – Oh how wonderful! The selfish American Dream!) About 25+ years ago 1 out of 30 women or so got breast cancer. Today its around 1 in 10 or so. But, the males shouldn’t feel left out of the “American Reality”: cancer of prostrate has has also risen in the last decades. It was only confirmed in the last decade or so, what has been known for a long time: that these chemicals often disrupt the hormonal balance in our bodies causing havoc within our bodies.

Many of these chemicals are insecticides and pesticides which help the corporate farmer rid the soil of pests. What is farmer to do without them? How can a farmer, also realizing that wonderful American Dream, make tons of money without using tons of pesticides? Well, he can’t because the American Dream means making tons of money no matter who is killed, injured along the way.

Of course, there are other ways of realizing the American dream. You could invest in or be part of the military-industrial-complex that has done nothing but grow in wealth and influence since the 1950s. And, that wonderful enterprise brought us the Iraqi War, which we are all led to believe was a war against terrorism (You its “terrorism” today, Communism during the Cold War, American Indians during the 1800s – American Dream always seems to need to some dead bodies to stand on to feel proud!)

How how wonderful the American Dream, but you’ll have to build a dome over and surrounding your dream-mansion by the lake, because our planet is dying. (And I said not one word about global warming, which big business is spending money having us believe it does not exist!) Instead of thinking of your own greedy self, why don’t you think about the poverty and malnourished in the U.S. Never before in the history of humankind has there been so much malnutrition – something like 1/3 of all humans on earth.

Peaceful Dreams …

I just have to do this: This is a note, because it took some time finding it:

The source of my comment where I said “big business is spending money having us believe it does not exist!” [that is, global warming] is here: (Actually big business have been fund anti-global warming propaganda since the early 1990s, but here’s a recent source):

EU: Exxon spends millions to cast doubt on warming

by Andrew Buncombe and Stephen Castle, The Independent (UK)
December 7th, 2006

The world’s largest energy company is still spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund European organisations that seek to cast doubt on the scientific consensus on global warming and undermine support for legislation to curb emission of greenhouse gases.

Data collated by a Brussels-based watchdog reveals that ExxonMobil has put money into projects that criticise the Kyoto treaty and question the findings of scientific groups. Environmental campaigners say Texas-based Exxon is trying to influence opinion-makers in Brussels because Europe – rather than the US – is the driving force for action on climate change.

“ExxonMobil invests significant amounts in letting think-tanks, seemingly respectable sources, sow doubts about the need for EU governments to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” said Olivier Hoedeman, of the Corporate Europe Observatory. “Covert funding for climate sceptics is deeply hypocritical because ExxonMobil spends major sums on advertising to present itself as an environmentally responsible company.”

It has long been known that the oil giant, which in 2005 recorded an all-time record for quarterly income, has spent millions of dollars to fund climate sceptics. Exactly how much is unknown but some estimates suggest $19m (£9.7m) since 1998.

In its 2005 report, Mr Hoedeman’s group details payments by ExxonMobil to two organisations the International Policy Network, which received $130,000 and the Centre for the New Europe (CNE), which received $50,000.

The Observatory suspects Exxon has also funded other groups engaged in undermining legislation. Its report said: “There is mounting evidence that many EU-focused think-tanks are heavily funded by corporations and this raises serious concerns about their agenda and their independence.” The two groups cited in the report have long been accused of denying climate change. Greenpeace’s ExxonSecret website notes that in 2004 the network issued a press release criticising the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, saying it had “intentionally exaggerated its estimates of temperature increases by using highly implausible scenarios of future growth in emissions of greenhouse gases”.

Greenpeace also lists a 2004 posting on CNE’s website which claimed: “The Kyoto Protocol is failing because it is ineffective, costly, and unfair. It is also ‘scientifically flawed’.”

Last year The Independent revealed how a US-based lobbying group which received substantial funding from Exxon was seeking to develop a Europe-wide network of think-tanks, journalists and major businesses to act against legislation to counter climate change. The organisation claimed its approaches had been flatly rejected.

Kert Davies of Greenpeace said: “Europe is leading the world right now in terms of climate policy. Exxon know that if they can [enlist] lobbyists they may be able to slow things down. That is the tactic right now.”

Such is the concern about ExxonMobil that earlier this year the Royal Society, considered Britain’s leading scientific academy, wrote to it asking that it stop funding groups that have “misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence”.

Ellen Bisnath, a network spokeswoman, confirmed that the organisation had accepted $130,000 from the oil company. She said: “We are an independent think-tank and we are contributing to the scientific debate on climate change.”

CNE’s president, Stephen Pollard, said: “We did get a payment in 2005 for a project which had nothing to do with climate change.” He said under his leadership CNE was “not in the climate change denial business”.

In a statement ExxonMobil said: “Our support extends to a fairly broad array of organisations that research significant domestic and foreign policy issues and promote discussion on issues of direct relevance to the company.”

What the sponsored sceptics say

* “Now that the costs of EU environmental policies are becoming unsustainable – as the gap between the American and European rate of growth shows – “scepticism” begins to gain consideration. How long will it take to reject environmental policies that harm the economy while not making better the environment?”

Centre for the New Europe website

* “Some believe climate change is an exceptional environmental problem that requires global regulation. By reducing emissions now, it is said, we buy insurance against future catastrophic changes. But against what exactly is Kyoto insuring, and at what price? By itself, Kyoto will have little if any impact on the global climate.”

International Policy Network website

“In fact, the European Union can no longer credibly blame the United States about the current state of Kyoto. The question now is whether the European Union will accept Kyoto’s failure, and its own, and accept a more practical rethinking of the issue for the future. If not, it only has itself to blame.”

l think those rich guys are just luky l wish to be like and l will work with all lhave

Why would you want to be a fly on the wall …. ?

Just as Russian oligarchs or the wealthy in most other places these people are completely Western. Their tactics may differ somewhat from the wealthy in other places, but like other people of wealth, they’re out, first of all, for the big no. 1 – ME!

Aliko Dangote alias ‚ÄúChemical Ali‚Äù has a “track record is such that the notorious German warlord Adolf Hitler would grin with envy.” (“The Many Sins Of Aliko Dangote,” Nigeria News, 07 Jun 2009)

He began as millionaire in his teens coming from a super wealthy Dangote family. He uses his connections in government circles to hurt the competition in cement, sugar, rice, salt, etc., which his many companies monopolize.

Femi Otedola’s father was the Governor Lagos. He monopolizes diesel and kerosene in Nigeria.

I don’t understand why wealthy people are glorified in articles like in Forbes, in shows like “Dallas,” etc., etc. To me they’re disgusting!

ANN hope you contact me …………………….syena my email id is syena.inesh@yahoo.com

Hard work pays…luck also supports.i wish i wud b soon ther 1 day

these people don’t even look young they look like they are in there 90’s. their faces are sagging and look like a got damn wild animal. this is a bunch of bull[crap]. these people ain’t young. they are old as hell.