‘A plumber working at Joel Osteen’s church recently had a shocking discovery—500 envelopes of cash and checks stashed in a bathroom wall!
The news came to light yesterday when the plumber, identified as “Justin,” called the morning show at 100.3 The Bull in Houston, Texas.
“There was a loose toilet in the wall and we removed the tile,” Justin said. “We went to go remove the toilet, and I moved some insulation away and about 500 envelopes fell out of the wall. And I was like, ‘Oh wow!’”
Justin told the radio station that he made the discovery on November 10 and immediately contacted the maintenance supervisor and turned in all the money.
‘There are two types of billionaire mining magnates in Australia.
First, there are those who stand up for everyday Australians in heavy industry, mining and agriculture; and then there are those who’d rather hobnob with globalist elites while virtue-signalling about their pathetic, profit-driven green activism.
Meet Gina Rinehart and Andrew Forrest.
Speaking at the fifth annual National Agriculture and Related Industries day, Gina Rinehart asked:
How on earth after so many bad years depleting farmers resources, can those in agriculture be expected to dish out for:
Electric vehicles – approximately double the cost of fossil fuelled vehicles
Solar panels – be that for high cost power installations or even [the] lesser costs for isolated lights
Solar panels on accommodation, to enable hot water when the sun shines
Greater costs added to the transport industries of new non-fossil trucks and locos – affecting all supplies farmers need
The costs of having to shift stock, for markets and otherwise
Raised costs for suppliers affected by net zero expenditures
All the other many costs involved in meeting net zero
Unlike our neighbour and agriculture competitor New Zealand, [which] carved out agriculture from its emissions and didn’t waste taxpayers money going to the Glasgow experience (which in itself, added to emissions more than our belching cows), if one truly added up all the emissions around the world – not limited to the jets toing and froing across the world, including [those] far away from Australia – but including all accommodation, heating, washing, cleaning, lighting, meals [and] ground transport, not limiting to EVs, conferences and more.
I know the miles of solar panels will need wiping to be effective; and the millions of dead bats and birds – lives claimed by wind power infrastructure – will need collecting and burying; and [an] industry [will need to be] created to deal with old solar panels – maybe burying. If economical ways can’t be found, without government handouts, to deal with the millions of solar panels – panels which will need changing every eight to 10 years, to maintain effectiveness.
Meanwhile Gina’s competitor, Twiggy Forrest was trying to make it more difficult for Australians to do business.
This week Forrest has been lobbying the government to phase out the multibillion-dollar diesel fuel subsidy that helps small mining and agricultural players develop their assets without the heavy burden of double taxation.
Even worse, he wants to use the money saved to support development of a green energy industry that he will of course have a significant stake in.
Really, mate?
Unsurprisingly, Forrest hasn’t garnered much support, given Australians are now used to his unbelievable arrogance and self-absorption.
Minerals Council of Australia chief executive Tania Constable told The Australian that the “ridiculous proposal … would cost 1000s of jobs across numerous industries”.
More jobs sent offshore to the Chinese, hey Twiggy?
The National Farmers Federation ridiculed Forrest’s plan with chief executive Tony Mahar saying the removal of the rebate was a “bad policy that would damage livelihoods in country areas. Fuel tax credits exist to fix a serious distortion in the tax system. Taxing farmers every time they start their tractor, pump or generator makes no sense. We’d have serious concerns if any director was found to have lobbied to increase taxes payable by their company and worsen the competitiveness of Australian miners versus overseas rivals,” he said.
Remember: Twiggy has a clear incentive to make it harder for smaller miners to become competitive and start encroaching on his market share.
Resources Minister Keith Pitt ruled out changes to the diesel fuel rebate.
“We won’t be changing the diesel fuel rebate,” Mr Pitt said.
“Mr Forrest is entitled to his view and if he wants to take action, he can just stop claiming it to his companies right now. He doesn’t need any change in policy from the federal government.”
We strongly advise against holding your breath on this, Keith. Twiggy is all talk, no action. The bloke makes millions of dollars every day from selling iron ore to Chinese blast furnaces fuelled by coal-fired power stations, for goodness sake!
And Deputy Nationals leader David Littleproud didn’t hold back saying, “Twiggy Forrest is giving plenty of gratuitous advice from the sidelines. He’s been running around the world cashing a lot of Fortescue cheques on hydrogen.”
Well, ADVANCE suspects good old Twiggy’s cheques may begin bouncing soon once the sun inevitably sets on all the hydrogen hype that’s come out of Glasgow and the public relations departments of the world’s largest corporations and banks.
Perhaps for Forrest and co, it may be Anaconda Nickel round two…
‘World Food Programme director, David Beasely recently stated 2 per cent of Elon Musk’s wealth could solve world hunger, to which Musk calmly responded he’s willing to fork out the money if the UN provides a plan. But can $US6 billion really put an end to a global issue that’s been around for decades? Probably not. That’s because the real problem is a lack of capitalism in countries most affected by hunger. Providing aid treats the symptom, not the cause.
The real root of the hunger problem isn’t that poverty-stricken countries don’t have money; it’s that they don’t have a political system that supports money-making. Simply throwing money at a problem isn’t a sustainable solution. Only policymakers have the power to influence a change.
The age of social media has provided platforms for most people to voice their thoughts. Currently, one prevailing sentiment happens to be hatred towards the wealthy. While many admire the ultra-rich for their lifestyle, still most dislike them for not coughing out half their assets to end global crises. What they don’t realise is that many US citizens who are wealthy today started out dirt poor. But since they lived in a capitalistic society, through innovation, entrepreneurship and hard work, they were able to go from rags to riches.
The WFP website states it raised a record of $US8.4 billion, but also pointed out they are still $5.3 billion short from the required amount. This raises a question ― how did the WFP come up with this number? Founded in 1961, the WFP has consistently been receiving donations from wealthy individuals and governments worldwide. They’ve been collecting donations from the rich for the last 60 years, and they’ve still not resolved world hunger. Is a one-time donation from Musk or Bezos really going to fix it all now?
Organisations like the WFP that pledge to feed the poor may be able to place a hot meal or two on the table for the hungry, but they cannot feed them for life. Gathering money to feed the poor is good, but helping these countries set up sustainable systems that fix the root problems would be better.
For example, Sierra Leone is a country severely affected by hunger. Sixty percent of its population lives below the poverty line. Its annual GDP per capita is US$484.52. The country boasts an abundance of natural resources, including iron ore and titanium, and is a major producer of gold and diamond, yet this has not given them an edge. That’s because when it comes to human development — like life expectancy, education or purchasing power parity — out of all the countries in the world, Sierra Leone is nearly at the bottom of the stack.
In addition, Sierra Leone ranks 150th out of 178 countries in economic openness, with low property rights and lower government integrity. Government spending is also on the rise, causing public debt to go up to the equivalent of 60.5 percent of its GDP. Then, there’s the cherry on top of it all: Sky high tariffs account for 45 percent of government revenue. Possessing natural resources ought to be a clear advantage for Sierra Leone, but when policy makers constantly intervene with private sector development and espouse protectionism, that advantage is lost entirely.
When you take into account all of these factors, it’s no wonder they’re going hungry.
Conversely, sitting on the other side of the Human Development Index (HDI) are the resource-poor Singapore and Hong Kong, ranking 11th and 4th respectively. Singapore has a GDP per capita of US$59,797.75 and Hong Kong of US$46,323.86. Both countries are two of the richest in the world, but they started with little land and no natural resources. They are both bustling financial hubs, but this was not by chance or luck.
The two countries are strong advocates for free-market policies, characterised by low taxes and an aversion to both protectionism and central planning.
Capitalism grows wealth. In turn, that growth supports a higher standard of living, and that includes a low hunger rate.
Billionaires can foot the bill for the hungry — perhaps they even have an obligation to share their marvellous wealth with the less fortunate — but let’s not get confused about it: No amount of charity will change their plight. The wealthy are not the government. As such they are neither obligated nor empowered to end world hunger. It’s policymakers alone who hold the power to free economies.
Follow the money for ‘Pfizer Tuesday announced it expects to earn $36 billion in revenue this year from its COVID vaccine — an increase from the previous estimate of $33.5 billion.
Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, developed with BioNTech, has quickly become the highest-selling drug in the world. During an earnings call, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said the vaccine contributed $13 billion in revenue during the third quarter alone, bringing total revenue this year to $24.3 billion.
Pfizer said its profit margin on the vaccine, before taxes and after splitting profit with BioNTech, is the “high 20s,” which means vaccine profits could approach $10 billion just for Pfizer this year.
The sales estimate for 2021 is equivalent to roughly 80% of what Pfizer believes the rest of its business will earn in 2021.
How far do you trust the government? Well, in Australia, ‘The Morrison Government is today launching the world’s first National Children’s Mental Health and Wellbeing Strategy.
The Strategy provides a framework to guide the development of a comprehensive, integrated system of services to maintain and support the mental health and wellbeing of children aged 0-12 and their families.’
‘“To ensure that every child has the opportunity to grow up in a healthy and supportive environment that helps them, and their families and communities, to thrive, we need a mental health and wellbeing system that is well-designed, comprehensive, and nationally consistent.”
“This strategy shows us how, and will be crucial to our current ongoing reform of the mental health and suicide prevention system. It is about ensuring the best for our children at each and every step and I’m honoured to launch it today.”
The Strategy provides a roadmap through coordinated investment and program development to ensure that children aged 0-12 can have all the opportunities for growth and development possible.’
‘“Half of all adult mental health challenges emerge before the age of 14, yet few children below the age of 12 receive professional support. As a nation, we need to acknowledge this and do everything we can to change it. Our Government is committed to the task,” Assistant Minster Coleman said.’
Last night we watched the Australian treasurer give his bags of money to the various groups such as mental health, indigenous organizations, domestic violence and old age care to name a few. It seemed that the government had no goal of getting out of the debt it had put itself into during the China virus. As one rightly wrote ‘Pop culture obsessives will never forget the famous episode of the Oprah Winfrey Show where the queen of America gave everyone in the audience — all 276 of them — a free Pontiac. What is less often remembered is that everyone who got a car also got a tax bill of $US6,000 with it. Nice.
This evening, when Josh Frydenberg stepped up to the dispatch box and delivered his ‘”you got a government program, you got a government program, you got a government program and you got a government program” budget, there was also a sting in its tail — a nice tax liability; a tax liability that will need to be paid for by our children and grandchildren.
Sweet dreams are made of this Who am I to disagree? I’ve travelled the world and the seven seas Ev’rybody’s lookin‘ for something.
Sweet dreams indeed. When the Treasurer highlighted calls “for a Reagan-Thatcher style supply-side revolution to repair the budget deficit, repay public debt and restore Australia’s lost prosperity ”, who thought he would have delivered the biggest deficit and biggest debt in Australia’s history — so large, in fact, that Wayne Swan probably threw his crystal “Galaxy’s Greatest Treasurer” trophy at the television in jealousy.
Perhaps Frydenberg’s budget strategy of childcare and age care subsidies was inspired by putting a twist of his own on the words of Ronald Reagan: “Government does not solve problems; it subsidises them”. Perhaps he was trying to give the wisdom of Margaret Thatcher a run. It was, after all, Thatcher who said “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money” — and in this budget, the Treasurer is actually attempting to run out of other people’s money.
It so seems that the inspiration for today’s budget came from “travelling the world and the seven seas”, from seeing how those fiscal paragons of Zimbabwe and Venezuela spent their way to increased inflation. They did manage to stimulate inflation to increase wages. Unfortunately, though, prices increased much faster.
But this budget is the budget of the modern Liberal Party of Australia; the party that believes that Edmund Burke was a fool for suggesting that society was a partnership between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.
Bugger the dead and the to be born. Take therefore no thought for the morrow. Party on, dude. Par-tay!
I have been in the ministry for fifty years now and I have learned that it is all too often thought by SOME that either a preacher makes too much money or he doesn’t really earn what he does make! Now, personally I am not a fan of most ‘popular’ preachers but John MacArthur is a good preacher. I don’t always agree with him on some things but that doesn’t take away from the fact he is a good speaker. As to what he gets paid from his church and other ministries is, I believe, between him, his church and the other ministries. John MacArthur and any other preacher worth their salt would know 1Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
These same men would know 2Corithians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. I will leave it at that but below is just a portion of what Julie Roys recently wrote concerning MacArthur’s salaries and an interview with MacArthur’s front man Phil Johnson.
Julie wrote that ‘Phil Johnson, director of John MacArthur’s broadcast ministry, Grace to You (GTY), argued in a recent videotaped interview with Justin Peters that MacArthur’s large salaries don’t reveal greed, but instead restraint, and his alleged nepotism is a farce. Yet when examined, the arguments Johnson presented are full of holes and raise even more red flags.’ The complete is at https://julieroys.com/johnson-defense-macarthur-more-red-flags/?mc_cid=6961317489&mc_eid=b13d34ad49
whatyareckon 