Part of the purpose of agenda 21 as I have explained before, is the socialization of wealth and resources. The balancing of the haves, with the have-nots. Simultaneously, it is necessary to cluster folks in more densely populated urban centers to accomplish the goals of this international planned globalization.
It is much easier to keep track of and control populations when they are less spread out. “Control” being the operative word here. Density offers advantages to policing, and group management, whereas sprawl is seen as inefficient and cumbersome.
Fewer people are needed to control more people in smaller spaces.
Think of how prisons are designed. How do so few guards manage so few prisoners? The clustering, separation within, and controlled environments are necessary or it would be impossible. Each prisoner has a number, has a charted history, and has a specific routine that is tracked and monitored.
How convenient, the similarities that seem to be developing with UN Agenda 21 goals, tied to planning efforts even within my own community, and the life of imprisoned felons.
We are already being planned into tighter community structure. Our private property rights are being abrogated daily by increasingly restrictive zoning requirements, urban centers are being planned, and land use limited. Add to this, wholesale attacks on the use of electricity through absurd regulatory rules will make rural electric use prohibitively expensive in the near future, our destiny is clear.
We are being penned in.
Part of the monitoring necessary for the efficiencies that our urban cages require, will be to keep track of our daily activities. Part of it is in a watchful eye over our electrical use. This article from the House Republicans is worthy of note:
OPSOMMER APPLAUDS INVESTIGATION INTO “SMART METER” DEPLOYMENT
January 12, 2012
State Rep. Paul Opsommer announced today that the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) was launching an investigation into the deployment of wireless “smart meters” after his office received several calls from constituents who did not want them installed on their homes.
The MPSC has opened a docket to have regulated utilities submit information to the commission for Case No. U-17000 so that it can learn of utilitys’ existing plans for deployment, the costs and sources of funding, whether customers may opt-out of installation, and the results of any privacy or health related studies the utilities have conducted.
“The use of smart meters in Michigan is still relatively new compared to other states”, said Opsommer. “People are coming home to find these have been installed on their homes while they have been away at work, and they don’t know much about them and feel like they are stuck even if they want them removed. There is currently little in law regarding smart meters, and I think we all want to avoid the controversies that they have had in places like California where thermostats could be remotely adjusted without a consumer’s permission. I’ve also talked to people who would simply like to opt out because of health or privacy concerns, and I think we need to find a way to accommodate these people given the monopolistic nature of utilities and the inability for most people to get their utilities from other sources.”
Consumers in California had banded together and were initially successful in stopping a California administrative rule that would have allowed people’s thermostats to be adjusted remotely, but it appears that a vote by the California Public Utilities Commission on whether people can opt out has been pushed back to February while decisions are made as to how much more such customers would have to pay. Opsommer said that in Michigan the people he has talked to have not been given the option to be able to opt out, regardless of price.
Interested persons have until 5pm on April 16th to file comments on the information that will be submitted by the utilities. Written comments should be sent to: Executive Secretary, Michigan Public Service Commission, PO Box 30221, Lansing, MI, 48909, and must reference Case No. U-17000. Electronic comments may be emailed to: email@example.com. Comments and other documents received in this proceeding will become public information, posted on the Commissioner’s website, and subject to disclosure.
Some folks have a problem with such progress as smart meter monitoring. In November, Julian Van Dyke wrote a letter challenging the local utility’s plans to install these devices without prior consent. In it he describes it as a “surveillance device” which currently violates federal law if applied sans consent. A Number of other reasons are given that are thoughtful and complete as to the dangers of such instruments, including the health reasons noted by Opsommer in the article above.
While the meters are often being placed by privately managed utilities, it should be noted such features are not limited to their use as regulated authorities.
Government by and for the people often hails newcomers who see such tools as a boon to better managing people, and populations. Given the authority by the governed, abuses happen, and its best not to have the tools available and at their discretion.
This nation’s citizens are not farm animals to be penned in, and monitored to achieve best results at milking times.
The technology with smart meters might have a stated innocence and purpose of efficiency, but it is like the heroin of so many other projects that government has abused. It could be lethal if applied improperly. The needle of government is dull, and its past uses have embedded the most vile parasites at its tip.
Expect more bruises and festering wounds if this [smart metering] is allowed to proceed unchecked.