OF THE
TIMES
He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.
When the Russian admin finally takes Odessa, the admin can do their own investigations. I'm guessing that some of the number probably died on the...
Here is a link to a new documentary from Edward Dowd called "Unsafe and Ineffective". The CDC neuro linguistic programming always used the phrase...
The mainstream media cannot allow Greenblatt to go unchallenged, Oh but they have ever since the Jews created the ADL and many other layers of...
The Gulf Stream stopped pumping nutrients during the last ice age โ and the same could be happening now Atlantic currents slowed dramatically...
"forecast how Atlantic currents will change in response to climate change today." - Yeah, 'climate change', but not a heating, but a cooling. - I...
To submit an article for publication, see our Submission Guidelines
Reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views of the volunteers, editors, and directors of SOTT.net or the Quantum Future Group.
Some icons on this site were created by: Afterglow, Aha-Soft, AntialiasFactory, artdesigner.lv, Artura, DailyOverview, Everaldo, GraphicsFuel, IconFactory, Iconka, IconShock, Icons-Land, i-love-icons, KDE-look.org, Klukeart, mugenb16, Map Icons Collection, PetshopBoxStudio, VisualPharm, wbeiruti, WebIconset
Powered by PikaJS ๐ and InยทSite
Original content © 2002-2024 by Sott.net/Signs of the Times. See: FAIR USE NOTICE
obviously quake is very big 70,000 dead , devastation is wide spread, still the $147 billion is a very big number.
What shocks me is $122 billion towards direct economic losses. I am not sure what is included in it. they they say they are planning to construct 3 Million houses and allocated 10 Billion $'s for it and others rehabilitation. Some thing seems to be wrong in these numbers . It all depends on the definition "direct economic economic losses" and the remaining 25 billions for others, which sounds reasonable.
If we consider the fact that china is a sweat shop and it only costs 10% or less of the actual retail sold price, we have to assume that 10 times the 122 billion is the world economy affected by it. I have to assume , I am missing some thing in these numbers