Monday, January 10, 2022

If the great reset really was about 50%+ mortality...

...I would be all for it.

If the jab jabbed you right in the gonads and destroyed most embryos, that would at least be interesting. I rather suspect the morbidity of the intervention is, instead, rather higher than they're comfortable with. It was supposed to be only a small amount of morbidity, to satisfy the psychopaths, not so much morbidity it would constitute a socially-acceptable grievance.

In general it is indeed clear that they're plotting something [great reset]-like, but it's not at all clear what it is, exactly. They haven't been doing stuff largely in public since, at least, journo-list. You can tell journalists still have a wagon-circling cartel that functions exactly like journo-list did, it's just that nobody is spilling the beans anymore. Likewise, the public documents about great anythings will be thoroughly scrubbed of any serious shop talk. 

In Reality history repeats and past behaviour is the best indicator of future behaviour. It will be more creeping tyranny as they timidly plot to extract a few more political favours from the voters. If they had the balls to do anything dramatic they would have done it ages ago. 

Their mistake was stacking the ncov scam with the election scam. Americans are still going through the five stages of grief with regard to Trump, and now they starting to work on ncov at the same time. That's going to be interesting. Currently in the denial phase about the complete ineffectiveness of masks, medicine, and distancing. Meanwhile, some Americans have moved to anger or bargaining over the whole election fraud thing. We'll see for sure how it works in the next elections. They will say you should vote RNC (as if that has ever worked before) but how will they argue for it this time?

On the other hand, American elections have been blatantly stolen before, and Americans sucked it up without a peep. On the third hand that was before the internet broke the broadcast monopoly. 

P.S. Almost all the supply-chain nonsense is cover for nearly-catastrophic levels of inflation. Inflation strips stores of their stock...coincidentally, similar to the way a supply-chain hiccup does, except the hiccups get solved and inflation doesn't get solved if you don't stage a military coup at the Fed. 

Inflation strips stock either because the stores can't afford to re-stock, or because they can't re-stock at a price their customers would accept. Works exactly like price controls. If a price is artificially raised, you get gluts at suppliers...meaning shortages on the shelves. If a price is raised so fast it seems artificial, the same thing happens. Equivalently, the Cantillon-favoured buyers eat all the stock before it can get to you. They see an artificially lowered price, which leads directly to shortages.

No comments: