americanthinker | I just finished reading an article on the Big Think website
titled "When science mixes with politics, all we get is politics," by
Professor Marcelo Gleiser, theoretical physicist, Dartmouth College. I
mistakenly thought the commentary would decry the misuse of science by
politicians, but no. Instead, it decries the mistrust that we, the
unwashed masses, have developed for the science establishment in recent
years. Unwittingly, the eminent professor gives us yet more reasons to
regard science insiders with skepticism.
He does what so many of his colleagues
do, which is to equate science itself with the institutions that purport
to advance science. To question politicized scientists, then, is
supposedly unscientific.
Censorship of actual science has been heavy-handed, both by Democrats
and by their Big Tech acolytes. Epidemiologists, virologists, and
physicians who do not toe the party line regarding COVID have been
intimidated and silenced. Science that cannot be openly questioned is
not science, since the heart and soul of science are to scrutinize every
claim from every angle. If we are to be told we must follow the
science, then scientists must explain to us the inductive reasoning that
was applied to exclude members of Congress, and their staffs, from the
COVID restrictions they imposed on the rest of us. If scientists are to
decry those of us who doubt their word, then they must equally decry
the policy of distributing unvaccinated, untested illegal aliens to
every state, while denying entry to legal travelers.
To decry only
the skeptics, while ignoring the egregious anti-science of many
politicians, does nothing to engender trust in the institutions of
science. It does the opposite.
scienceblog | As polarization has escalated in the U.S., the question of if and
when that divide becomes insurmountable has become ever more pressing.
In a new study, researchers have identified a tipping point, beyond
which extreme polarization becomes irreversible.
The researchers employed a predictive model of a polarized group,
similar to the current U.S. Senate, to reveal what can happen when the
country faces an attack by a foreign adversary or a global pandemic.
“Instead of uniting against a common threat,” said lead author
Michael Macy, Distinguished Professor of Arts and Sciences in Sociology
and director of the Social Dynamics Laboratory in the College of Arts
and Sciences, “the threat itself becomes yet another polarizing issue.”
The model allows researchers to study the effects of party identity
and political intolerance on ideological extremism and partisan
division.
“We found that polarization increases incrementally only up to a
point,” Macy said. “Above this point, there is a sudden change in the
very fabric of the institution, like the change from water to steam when
the temperature exceeds the boiling point.”
The dynamics resemble what physicists call “hysteresis loops.”
“We see this very disturbing pattern in which a shock brings people a
little bit closer initially, but if polarization is too
extreme, eventually the effects of a shared fate are swamped by the
existing divisions and people become divided even on the shock issue,”
said co-author Boleslaw Szymanski, a professor of computer science and
director of the Army Research Laboratory Network Science and Technology
Center (NeST) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. “If we reach that
point, we cannot unite even in the face of war, climate change,
pandemics, or other challenges to the survival of our society.”
The work builds on an earlier general model Szymanski developed to
study the interactions of legislators in a two-party political system.
Although the model isn’t specifically tuned to distinctive practices,
customs, and rules of the U.S. Congress, it was trained using data, and
previous research comparing model outcomes to 30 years of Congressional
voting records demonstrated strong predictive power. In one finding from
that work, the model accurately predicted the shift in polarization in 28 of 30 U.S. Congresses.
The China conspiracy theory seems to be working – a survey by the Reagan Foundation found that 52% saw China as the “greatest threat” to the USA
(Russia well behind at 14% and North Korea just behind it at 12%).
Three years ago Russia was 30% to China’s 21%. More striking is that
China has gained twenty points since February. Can the
Putin-won-2016/Trump-won-2020 divide be bridged by a Chinadunnit
conspiracy theory?
But agreeing on a common enemy is one thing, the internal divisions
are something else. In this respect the Reagan Foundation survey cited
above is indicative. It finds that disbelief is spreading rapidly in the
American population: trust in all institutions is dropping; confidence
in the US military is dropping; support for active global leadership is
dropping. A survey just now shows a slight majority of American youth regarding their democracy as in trouble. Not the strongest foundation for more foreign adventures.
A deeply divided country: there is no common conversation in the
United States today – one person’s conspiracy theory is another’s truth.
theguardian | High among the unexpected, non-health
compensations of masks is their value as shorthand. At the same time as
they impede communication, they offer, anywhere that people exhibit
extreme non-compliance, a rapid non-verbal personality indicator that is
rivalled only, I would argue, by manspreading. Of course there are many
other single but baleful inducements to run for the hills –
personalised number plates, not tipping, devotion to the works of Ayn
Rand or Judith Butler – but these may take time to discover or may even,
on rare occasions, be redeemable.
Mask
aversion once fell, just about, into that category. Last summer,
anti-maskers could argue that they preferred the previous official
guidance. Jenny Harries, now head of the UK Health Security Agency, had
indeed treated the world’s mask-wearing nations to her superior,
anti-mask theory in March 2020. “You can actually trap the virus in the mask and start breathing it in,” she said. Incredibly, or perhaps as a result if Johnson was involved, she was promoted.
As
evidence has mounted to back mask efficacy, Johnson, even with this
stimulus to lead by example, has treated masks as if they were a lefty
plot against his face. A masked audience watching Macbeth
recently noticed that the prime minister, squished into a crowded
little theatre, preferred to follow the on-stage psychopathy with his
face uncovered. In doing so, he perhaps revealed more about himself than
idiot contrariness. Low compliance with containment measures was
directly associated in one study with “antisocial traits,
especially lower levels of empathy and higher levels of callousness,
deceitfulness and risk-taking”. Though it’s too late to save us from
Johnson, the psychology of mask behaviour might help to screen out
another leader who shouts, when discouraged: “Let the bodies pile high in their thousands.”
Meanwhile,
we may be getting closer to understanding the MPs who last week voted,
in defiance of scientific advice and majority opinion, against
protecting public health. Weren’t they once great respecters of
majorities, even narrow ones? But it’s pointless to expect logic. Like
the Macbeths, they simply couldn’t help themselves.
unherd | Perhaps it’s my age, or perhaps it’s just blind prejudice, but when I
wake to the news that the Austrian government has interned an entire
third of its national population as a danger to public health, a chill
runs down my spine.
I look at the news photos of armed, masked, black-clad police
stopping people in the streets to ask for their digital papers, and I
read stories of others arrested for leaving their own house more than
the permitted once a day, and I hear Austrian politicians intoning that
those who refuse to accede to the injection are to be shunned and
scapegoated until they acquiesce.
Then I watch interviews with
“ordinary people”, and they say that the “unvaxxed” had it coming. Some
of them say that they should all be jailed, these enemies of the
people. At best, the “anti-vaxxers” are paranoid and misinformed. At
worst they are malicious, and should be punished.
Then I look across the border at Germany. I see that in Germany,
politicians are also considering interning the “vaccine hesitant”, and
are also discussing enforcing vaccination upon every citizen. By the end
of the winter, says Germany’s
refreshingly honest health minister, Germans will be “vaccinated, cured
or dead”. There is apparently no fourth option.
They have been busy in Germany. Recently they put up fences in
the streets in Hamburg, to separate the Bad Unvaxxed from the Good
Vaxxed at the Christmas markets. Outdoors. Perhaps they will also
provide the Good people with rocks to throw across those fences. The
mood certainly seems ripe. A cartoon recently published in the mainstream, high-circulation newspaper Frankfürter Allgemeine Zeitung featured
a man sitting on his sofa playing a first-person shooter game in which
the targets were unvaccinated people. The caption described it as “a big
hit under the Christmas tree.”
Not that Germans or Austrians have any monopoly on the current march
towards authoritarianism in the name of public health. It is entirely
globalised. The opinion recently expressed by Pulitzer Prize-winning
American art critic Jerry Saltz to his half a million Twitter followers
was typical of a new form of class hatred that is somehow acceptable in
the age of cancellations and hyper-sensitivity. “My latest Covid thought
is ‘Let her rip:’”, he wrote. “Meaning, we who are lucky enough to be
triple & double vaxed are pretty protected. Let the rest die. I know
they pose a danger to us all. But we are more than 97% protected from
them. If they want to die, I say let them die. Freedom.”
Across Europe and the wider world, the picture is the same.
Internment. Mandatory medication. Segregation of whole sections of
society. Mass sackings. A drumbeat media consensus. The systematic
censoring of dissent. The deliberate creation of a climate of fear and
suspicion. The deepening demonisation of the “unvaxxed”. Something
terrible is rising around us, and we are only just waking up to it.
“We're seeing a lot of breakthrough infections right now.What we did not know is that even a booster vaccination with Biontech / Pfizer does not prevent this, "Preiser explained to the Tagesspiegel.These infections are the first breakthrough infections reported with the Omicron variant in people who have already received their booster vaccinations.
“Of course you shouldn't misunderstand that vaccination doesn't help.On the contrary: It only shows that even the best possible vaccination is obviously not enough to prevent infection - which we already suspected, "said Preiser.
All seven had received at least two of their three vaccinations with an mRNA vaccine.Six of them received the booster vaccine from Biontech, one from Moderna.Six people are under 30 years old and one person is 39 years old.
These vaccines were given to people in this order:
People 1 to 5: Biontech, Biontech, Biontech
Person 6: Biontech, Biontech, Moderna
Person 7: Astrazeneca, Biontech, Biontech
The booster vaccinations were given to the subjects between five and ten months after the second vaccinations.The booster vaccinations were at least a month, but a maximum of two months ago, according to the study.Those affected were among those vaccinated very early in Germany.
According to the study, none of the seven infected people had relevant previous illnesses and none had previously tested positive.Four of them did medical internships in various local hospitals, the other three were on vacation.When they arrived in South Africa in the first half of November, they all tested negative.
theatlantic | Here’s the upshot: Each fully
vaccinated person might still be at minimal risk of getting seriously
ill or dying from COVID this winter, but the vestiges of normalcy around
them could start to buckle or even break. In the worst-case scenario,
highly vaccinated areas could also see “the kind of overwhelmed hospital
systems that we saw back in 2020 with the early phase in Boston and New
York City,” Samuel Scarpino, a network scientist at the Rockefeller
Foundation’s Pandemic Prevention Institute, told me. If only a small
percentage of Omicron infections lead to hospitalization, the variant is
still spreading with such ferocity that millions of people could need a bed.
Such a scenario would be especially dangerous if those millions of people all needed a bed at the same time.
Omicron is so transmissible that cases could peak across the country
more or less in tandem, Schiffer and Scarpino both said, which would
make it harder for the U.S. to shuffle personnel and ventilators to
particularly hard-hit regions. ICU capacities in some states are already
stretched thin and health-care workers are resigning en masse,
so the harms could be even worse. “If we don’t get serious, if we don’t
get the masks on, if we don’t get testing up, we’re going to be back
into lockdown again because people will be dying in the hallways of
hospitals,” Scarpino said. The prospect of such a surge in
hospitalizations is “keeping me up nights, to be honest,” Schiffer told
me.
This all would be mitigated if Omicron turns out to cause significantly milder disease than Delta—still
a possibility, but far from confirmed—and if the vaccines’ protection
against severe disease holds strong. But even in that sunnier version of
the future, cases are almost certain to increase in highly vaccinated
areas and undervaccinated ones alike, and bring with them a host of
disruptions to daily life. Schiffer suggested that in areas with
sufficient political will—mostly highly vaccinated ones—high case rates
could spur local leaders to institute new shutdowns. In any event, fully
vaccinated people are still required to isolate for at least 10 days after a positive test, and anyone they’ve been in contact with might have to stay home from school or work.
A positive test in a classroom could send dozens of kids into
quarantine, and keep their parents out of work to care for them. Jon
Zelner, an epidemiologist at the University of Michigan, told me that
massive disruptions caused by surging Omicron cases this winter could force Americans to reconsider these sorts of procedures.
Whatever
the effects on vaccinated Americans, the Omicron fallout is going to be
much more severe for everyone else. In places with low vaccine coverage
and strong anti-shutdown politics, inconvenience could be replaced by
mass death and even greater grief. And the devastation will almost
certainly be greater, on average, in rural communities, poor
communities, and communities of color. “It’s unvaccinated people who are
going to be at the worst risk for the worst outcomes. And it’s also
going to be the folks who don’t have the ability or the luxury to
quarantine or just kind of hide out when it looks like the numbers are
getting too high,” Zelner said. People working multiple jobs might not
have time to get a booster or sick days to use while recovering from
side effects. People who live in areas that are underserved by hospital
systems will have more trouble finding a bed and receive worse care if
they do get sick.
None
of these futures are yet written in stone. The scope of the coming
hardship will depend on how capable Omicron is of causing severe disease
and death. And though Omicron seems likely to overtake Delta, “cases
are still low enough with Omicron that we can have a big effect if [we]
act early,” Scarpino said—though “acting early was last week.” A month
ago, one could still pretend that burden fell on those who lived in some
other place, far away from vaccinated people in vaccinated communities.
Now that delusion looks shakier than ever.
When the Jussie Smollett incident hit the headlines in early 2019, anyone with a modicum of critical thinking skills could see it was an obvious hoax.
Yet, leftist networks, politicians and celebrities breathlessly amplified Jussie's claim, fueling racial division throughout the country instead of taking the 'wait-and-see' approach that much of the black community took at the time:
Now let's look at who didn't remain silent - and still promoted Jussie's lie.
Then there's this guy...
And this guy...
Katie Perry tweeted at the time: "Standing with and sending love to @JussieSmollett today... this is a racist hate crime and is disgusting and shameful to our country."
Cher tweeted a cryptic boomer message that only level-6 cat ladies can decipher:
And yet, none of these race-baiting celebrities and politicians who used their massive platforms to promote Jussie's lie have deleted their tweets, or owned up to being an idiot.
apnews | How will the world decide when the pandemic is over?
There’s
no clear-cut definition for when a pandemic starts and ends, and how
much of a threat a global outbreak is posing can vary by country.
“It’s
somewhat a subjective judgment because it’s not just about the number
of cases. It’s about severity and it’s about impact,” says Dr. Michael
Ryan, the World Health Organization’s emergencies chief.
In
January 2020, WHO designated the virus a global health crisis “of
international concern.” A couple months later in March, the United
Nations health agency described the outbreak as a “pandemic,” reflecting
the fact that the virus had spread to nearly every continent and
numerous other health officials were saying it could be described as
such.
The
pandemic may be widely considered over when WHO decides the virus is no
longer an emergency of international concern, a designation its expert
committee has been reassessing every three months. But when the most
acute phases of the crisis ease within countries could vary.
off-guardian | Illinois Representative Jonathan Carroll wants to
push through a change to the state’s insurance law that would mean
health insurers no longer have to cover unvaccinated people who get
Covid, forcing people to pay their medical bills out of pocket.
I think it’s time that we say ‘You choose not to get
vaccinated, then you’re also going to assume the risk that if you do
catch COVID, and you get sick, the responsibility is on you,’”
The potential corruption and abuse of such a rule should be obvious
to anyone familiar with just how mendacious insurance companies can be.
In all likelihood insurance companies will simply demand a negative Covid test before paying anything,
and if you test positive, no matter what you were treated for, you will
be called a “covid case” and forced to pay out of pocket.
The bill could, essentially, wipe all health insurance off the books for unvaccinated people.
The vaccinated should take no comfort from this, because their
vaccinated status is entirely temporary, and subject to rules that could
change on a whim.
Any “double jabbed” who misses a booster, or got a brand of vaccine
that was subsequently unapproved or discontinued, or wasn’t updated for
the latest variant, could suddenly find themselves one of the
“unvaccinated” underclass.
Of course, once it applies to vaccination status it can apply to other things. You travelled to the wrong place, or you didn’t wear a mask, you “associated with known anti-vaxxers”.
And, even more concerning, is the potentially slippery slope this
starts us down. Unvaccinated don’t get health insurance. Neither do
smokers who get lung cancer. Or overweight people who get diabetes. And
so on and so on.
The potential good news is that putting this law on the books would
require a lot of legal workarounds, including violating or changing the
Affordable Care Act, which outlaws removing insurance coverage from
someone based on a new medical diagnosis or test result.
off-guardian | Doctors are warning that hundreds of thousands of people in the UK could be at increased risk of heart disease or cardiac events.
Speaking to the Evening Standard, psychological therapist Mark Rayner and vascular surgeon Tahir Hussein said that the UK could see “300,000 new patients with heart issues” in the near future.
What’s to blame? Well, that would be “Post Pandemic Stress Disorder”. A new condition “yet to be recognised”, even though “many experts believe it should be”.
It’s a totally real thing. They didn’t just completely make it up. Don’t be cynical.
You see, all the “pandemic” related anxiety and stress has taken such
a toll on the public that doctors are predicting a 5% increase in heart
disease, nationwide, and not just in the elderly or infirm.
According to Dr Hussein, he is already seeing…
a big increase in thrombotic-related vascular conditions
in my practice. Far younger patients are being admitted and requiring
surgical and medical intervention than prior to the pandemic.
Now, some of you demented anti-vaxxers out there might be asking crazy questions like “could this increase in blood clots and heart disease be linked to injecting millions of people with an untested vaccine?”
But that’s absurd. And I told you to stop being cynical.
It turns out all the people saying that back in March weren’t just
conspiracy theorists spreading misinformation after all. They were
totally right. But the clots are only rare, so don’t worry. And they
sort of know what causes it now, so future batches might be fine.
And yes, also in the interests of fairness, it’s true that both the Pfizer and Moderna shots can cause heart issues too. Both, according to the CDC, can cause pericarditis and myocarditis, the complications of which include heart attacks, heart failure and strokes.
The UK government has even produced special guidelines for dealing with myocardits, “following Covid19 vaccination”.
But, just like the blood clots, this is very rare. Obviously not so rare you don’t need a special guiding document on how to deal with it, but still very very rare.
…the point is, yes, all the major Covid vaccines are known to have cardiac-related side effects, and yes, some doctors are now predicting a major spike in heart-related health problems, but these are totally unrelated.
charleshughsmith |The possibility that the United States could fragment is no longer a marginalized topic.
Maps displaying various post-U.S. regional configurations accompany
essays exploring how and why a break-up of the U.S. would be a solution
to regional and ideological polarization, for example, Max Borders'
recent article,
Dear America: It's Time to Break Up.
But two forces larger than political polarization may fragment
nation-states across the globe, including the U.S.: inequality and
scarcity. Inequality and corruption go hand in hand, of course, as
the wealthiest few influence the state to protect their monopolies and
backstop their speculative gains.
The parasitic elite can accumulate the majority of income,
wealth, political power and resources in eras of expanding abundance, as
what's left is enough to support an expanding populace that consumes
more per capita every year, i.e. broad-based prosperity.
But once abundance transitions to scarcity, the economy and society
can no longer sustain the dead weight of its outsized parasitic elite.
The parasitic elite believes its bloated share of resources, wealth and
power is not only sustainable but can be expanded without consequence,
and so it deploys all its formidable power to keep the status quo
unchanged even as scarcity lowers the living standards of the bottom 90%
and hollows out the economy.
In effect, the modern central state, regardless of ideological label, optimizes inequality and growth. Once growth falters while inequality continues increasing, the only possible outcome is fragmentation and/or collapse.
Put another way: the status quo is no longer the solution to inequality and scarcity, it is the problem.
Private-sector and political elites are incapable of recognizing they
are now the problem, and so the rapid unraveling of the status quo will
come as a great shock to their magical-thinking confidence in their
power.
The elite's delusional "solution" is a seamless, painless transition
to a new era of abundance via "green energy." Unfortunately, this vision
is 100% magical thinking, as all these projections ignore the
physical realities of building out a global energy system that generates
energy on the same scale as existing hydrocarbon energy sources. Read
these three reports for reality-based assessments:
The Delusion of Infinite Economic Growth: Even "sustainable"
technologies such as electric vehicles and wind turbines face
unbreachable physical limits and exact grave environmental costs.
(scientificamerican.com)
As explained in the first paper, inequality generates collapse and so does a decline in resources, i.e. scarcity.
Put the two together and the only possible outcome is collapse of all
centralized nation-states that optimize inequality and endless expansion
of consumption.
The issue isn't ideological labels or principles, it's whether the state
solves problems or covers them up with fake fixes that accelerate
collapse.
Nations which want to not just survive but emerge stronger have one path: a revolutionary transformation
from "waste is growth" to degrowth, from an economy and state dominated
by a parasitic elite to a strictly limited parasitic elite and from
abject dependence on fragile supply chains originating in other nations
to decentralized, localized independence for essentials.
strategic-culture | Were you following the news this last week? Vaccine mandates are
everywhere: one country, after another, is doubling-down, to try to
force, or legally compel, full population vaccination. The mandates are
coming because of the massive uptick in Covid – most of all in the
places where the experimental mRNA gene therapies were deployed en masse. And (no coincidence), this ‘marker’ has come just as U.S. Covid deaths in 2021 have surpassed those of 2020.
This has happened, despite the fact that last year, no Americans were
vaccinated (and this year 59% are vaccinated). Clearly no panacea, this
mRNA ‘surge’.
Of course, the Pharma-Establishment know that the vaccines are no
panacea. There are ‘higher interests’ at play here. It is driven rather
by fear that the window for implementing its series of ‘transitions’ in
the U.S. and Europe is closing. Biden still struggles to move his
‘Go-Big’ social spending plan and green agenda transition through
Congress by the midterm election in a year’s time. And the inflation
spike may well sink Biden’s Build Back Better agenda (BBB) altogether.
Time is short. The midterm elections are but 12 months away, after
which the legislative window shuts. The Green ‘transition’ is stuck too
(by concerns that moving too fast to renewables is putting power grids
at risk and elevating heating costs unduly), and the Pharma
establishment will be aware that a new B.1.1.529 variant has made a big
jump in evolution with 32 mutations to its spike protein. This makes it
“clearly very different” from previous variants, which may drive further
waves of infection evading ‘vaccine defences’.
Translation: a new wave of restrictions, more lockdowns, and –
eventually – trillions of dollars in new stimmie cheques may be in
prospect. And what of inflation then, we might ask.
It’s a race for the U.S. and Europe, where the pandemic is back in
full force across Europe, to push through their re-set agendas, before
variants seize up matters with hospitals crowded with the vaccinated and
non-vaccinated; with riots in the streets, and mask mandates at
Christmas markets (that’s if they open at all). A big reversal was
foreshadowed by this week’s news: vaccine mandates and lockdowns, even
in highly vaccinated areas, are returning. And people don’t like it.
The window for the Re-Set may be fast closing. One observer, noting all the frenetic Élite activity, has asked
‘have we finally reached peak Davos?’. Is the turn to authoritarianism
in Europe a sign of desperation as fears grow that the various
‘transitions’ planned under the ‘re-set’ umbrella (financial, climate,
vaccine and managerial expert technocracy) may never be implemented?
Cut short rather, as spending plans are hobbled by accelerating
inflation; as the climate transition fails to find traction amongst
poorer states (and at home, too); as technocracy is increasingly
discredited by adverse pandemic outcomes; and Modern Monetary Theory
hits a wall, because – well, inflation again.
Are you paying attention yet? The great ‘transition’ is conceived as a
hugely expensive shift towards renewables, and to a new digitalised,
roboticised corporatism. It requires Big (inflationary) funding to be
voted through, and a huge parallel (inflationary) expenditure on social
support to be approved by Congress as well. The social provision is
required to mollify all those who subsequently will find themselves
without jobs, because of the climate ‘transition’ and the shift to a
digitalised corporate sphere. But – unexpectedly for some ‘experts’ –
inflation has struck – the highest statistics in 30 years.
There are powerful oligarchic interests behind the Re-Set. They do
not want to see it go down, nor see the West eclipsed by its
‘competitors’. So it seems that rather than back off, they will go full
throttle and try to impose compliance on their electorates: tolerate no
dissidence.
When
and how can we know that a change of direction is fundamental and
lasting, rather than a temporary departure from established trends?
That, in essence, is the call we need to make now.
Far from being “transitory”, current conditions – including rising
inflation, surging energy prices and the over-stressing of supply-chains
– are indicators of a structural change.
Ultimately, what we’re witnessing is a forced restoration of equilibrium between a faltering real economy of goods and services and a drastically over-extended financial economy of money and credit.
This is where confidence in continuity crumbles, where the delusions of ‘growth in perpetuity’ succumb to the hard reality of resource constraint, and where ‘shocks that are no surprises’ shake the financial system.
If you want just two indicators to watch, one of these is the volumetric (rather than the financial) direction of the economy, and the other is the behaviour of the prices of essentials within the broader inflationary situation.
The economics of stress
In
the science of materials, it’s observable that fractures happen
quickly, even if the stresses that cause them have accumulated over a
protracted period. We can spend hours, days, weeks or even years
gradually increasing the tension applied to an iron bar, but the ensuing
snap in that bar will happen almost instantaneously.
Economics isn’t a science, but there’s a direct analogy here. Anyone who understands the economy as an energy system will be well aware of a relentless, long-standing build-up of stresses.
They’ll be equally aware that this cannot continue indefinitely.
Two things matter now.
First, when will these cumulative pressures bring about the moment of fracture?
Second, what should we expect to see when this snapping-point is reached?
The answers to the second question are pretty clear.
alt-market | For many years now there has been a contingent of alternative
economists working diligently within the liberty movement to combat
disinformation being spread by the mainstream media regarding America’s
true economic condition. Our efforts have focused primarily on the
continued devaluation of the dollar and the forced dependence on
globalism that has outsourced and eliminated most U.S. manufacturing and
production of raw materials.
The problems of devaluation and stagflation have been present since
1916 when the Federal Reserve was officially formed and given power, but
the true impetus for a currency collapse and the destruction of
American buying power began in 2007-2008 when the Financial Crisis was
used as an excuse to allow the Fed to create trillions upon trillions in
stimulus dollars for well over a decade.
The mainstream media’s claim has always been that the Fed “saved” the
U.S. from imminent collapse and that the central bankers are “heroes.”
After all, stock markets have mostly skyrocketed since quantitative
easing (QE) was introduced during the credit crash, and stock markets
are a measure of economic health, right?
The devil’s bargain
Reality isn’t a mainstream media story. The U.S. economy isn’t the stock market.
All the Federal Reserve really accomplished was to forge a devil’s bargain: Trading one
manageable deflationary crisis for at least one (possibly more) highly
unmanageable inflationary crises down the road. Central banks kicked the
can on the collapse, making it far worse in the process.
The U.S. economy in particular is extremely vulnerable now. Money
created from thin air by the Fed was used to support failing banks and
corporations, not just here in America but also banks and companies
around the world.
Because the dollar has been the world reserve currency for the better
part of the past century, the Fed has been able to print cash with wild
abandon and mostly avoid inflationary consequences. This was especially
true in the decade after the derivatives crunch of 2008.
Why? The dollar’s global reserve status means dollars are likely to
be held overseas in foreign banks and corporate coffers to be used in
global trade. However, there is no such thing as a party that goes on
forever. Eventually the punch runs out and the lights shut off. If the
dollar is devalued too much, whether by endless printing of new money or
by relentless inflationary pressures at home, all those overseas
dollars will come flooding back into the U.S. The result is an
inflationary avalanche, a massive injection of liquidity exactly when it will cause the most trouble.
Rejuvenation Pills
-
No one likes getting old. Everyone would like to be immorbid. Let's be
careful here. Immortal doesnt include youth or return to youth. Immorbid
means you s...
Death of the Author — at the Hands of Cthulhu
-
In 1967, French literary theorist and philosopher Roland Barthes wrote of
“The Death of the Author,” arguing that the meaning of a text is divorced
from au...
9/29 again
-
"On this sacred day of Michaelmas, former President Donald Trump invoked
the heavenly power of St. Michael the Archangel, sharing a powerful prayer
for pro...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...