The Great Reset: The Social Contract part 1

“For decades, it has slowly and almost imperceptibly evolved in a direction that forced individuals to assume greater responsibility for their individual lives and economic outcomes. Leading large parts of the population (most evidently in the low-income brackets) to conclude that the social contract was at best being eroded, if not in some case breaking down entirely.” Page 96.

I don’t know what social contract Klaus Schwab, a man who has worked for a university since the early 1970s and hangs out with billionaires and politicians in his spare time, was a part of or what he thought it entailed but yes personal responsibility is an idea that is important for society and mental wellbeing. The notion that personal responsibility is a bad thing might be the reason that the left has gone after Dr. Jordan Peterson time and time again. For a program like the Great Reset to work would mean that the public believes they are not responsible for their own wellbeing. In order for the great reset to happen all personal responsibility needs to be handed over to “big” government who knows what is best for you, instead of you. When this has happened in the past millions of people died. Mao knew what was best when he had the country growing only rice, causing a famine that China had never seen before. When the Tibetans were forced to grow crops they had never seen before, they starved unable to grow the new crop in a cold, high altitude environment. Stalin took farms away from people in the Ukraine and handed them over to people who had never farmed before. Millions staved and the soviet government had to produce poster telling people not to eat their children during the winter months. Needless to say, I would rather deal with a social contract where I can blame myself for what is happening in my world then point the finger at a government that never takes responsibility for the horrible things it has done.

“Today, the fundamental reasons underpinning the loss of faith in our social contracts coalesce around issues of inequality, the ineffectiveness of most redistribution policies, a sense of exclusion and marginalization, and a general sentiment of unfairness.” Page 96-97.

Inequality hasn’t been in issue until a bunch of communist, feminist, lesbian, trans rights activists started marching in the streets, setting fires to small businesses, and killing people in the name of Black Lives Matter. Equality is a buzz word, something to get people motivated behind. It sounds good therefore it must be, but when we look how equality and equity are used but these organization, including the World Economic Forum, we see that the definition changes to fit their narrative and keep the conversation moving towards their end goal. If people took personal responsibility for their actions then conversation revolving around inequality wouldn’t happen. This argument assumes that people in general are not in control of their own lives and need someone else to aid them through life.

As for redistribution policies, most people do not like the idea of having their money handed over to an organization that takes a cut for themselves then hands the rest over in the most inefficient way possible. The theft from those who are responsible to hand over their earnings to those unable or unwilling to better their own lives is never look upon as a good thing. As of February 2021, a group of investors took their money and bought stock in GameStop, a brick-and-mortar videogame store that looked like it was going to go out of business. In doing so, a group of hedge funds started to look at massive losses having shorted the stock trying to make easy money and kill the company all together. These people took personal responsibility for their finances and turned the game of the stock market on its head. Again, the people who took personal responsibility for their situation and bettered their lives were portrayed as villains instead of the American entrepreneurs they are. There is an agenda to teach the public to put their trust in the government and not to try solving their problems on their own. We have seen this time and time again. When wall street looks at the public, they say that they could do what they do but choose not to. When they do participate in the stock market the same people who pushed the idea of getting themselves out of poverty then scream “NO! Not like that!”

“Whichever form it takes, in almost all cases, the establishment’s response has been left wanting- ill prepared for the rebellion and out of ideas and policy levers to address the problem.” Page 97.

This passage was in regard to the rise in populism in many western countries like the UK, France, and the US. In the side margins I wrote as a note, “no shit.” Even after Joe Biden took power along with the rest of the Democratic left their first priority was to impeach the former president of the united states. The $2000 checks that were promised to the public for voting them into office were reduced to $1400, for some people, if you qualify. As of March 2, 2021, these checks have still not been approved by the senate and will like not ship out to those in need until April. The lefts lack of focus on anything other than “Orange Man Bad” continues to become more obvious and I can’t wait to sit back and watch them eat each other. As for the “rebellion,” the notion that the opposing side of a political view is now regarded as a rebellion or insurrection only divides the country more and serves no purpose other than to villainize people and reduce them too less than human. With Trump out of the picture the left is out of ideas, pulling a check book out to cover cost for things they can not afford, playing the same game of kicking the can down the street to leave for someone else to clean up.

Standard

The Great Reset: The return of “big” government

“It matters enormously whether your country has a good health service, competent bureaucrats and sound finances. Good government is the difference between living and dying.” Page 89.

If this statement is true then we have to admit that most of the world, especially the US is fucked. We already have big government. When congress passes the Equality Act, mandates the limitation of words in public speaking, and ruins the lives of people for having different beliefs as them, at what point does government go from small to “big.” Our bureaucrats are incompetent in the ability to send out a check to the people who should get them. Unemployment is cut off to those who need it and paid into the system for decades until they needed it. Laws are created out of thin air and not questions by law makers even when they don’t make sense and do not hold up to science. Rioters and looters walk free while gym owners are sent to jail for keeping people healthy during a pandemic. As for finances…

Our current national debt is over 27 trillion dollars and congress wants to add another 1.9 trillion during a year where tax revenue will be down and there isn’t a sign that the economy will get better in the near future. A wise man once said, “government has killed more people than a virus.” If I had to choose between making my own choices to live a happy and healthy life during a pandemic or letting the government do it for me, I would choose my own judgement over a bunch of office trolls any day. The government’s inability to manage healthcare for decades now isn’t going to drastically change overnight. Firing the deep state and replacing our elected officials with competent people isn’t going to happen. As for finances, if the government was run as well as the officials own bank accounts, we would be the wealthiest country in the world, however these old crow foot wearing, leather skinned, bags of bloated pig fat are too busy stealing from the rest of us to run the damn country in a positive way. Covid-19 will not solve this and Schwab needs to share whatever he was smoking with the rest of the world to think that it is even a possibility.

“A few examples illustrating the point strongly suggest that this time, as in the past, taxation will increase. As in the past, the social rationale and political justification underlying the increases will be based upon the narrative of “countries at war.” Page 90.

America is broke. We hold several IOUs and at any point one of the countries we owe will call on our dent and we will have nothing to offer. If the government tries to say we are at war the justification will not hold and people will resist. To say we are at war with a virus that has a 99.9% survival rate is ridiculous. It’s like saying Canada is a threat and we need to start fighting back for their poor choice in music exported to the states. 99.9% of people who listen to Canadian pop stars don’t usually kill themselves, but listen to Nickelback or Alanis Morissette too many times and you might want to put a bullet in your head. Does this mean we should go to war, tax the public, and make everyone’s life a living hell to save the .1% of people who make poor choices? No thanks, plus we know that the money they take from us will not go towards the efforts they say they are. It will go to black farmers because the bank account of a poor black farmer is different from the bank account of a poor white farmer. Or maybe they money goes toward critical race theory therapy programs. Or gender studies in a country like Pakistan where most of the population is Muslim and gender is pretty well defined by their religion. The point is that the government can come up with all kinds of excuses to tax the hell out of people, a war on Covid-19 won’t fly and I doubt most people would pay a drastic increase when they don’t have to.

“They should also ensure that partnerships with business involves government funds are driven by public interest, not profit.” Page 92.

When government offers to pay a certain amount of money for a product it is in the company’s best interest to make the product for the lowest possible price to profit the most they can from the deal. We have all heard the stories about the army paying $50 for a hammer and $120 for a toilet seat. After working for a few non-profit companies, I can tell you for a fact they are not interested in saving money. These places are designed to share the wealth as long as the money travels to the top of the food chain. If Pfizer had the public interest at heart would they have rolled out a vaccine, skipping several safety steps and studies, and shipped out millions of doses without knowing what the possible side effects were of a never-before-seen mRNA vaccine?

“Central banks decided to cut rates and committed to provide all the liquidity that was needed, while governments started to expand social-welfare benefits, make direct cash transfers, cover wages, and suspend loan and mortgage payments, among other responses. Only governments had the power, capability and the reach to make such decisions, without which economic calamity and a complete social meltdown would have prevailed.” Page 92-93.

This statement tries combine several different policies together as if all governments implemented these policies and ignores the countries that didn’t lockdown or take drastic measures. Central banks have left rates low since 2001 and they haven’t gone up since then. With 27 trillion in debt when have they ever said to providing liquidity? Social-welfare benefits are one of the main reasons that the economy is struggling to get back on its feet. When a person is making more money on unemployment why would they want to return to work? The direct cash transfers are a joke and an insult. If $1200 is going to change your life, Covid-19 is not your problem, you are your own problem and you need some fixing before worrying about a virus. Several countries delt with loans and mortgage payments in a different way. In the US some states suspended rent payments and mortgage payment but with the understanding that the amount owed would be paid at the end of the set time period. If people haven’t been working how are they going to pay three to six months’ worth of rent at one time. Most households had less than $500 in savings before the pandemic. In Italy, the government stepped in and said that during lockdown people didn’t need to pay rent, the landlords did not need to pay their mortgage and banks and loan companies were not to take payments. Everything was frozen in the economic system and when it was over, they would all continue as if the lockdown never happened. I found this to be the best policy and I was disappointed that others didn’t follow its example. As for the argument that these policies prevented calamity and social meltdown, no it didn’t. now we have anti lockdown riots happening. Camps are being proposed in several countries to lock people up in if they are suspected of having the virus. The governments are creating the meltdown and they continue to push people further towards destruction.

“…To preventing banks from incentivizing consumer debt.” Page 94.

Are we serious here? What world is Schwab living in? While we look at the crappy system, we currently live in that pushes people into debt what about the companies that work through a debt system, or the governments, state to federal, who work with a massive amount of debt. Our whole economy, because of interest rates, is based on debt. As long as there are central banks there will be debt. The banking system itself relies on loaning money that could never be returned to keep people as indentured servants for the majority of their lives.

This was a difficult chapter to read considering the amount of misinformation and half truths thrown in to make it sound like Covid-19 was a good excuse to create “bigger” government than what we currently have. During my lifetime I have seen nothing but expansion of the Federal government. There was the Patriot Act, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the merger of Big Tech and the Federal Government. I don’t know how much bigger Schwab thinks governments need to become in order to create his new world order but he better keep in mind to stay off my lawn.

Standard

The Great Reset: Economic Reset, part 1

The following is part of a book review series about The Great Reset by Klaus Schwab and Thierry Mallerett.

“Must the economy die so that it could be resurrected in robust good health? Yes.” This is from page 38 of The Great Reset by Klaus Schwab and Thierry Mallerett. This is a Quote from Simon Schama describing what was done during previous pandemics, but it is used as an argument for the reaction by Governments around the globe. There are arguments made on both sides of the fence for lockdowns or keeping economies open and I have to say that the arguments for lockdowns are poor overall.

On page 44 we read “Once people began to worry about the pandemic, they effectively started to shut down the economy, even before the government had officially asked them to do so.” Anyone who was paying attention for the last year knows this didn’t happen. I, personally, went out and stocked up on food and supplies not knowing what was going to happen over the coming weeks. The shelves in supermarkets were bare. People could not buy toilet paper on-line. Stores closed their doors and we thought that everyone was going to die. I knew it was better to spend the money I had on something I knew I would need in the future rather than save it for when things reopened. Since then, people have started saving money, not because of the lockdown but not knowing if they are going to lose their employment because of government policies, not the virus. At the time of the initial lockdown the average American had less than $1000 in savings and could not afford a $500 expense if it came their way. The only time Americans saved money was when the stores were closed due to lockdowns and that was only if they were the people who could work from home and keep a paycheck coming in. Even then, sales on Amazon and other on-line outlets skyrockets to Christmas sales numbers funneling money away from small businesses and straight to major corporations. This argument on human reaction regarding the fear of the virus is false.

Regarding lockdowns. On page 45 we see a line “when you do it right, nothing happens.” As we know now, nobody did it right. The states with the most sever lockdown orders had the largest spikes in cases and death. New York, Michigan, and Washington state shut down major parts of their economy but continued certain operations for the sake of tax revenue. You could not go to church, but you could go to the lock liquor store and buy a bottle of gin with a pack of smokes. You could go to Lowe’s and buy lumber, but you weren’t allowed to buy house paint or flooring. With our current culture the ability to do an appropriate lockdown was impossible. Most homes do not have enough food to feed the occupants for more than a week. Savings are non-existent and even if people had the money to buy food for several weeks the local grocery store is designed to have food for the public it serves for a week at a time. A proper lockdown was never feasible, the virus was never going away.

When referring to returning to normal the book quotes leading experts on the subject “It is likely to be before the first quarter of 2021 at the earliest.” As of 2-7-2021 the US economy isn’t close to recovering with people in the service industry still unemployed, thousands of small businesses closed permanently due to the mismanagement of the pandemic, and a failed roll out of a vaccine by the Biden administration. Under president trump there were 200,000 more vaccines given per month than the current administration who came into system already in process and more companies producing the vaccine than before.

The fear for the economy now is that with people saving money, American households have 33% more savings than before the pandemic and in the EU its 19% higher, they will not spend it once the economy is fully open hindering the growth back to normal. It’s not the virus that caused these people to hold on to their money, its fear of paying their bills when the government decides they are not essential and can no longer work. In the US we received two checks during the entire span of the pandemic. Neither would be enough to pay the bills that piled up while someone was out of work for forced to shut down. Small business loans were only for paying employees to keep them on the payroll and prevent them from collecting unemployment. Many businesses shut down knowing that their employees would collect more while on unemployment and the loan did not help the cost of keeping the business afloat like paying the owner, rent, power and water bills, property taxes, resources, or any loans that might be outstanding. Small businesses overall had no help from the federal government. During the last month, with businesses still shut down and people still unemployed, state governments are starting to demand payments back from people originally deemed qualifying for unemployment benefits due to Covid-19. Whatever saving these people might have will be eaten by a bureaucratic system that is looking to cut its losses while mishandling a situation making it more painful for the public.

Standard

The Great Reset: Macro Reset

The following is part of a series about the book Covid-19: The Great Reset written by Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret. Some things to consider for this book, since the book has two authors it is unknown what information was added by which author.

  1. Interdependence

This section of the book compares aspects of society to boats. Each country at one time used to be their own boat but through globalization they became cabins on the same boat. Because of this independent ideology it is difficult to grasp the big picture and countries need to react to things like Covid-19 as if we are all on the same boat instead of trying to regulate what happens in our own cabins. This section made me question the movement towards populism and a desire that is growing in countries like isolationism. After all, if these countries had isolated or regulated travel as they wanted to before the Covid-19 outbreak would they have been affected like the rest of the planet? At what point are nations allowed to no longer participate in a global market or will they be forced to play along whether they like it or not?

In keeping with the boat analogy could one of the solutions to Covid-19 be isolationism and making a country a lifeboat away from the rest of the sinking ship?

  1. Velocity

With reference to our fast-paced society the argument is made that we already accept change and at a faster pace than before. More of the world is connected through the internet and we expect things faster and more immediate. As things become faster, we equate this with the fast pace of Covid-19 moving through the world even though it follows the same pattern as a bacterium populating a petri dish. Just like the end of the dish being filled so will the new policies of the Great Reset. A quote from Hemingway is used about being broke. At first, it’s a little at a time then its all at once. This is how the policies will be rolled out. We are already seeing this with the barrage of executive orders being signed by the Biden administration and policy changes in Canada and the UK.

  1. Complexity

The system of our society is a complex system that used specialized professions to keep things working. Because of these specialized positions it is difficult to see how one change in mortgages will affect the jobs market or college enrollment. The argument is made that nobody saw the financial collapse of 2008 coming and this is a flat out lie. Michael Ruppert warned people about what was coming two years before the housing bubble burst. Members of wall street took out credit default swaps on the mortgage bonds before they crumbled due to rising numbers of default mortgages. I saw it coming with the insane prices of houses while nobody had received a pay raise in three years. These things are not difficult to see coming and I’m tired of people who think they know better telling everyone afterwards there was no way to know.

In late march of 2020 my boss sat us down in the work room and asked what we could see next? What was coming after the lockdown? After a minute of silence I said, “civil unrest, famines, riots, societal collapse.” It wasn’t what people wanted to hear and so these voices go ignored and forgotten even after things happen. The people in charge say nobody knew to take some responsibility off their own shoulders leaving those that spoke up left out as crazies and undesirables.

Covid-19 is not a black swan event, but the consequences will be. It is not difficult to see the repercussions of Covid-19 on our society. This has been tracked since the beginning. The rise in suicide from the constant lockdowns, the closing of businesses, depression among kids, lack of trust in government and media. So far there are no consequences regarding Covid-19 that haven’t been seen. They are all driven by government policies and the results are easy to see or predict. Our government keeps printing money since tax revenue is not coming in, causing inflation and later a rise in interest rates which will make the federal government insolvent unless it prints more money to pay its bills. The balance books are too far to one side for the national debt to ever be paid back and there aren’t enough resources in the world to cover the damage. None of this is a black swan that nobody could have expected, it’s the obvious repercussions of poor management and credit card policies.

Standard

The Great Reset: Introduction

The following is the beginning of a series about the book Covid-19: The Great Reset written by Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret. Some things to consider for this book, since the book has two authors it is unknown what information was added by which author. The authors state that it was written at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic and was published June of 2020. However, the virus was not acknowledged to be an issue until February of 2020. Lockdowns began in the United States in late March and have continued on and off since. Maybe, during a time period where people are forced to be stuck indoors could two men put together such a book but the policies and suggestions laid out mirror previous programs started by the United Nations and the World Economic Forum. My guess is that this has been sitting on a laptop for a while and it finally had its chance to find purpose.

The introduction.

Arguments are made for the book in the introduction, laying out the opportunity that is presently available for making the world a “better” place. There are references to the Black Death that went through Europe killing anywhere from 1/3 to half of the population. The authors point out the end of serfdom and claim that the style of social order disappeared because of the plague. It is a simple argument but they leave out several factors that also took place for the change to occur. The landowners stayed in power and while the workers had more rights there were negotiations that took place because of the lack of workforce available. There was also the cooling period that took place causing a mini-ice age after the plague which also caused a famine, dropping the population even further. It wasn’t until the discovery of the new world that you finally saw an end of the effects that the plague had on Europe. This wasn’t called the Dark Ages for nothing. The influx of new world gold, lumber, tobacco, furs, and crops created a market of abundance that paved the way for the Renaissance. Whether or not this would have happened without the plague we don’t know. Recent discoveries by historians tell us that China had already discovered the new world at the beginning of the 1400s and this might have led to Columbus making the voyage across the ocean. China was in constant trade with Italy during that time.

Towards the end of the introduction there is some praise given to the Enlightenment that eventually came from the Black Death but the policies pushed forward in the Great Reset counter the ideas of the Enlightenment. The rights of the individual. The ability for democracy to rule a government instead of a monarchy. The right to personal property. Free speech and the protection of shared knowledge encompass the enlightenment. These ideas had to be shared in secret with the possible repercussions being death at the hands of the church or the government. The great reset is a new religion founded in environmental justice, social justice, and communist economic reform. While the enlightenment sounds good the rest of the book counters the ideas that countries like the United States were founded on.

Another argument made for the Great Reset includes the right for women to vote. Although, I will point out that it is not made clear which country the authors are referring to. They make the claim that women were not allowed to vote until after WWII and that it was the war effort that made it possible for this advancement in women’s rights. Their place in the workforce moved them into a more acceptable place in society so they could earn the right to vote. This statement is completely false. The right to vote was granted to women in 1919 and signed into law in 1920. 25 years before the end of WWII women had been voting. The downside of women entering the work force during the war was their unwillingness to leave when the men came home. Divorce rates in the 1950s were at record highs and the average pay for men and women dropped with a doubling in the number of paid laborers now in the market. The two-income household had been established along with higher taxes and more expenses. The only upside to the US economy after the war was that we were the industrial complex for the rest of the world having destroyed the Japanese and German infrastructure during the war. If you wanted to purchase a tractor, car, or plane for your business you bought it from the US.

Like any of these books and programs put out by groups like the World Economic Forum there is mention of a New Order. They didn’t say New World Order but they do point out that this would be a program that impacts the world as a whole. I found it interesting how they quoted Camus in his book The Plague, discussing the changes to society after a plague rolled through France. However, this is used as an example of something that happened even though the book is pure fiction and isn’t based on a real event or disease. The dead rats found in the street were the only real sign of what was happening in The Plague. Other than that, no other clues were given as to the illness in the book.

The introduction concludes with the idea that a pandemic gives society an opportunity to change many key factors in our economy and way of life. With the introduction of a plague on the planet governments and institutions are able to change policies so that when it is over there is a new normal that people will already be adapted to. The only thing wrong with this logic is that Covid-19 is not a pandemic of that magnitude. The survival rate is still at 99.9% for the majority of the population. It did not take long to discover inexpensive drugs and supplements that fought the virus raising the survival rate. Vitamin D is a key factor in the severity of the symptoms. Hydroxychloroquine is an early therapy that can be used if someone test positive for the virus but does not have symptoms. In Africa a program called ANTICOV is working to find inexpensive drugs that will drop the death rate even further. The program started in November of 2020 and is already showing promising signs of inexpensive drugs working better than the expensive ventilators that killed 85% of the patients put on them. The Great Reset may be waiting for a pandemic to hit in order to push its policies but Covid-19 is not the pandemic needed for such a policy change.

Standard