By: Janey B
On the season finale of The People’s Project, Peter Wong interviewed former Australian NBA player, Andrew Bogut and Victorian MP, Richard Riordan. They discussed government blackmailing small businesses to comply with controversial “Covid” mandates, whilst various other parties are bought off with bribes (in the form of pay increases and handouts) – and denounce this “communism” they compare to Mussolini’s Italy (except Mussolini was a fascist). Government at both state and federal level in Australia are lying, intimidating and blackmailing the population into compliance with Covid policy. The fact the science the government claim to be following is highly contentious and all dissenting opinion is being censored, is also extremely concerning.
But, if we consider the fact that this problem is not unique to Australia, and that allegedly “democratic” governments (closely aligned to the World Economic Forum (WEF)) globally, are all singing from the same hymn book on all things Covid, (and it IS a religion now), we can see it for what it is: “fascism”.
Globalisation has replaced nationalism, because the WEF is a globalist elites/corporate club. According to Investopedia:
The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) membership features a cross-section of the global elite from the private and public sector, and includes some of the most prominent CEOs, diplomats, celebrities, media personalities, government officials, religious leaders, and union representatives from around the world.
…The WEF is funded by its own membership, which includes industry leaders as well as individuals from all walks of life, including celebrities, journalists, and interested individuals willing to pay annual dues and meeting fees to attend.17 Regional meetings are held in developing nations such as Africa, East Asia, and Latin America, but the annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, is the central meeting event for all members.
…The Davos WEF brings together business leaders, investors, politicians, and journalists from across the globe to discuss current global economic and social issues and is held in January in the small ski town. The forum focuses on shaping global, regional, and industry agendas and is among the most popular, well-attended, and high-profile events in the world.(emphasis added.)
As it turns out, the WEF are also self appointed experts on health and believe they should be driving the response to Covid, along with WEF partners, GAVI and The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Disturbingly, given the compliance we have seen by member governments, it seems they are. Is this an accident? Well, it does fit in very nicely with another favourite WEF agenda, The Great Reset. A major component of this “reset”, is the 4th Industrial Revolution.
The World Economic Forum posted the following video on their Facebook page, in April of 2016. Erik Brynjolfsson introduces the 4th Industrial Revolution, which he describes as “bringing together physical, digital and biological systems”. It encourages us to “reimagine what it means to be embedded in the world”.
We are seeing this incredibly exciting convergence of genome editing, DNA sequencing. Governments have a very important role to play in enabling the safe and effective use of technologies.
(Conversely, we have seen governments not only enabling, but mandating the use of unsafe and ineffective experimental jabs whilst abhorrently censoring deaths, and other major adverse events. Insidiously attempting to nullify, aguably, the most fundamental human right: that of bodily autonomy in medical treatment.)
In January 2017, McKinsey Global Institute (a WEF ‘strategic partner) published a report titled: It begins by extolling the benefits of a ‘superior’ automated workforce.
Robots and computers can not only perform a range of routine physical work activities better and more cheaply than humans, but they are also increasingly capable of accomplishing activities that include cognitive capabilities once considered too difficult to automate successfully, such as making tacit judgments, sensing emotion, or even driving.
McKinsey state, “based on our scenario modeling, we estimate automation could raise productivity growth globally by 0.8 to 1.4 percent annually”. When the report was produced, it was estimated less than 5% of occupations could potentially be fully automated, however, “about half of all the activities people are paid to do in the world’s workforce could potentially be automated by adapting currently demonstrated technologies.”
Who will the “winners” and “losers” be? According to McKinsey, not only low skilled labour, but professional’s may see their situation altered radically with the advent of new technology. The research “suggests that half of today’s work activities could be automated by 2055, but this could happen up to 20 years earlier or later depending on the various factors, in addition to other wider economic conditions.” (emphasis added)
The report goes on to explain how up to 60% of occupations can be partially automated, and an estimated 51% of the workforce. We can expect, as new technologies are developed. that number will increase. Clearly this will result in obsolescence of human workers, which McKinsey do briefly acknowledge.
One of the challenges of the new era will be to ensure that wages are high enough for the
new types of employment that will be created, to prevent continuing erosion of the wage
share of GDP, which has dropped sharply since the 1970s. If automation does result in
greater pressure on many workers’ wages, some ideas such as earned income tax credits,
universal basic income, conditional transfers, shorter workweeks, and adapted social safety
nets could be considered and tested. As work evolves at higher rates of change among
sectors, locations, activities, and skill requirements, many workers may need assistance in
adjusting to the new age. (emphasis added).
Universal Basic Income (UBI) was raised as a solution, for the losers of this great scheme. How it works is, the government pay everyone (regardless of income) a sum of money ($1000 p/month was proposed in the US).
The idea is called unconditional or universal basic income, or UBI. It’s like social security for all, and it’s taking root within minds around the world and across the entire political spectrum, for a multitude of converging reasons. Rising inequality, decades of stagnant wages, the transformation of lifelong careers into sub-hourly tasks, exponentially advancing technology like robots and deep neural networks increasingly capable of replacing potentially half of all human labour, world-changing events like Brexit and the election of Donald Trump – all of these and more are pointing to the need to start permanently guaranteeing everyone at least some income.
Of course the author fails to mention that the “converging reasons” he lists, are a direct consequence of crony capitalist policies implemented the last few decades. No mention of the widespread anger among ordinary people for the “austerity” they were forced to endure after the 2008 crash, whilst bankers and fraudsters alike received no punishment, and even received bonuses. Just as the coming ‘crises’ they predict are brought on by their egoistic influence in world affairs (a bit like Bill Gates’ pandemic predictions?)
Economists assured us for decades, the “trickle down” affect really worked, despite many experiencing the exact opposite – a bigger ‘slice of the pie’ for executives and shareholders (not to mention, owners), whilst most of the workforce have seen their wages stagnate, as cost of living increased mercilessly. But not everybody was sold on the idea.
In April 2019, Finnish Nobel laureate, Bengt Holmström noted his concern that while UBI may satisfy the income component of employment, there were other considerations:
- That if too many people were not employed, young people may develop belief that it is normal not to work and become demotivated.
- Work provides social opportunities and human connection.
- People derive personal satisfaction, esteem and fulfillment from their employment.
Anthony Galli, in August 2019, questioned the wisdom of implementing such a scheme on such a large scale, without any evidence to support it. He argued that:
- There was a potential for cost blowout. i.e. that politicians would be under pressure to raise the UBI to win votes.
- That a (e.g $1000) UBI as a supplement to income was one thing, but when it became the only income, it was a “slavery handout”.
By the end of 2019, implementation of a UBI did not have popular support.
… only a crash test dummy would want to impose such a radical proposal on the largest, strongest economy in the world with little to no evidence.
Fortunately for the globalists, 2020 brought Covid19. Government’s globally (and coincidentally(?) WEF members) immediately implemented draconion “protective measures” to “combat the virus”, that ignored usual protocols (and scientific research) and ultimately harmed communities.
Only 4 months after the pandemic was declared, WEF tzar Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret published Covid19: The Great Reset. This is showcased on the WEF website, citing the challenges of Covid, and promoting vaccines, lockdowns, maskwearing – not hard to see who exactly is running this show, and for whose benefit.
As we enter a unique window of opportunity to shape the recovery, this initiative will offer insights to help inform all those determining the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons. Drawing from the vision and vast expertise of the leaders engaged across the Forum’s communities, the Great Reset initiative has a set of dimensions to build a new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being.
Indeed, we are now being told that “Covid” is driving automation at a faster pace.
The pandemic didn’t just threaten Americans’ health when it slammed the U.S. in 2020 — it may also have posed a long-term threat to many of their jobs. Faced with worker shortages and higher labor costs, companies are starting to automate service sector jobs that economists once considered safe, assuming that machines couldn’t easily provide the human contact they believed customers would demand.
Past experience suggests that such automation waves eventually create more jobs than they destroy, but that they also disproportionately wipe out less skilled jobs that many low-income workers depend on. Resulting growing pains for the U.S. economy could be severe.
… Employers seem eager to bring on the machines. A survey last year by the nonprofit World Economic Forum found that 43% of companies planned to reduce their workforce as a result of new technology. Since the second quarter of 2020, business investment in equipment has grown 26%, more than twice as fast as the overall economy. (emphasis added).
But it isn’t Covid, it is the policy enacted by governments. Policy that just happens to align in word and dogma with the WEF, as noted above. Make no mistake, behind all the “inclusive” talk and promises of prosperity, is the agenda outlined in this propaganda video. “Human dignity” apparently comes a poor second, as human rights are jeopardized by jab mandates, jab “passports” and contact tracing apps.
Back to the interview we started with. Is there a disconnect somewhere, even with some who know this ‘isn’t about a virus’? Too often in commentary this is portrayed as another left/right issue. Or, there is an insinuation this issue only affects the ‘working class’ (and other low income earners). However, the grand scheme for humanity, as envisioned by the elite members of the WEF, is a massive power (and asset) grab.
“You will own nothing, and be happy”.
To view the root cause of this issue as being conceived at a national level, ignores the fact that this goes beyond national governments, and borders. To view this through the tired (and false) left/right paradigm, is inaccurate and perilously misleading. Whether viewed nationally or globally this is a bi-partisan agenda. Whatever ever your political leanings, you are the target, whether you are working class or middle class, “left” or “right”.
People are now issuing dire warnings on the US economy, including:
- Big crash coming.
- Banks closing accounts and lines of credit.
- Rate increases and inflation.
- Supply chain disruption/shortages.
Catherine Austin-Fitts warned of the intention to asset strip the middle class (and almost everyone else) in her Planet Lockdown interview. I highly recommend you have a look if you haven’t already.
This methodical displacement of humanity will impact up to 51% of workers according to estimates. Are you really safe? If now, for how long? For those few areas they can’t replace humans with machines, the competition with be ferocious. Wages will reflect this. I would be very wary of any Bitcoin investment too. Gold and silver. This isn’t being widely promoted of course, because it would drive the price up.
“You will own nothing, and be happy”.
How secure do you think your job will be? BBC provided this nifty little interactive. Just click on the link (below the image, it will take you to the BBC website), them simply enter your occupation for an estimate of how likely you are to be replaced by technology, but:
- It’s 6 years old, and
- The estimate is likely on the low side.
This is the future, not only for us, but all generations after us unless we end this.
We must unite, and work together to defeat this elitist agenda, intended to only benefit those same scoundrels who have been unashamedly gaming the system in their favour for decades. This truly is an apoplectic battle: the “99%” of us, against the elite “1%” (led by Klaus Schwab), who intend to remake our world to suit their greed and narcissism. To manipulate the herd of human cattle as they see fit. To disenfranchise as they see fit. To cull as they see fit? It sure would save a lot of money in UBI, I guess.