Sign into an existing account

There's another few layers you aren't seeing yet

I should write a book titled "The 4th industrial revolution and the age of vampirism" I talk about this so much now.

For brevity's sake automation(robotics and AI) means we need fewer people to do the same work and so they are doing to humanity what was done to horses after the advent of the automobile and tractor. They are culling the population but in that culling instead of letting random inheritors become wealthy the goal is to drain every penny from the eminently deceased for end of life care.

This bookends curiously with immortality on the horizon. We aren't defeating death completely but we've figured out how to keep him away. Telomere therapy is what it will be called eventually. We discovered that though an imperfect job your body can transfer telomeres across cells and different cell types and that transfused blood with more telomeres will donate them to your other cells; in essence young blood will reverse the biological age of your cells. Testing needs to be done because we could end up with a weird situation where long enough telomeres cause octogenarians to have growth spurts. There is a special girl who has a disorder for overlong telomeres she's basically been stuck living as a disabled child for 25 years and doesn't look even teenaged yet, cloning her or her blood or genetic engineering her clones to have a universal blood type would essentially create an immortality industry especially if they can brand it lab grown blood. Potentially marrow transplants could have a similar effect.

The vaccines are more than just guaranteeing future business it's putting an expiration date on the poor and stupid and creating a market and consent for genetic therapy.

It also occured to me big pharma could also be behind big gay the money in AIDS research has been so massive and the knew "prep" was coming for nearly 30 years so they decided to expand their market by cultural imposition 0.8% of the population being at risk isn't enough to justify AIDS spending so they pushed and pushed and now 21% being at risk is probably sufficient for their bottom line but yet again i point to the title of my unwritten book, the big gay is big population control to the same ends as covaids.

The "vaccine" was meant to make money and "end" a crisis that never existed in the first place. I'm sure it's causing myocondartis and other BS but it's been a few years and every prediction of mass deaths has been false so far.

People love to focus on the hocus pocus quack Qtard shit instead of what's obvious. The huge transfer of wealth and further destruction of everyone's lifestyles during this "pandemic" was the conspiracy.

Why do you think Mark Zuckerberg lets people talk about vaccine conspiracies on Facebook? Him and his kosher pals love it when you focus on things like that instead of the browning of America and the further destruction of the middle class.

Well i do see at least 20% decrease of births in my country. Considering 2/3 took the shot...

{Chiro rant}

There is a paradox built into economic theory, at least as far as it intersects with other aspects of anthropology. On the one hand, profits are generated by serving differential needs. On the other hand, there are differential profits earned by better serving those needs. As competition drives gains in collective competence of providers to satisfy those needs, consumer needs overall decrease (rather, more of them are solved more efficiently). However, modern financing assumes a growth model; stakeholders invest to the extent they wager on the growth of a company (a provider).

The paradox should be clear. At some stage of collective competence (corresponding with a threshold of per capita wellbeing, let's say), economic incentives for consumers (buyers) in an ideal setting to buy at the same (or higher) levels would decrease relative to the incentives for sellers to innovate.

Put simply, companies begin to band together (so to speak) as they must collectively negotiate their competence with the willingness of the public (consumers) to buy. The most competent entity in a given economic domain begins to undercut the profitability (growth opportunity) of the whole as their solution X "does its job too well". Now, if price stratifiction is operating, then the best solution should be the most expensive, but overall, you'll find that the whole system proceeds toward equilibrium, with all buyers finding their optimum tradeoff balance. It works that way for a while, increasing incentives for the poor to increase their SES so as to gain access to better services.

But, with time, the overall solution space either (a) converges on some theoretical maximum for human capabilities (consider medicine as one good example) and/or (b) reaches a level of aggregate competence that makes inter-seller competition almost a moot point from the standpoint of most consumers. You see what's happening? The capabilities of human technology advance on a different curve than actual human needs, the latter of which don't stand to change nearly as rapidly as the former. Just think of the rate of change of human nature versus the rate of change in human technological capability over, say, the last century or two.

If you allowed this to proceed without intervening, you'd eventually reach an equilibrium point of comptence-incentive matching that would mean roughly everyone is having their basic needs met by a static group of providers. . .but this is financially implausible. The profits of providers in this equilibirum state would be static. But humans are opportunity seekers (most importantly, they seek differential rewards in order to beat the next guy). If investing in one of these "equilibrium stage entities" means getting a flat rate of return, people would lose the incentive to invest, seeking instead to put their money elsewhere (but where?).

Now, equilibrium stage (in principle) means that no competitor could enter a market that would possibly be able to provide X service at a cheaper price, thus destabilizing equilibrium. Of course, we know that isn't how the real-world works, but this idealization is trying to highlight a point, which is that in this ideal context, markets would become inefficient and destabilize since, in theory, investors would be relegated to value-investing. The truth is that 99% of humans don't know what to value in the long-run if you take away the profit margins. They invest where they stand to gain more money than the next guy. They want to do better than their neighbors, the Jones. They want to invest in companies that are growing, or which stand to grow the most. In other words, value-investing becomes a virtue signal, a misnomer. Profitability is itself the primary value. Public financing has turned everything into a big casino. (How many people decide whether to pay into their 401k based on researching whether their particular workplace's fund invests in PornHub or not? No, they want to see how the fund performs.)

Commercial entities are in a predicament. They can't simply respond to these pressures by "competing better", for two reasons: (a) again, convergence on limits of competence and (b) solutions that are too universally good result in equilibrium.

So, the commercial entities have to begin negotiating as their own "layer of human society" against the public, and they do this as a collective by gaming markets. This can take two forms, either consolidation of equity (monopoly forming) through the process of wiping out competitors, or through creating new needs for consumers. Influencing regulation is viable for either of these strategies (you can regulate competitors out of markets, e.g., which is what the climate crisis is all about); and you can create "needs" in people by having the government legislate them (e.g., vaccines).

Forming monopolies works for a time but growth-incentive eventually means that rising prices will create opportunities for lower-priced competitors.

The other opportunity is to create new needs in consumers. This can also take two forms. Either you create new "needs" the consumer "didn't know they had", or you sabotage consumers' ability to satisfy their needs, causing demand for your solution to rise. There is a paradigm example for both strategies. Social media is an excellent example of creating new needs. Sabotaging people's health is an example of the latter kind. We've entered a stage where the number of providers has dwindled, and they are engaged in a global game of managing whole economies (whole sector profitability) through price-fixing and creation of crises. It is anti-competitive in the traditional sense, but highly competitive in terms of the relationship between provider and consumer (extremely antagonistic, and most would say immoral, even evil, going against the very spirit of care and giving that we think should premise the exchange of goods in a healthy society).

They have guaranteed ever increasing revenues forever. This is why there was a brutal attempt to get every single human injected.


LMFAO fuck off with your gaslighting low IQ post...top vaccine rate in africa was 22%

This was targetted at White people to ethnically genocide them...the fact you say nothing about that but pretend it's "everyone" is an obvious hint that you are anti White

You can't even call kikes kikes, you use this faggotry nonsense ((()))

die kike

The Cavendish family believes they are gods, descendants of the pharaohs.

Where was DNA discovered?

What's the current patriarchs name?

They want the only uncontaminated DNA on the planet to be their own. They've already been inbreeding for thousands of years anyways.

Why not both. Two birds one stone. Since Rockefeller infiltration 100 years ago, it's just the medical industrial complex

deleted

Wow, you used the word payload….must be true

Turns your immune system into a subscription service.

The bouncing Betty landmine wasn’t designed to kill. It was designed to injure. It takes 4 soldiers out of the battle to carry one injured soldier. Dead soldiers can wait until the fighting is done. In terms of profit, the Covid seems a similar strategy. You can’t profit from dead people, but sick people are gold!

deleted

You’re wrong OP. Billions are about to die from the vax coupled with the FEMA message that is going to be sent to everyones phones today at 2:22 pm

It’s gonna be Biblical

Watch Utopia (UK version) it lays it all out, with a few points missing.

Next virus is the true power grab. It will be very lethal to the vaxxed and thus usher in a new police state