Dave Smith was talking about this on his most recent episode. Wild how jackasses on the internet are fully capable of defending their positions for 3 hours straight, but our leaders can’t get through a 10 minute ABC interview
Start a business. Not one based on fiat loans but with real savings. That way, you have real skin in the game and don’t have to depend on VC.
If that’s the case, doesn’t the rural side win in a landslide? Food and energy all come from rural areas. NYC/LA/Chicago produce no food, no oil, no gas, no manufacturing.
Interesting thought. How would a civil war even be fought today? The divide doesn’t appear to be south vs. north or east vs west. Looks more like rural vs urban.
I brought this up to someone a few weeks ago and they basically responded with “oh yeah? Where are the peer review studies bro?”. I, of course, didn’t have any because I figured it was common knowledge that the Amish aren’t typically the ones who are chronically obese or having heroin overdoses in public playgrounds. That being said, could you refer me to a resource that confirms this?
If you ever feel torn, pick the low time preference option. nostr:note1usxd4sqewu2cy66phpdsr4uw22encny63aa4qy65l62d8z46m8xskqg8pr
As someone in a STEM PhD program, I can confirm that within academia, you are not allowed to criticize the COVID regime, even to this day. All that you’re allowed to say about it is “COVID was a scary/crazy time” or something along the lines. Then everyone nods their head in agreement and changes to the subject to the weather or last night’s game.
As far as I can tell, there has been little to no reflection from the scientific community about what went wrong. At the time, we weren’t allowed to ask questions because we were in the middle of an emergency. Now, we’re not allowed to ask questions because we’re on to new and more pressing things.
It seems to me that the higher frequency (and lower amplitude) cycles you’re talking about are primarily redistribution of the resources and power, but the lower frequency (higher amplitude) cycles represent a redefinition of resources and power. We’re probably seeing both right now, but the latter is of greater importance. Fascinating times we live in.
The climate hysteria has clearly been a scam all along, but I always assumed that intention was just to give the State more regulatory power.
But the chem trails seem to indicate that either a) they genuinely believe that the weather is the biggest threat to mankind and anything is warranted in order to stop it or b) they are purposely destroying the environment. In other words, are they incompetent or malicious?
I wonder how many more “cycles” we even have left. Do you think that, at a certain point, as adoption becomes widespread, the bull/bear markets will be more mild?
I’ve come to believe that the root of it is fear of responsibility