Active link for Luke Mitchel's Understanding Obamacare:
http://www.lukemitchell.org/2012/11/harpers-magazine-understanding-obamacare.html
From the article:
The Democratic deal for the drug companies is, if anything, even sweeter than the Democratic deal for the insurance companies. . . . "The White House blessed it," Tauzin said, assuring his clients that billions of government dollars would continue to flow their way. Democrats, meanwhile, must have been almost equally assured by the subsequent headline in Ad Age: "Pharma Backs Obama Health Reform with $150 Million Campaign."
Yes, those about to be "regulated" by Obamacare spent $150 million to help get Obamacare passed. THAT is how government "regulation" works: it pretends to help or protect consumers while instead enriching and "partnering" with the regulated industry. In the case of the FDA, for instance, this has lead to insanely high prices for pharmaceuticals, repeated FDA approval of drugs that are unsafe and often deadly, and forcible withdrawal from the market of actual safe and effective products that Pharma either wants a monopoly on or wants to no longer compete with.
. . . the unforced error . . .
LOL
With SO much evidence, from so many different sources (insurance companies, mortuaries and embalmers, government data from multiple nations, etc) that the jabs are harmful and often horrifically so, not to mention that they're killing hundreds of thousands of people before their time -- the fact that ANY professional scientist in any discipline is willing to argue in public for the "safety and efficacy" of the jabs is jaw-dropping.
Tyson is either a gaslit idiot or deeply corrupt.
I don't really want there to be a time when we all have to work synchronously like that. I think our power is in our million different approaches. We are a distributed intelligence. Can you tell me why it would be necessary?
That's an EXCELLENT point. You're talking about a major and inherent benefit of FREEDOM: society's problems get tackled from many directions by many different people with different views, expertise, and approaches -- instead of by a single imposed pseudo-solution. Under freedom, what works is embraced and less-successful approaches are discarded. Under tyranny, you're stuck with whatever approach gets imposed, until some other imposed solution comes along -- which is usually just the same corrupt "solution" as before with a new name, a bigger budget, and tighter restrictions.
Also: This has become an epic thread. Thanks for starting it off, propertyofUniverse!
I think it's an important part of the equation.
The Second Amendment -- and the percent of the population that is armed and even reasonably competent -- is another. The number and level of corruption of the military and federal, state, and local armed agents is another; a widespread understanding of freedom and of tyranny (and their effects) is important for effective resistance, and there are more factors.
But I think you've identified a good proxy for estimating the danger of a successful boost of tyranny by the ruling regime. When enough of the population has been gaslit or whatever into believing the cover story for the heavier tyranny being imposed, the danger of that tyranny succeeding is very high.
Solid post. I think you're on to something, and I agree that if significantly more Americans had been mesmerized by the "vax" propaganda and related pro-tyranny mindsets, those of us ignoring or outright protesting the COVID theater, the "vax", and so on would have been targeted for termination in the camps.
Those camps weren't built for anything else, and history shows that outright mass democide is common. Sauce: Death by Government, by R. J. Rummel, and The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (the Foreward is titled The Uses of Atrocity), by a group of left-wing scholars who researched every Communist regime of the 20th century.
I didn't say cancer rates hadn't gone up, just that you don't need a modern diet to get cancer. I can't agree with your claim that keto is "the only diet supported by actual, unbiased science."
The Mediterranean diet has plenty of scientific evidence for its health benefits, as does the typical Japanese diet, to name two examples.
Good point. And cancer has been a bane of mankind (and of other animals, including the dinosaurs) since roughly forever. Plenty of things can make you more likely to get cancer, but even a perfect diet (assuming there is such a thing) wouldn't put you entirely in the clear.
At some point, retail demand for physical gold will overwhelm the fantasy-land paper price. Paper gold (shares in gold ETFs for instance) is easy to turn into fiat, just as the post-1913 dollar (until Nixon ended all pretense that the dollar was gold-backed in '71) was actually fiat despite being advertised as not, even during the period up 'till Roosevelt ended dollar-gold convertability for US citizens and essentially confiscated gold -- because the FED was inflating the currency from Day One, though slowly enough that they got away with it for decades.
The public isn't spooked enough yet, nor educated enough, to stampede to their local coin dealers (and other metal merchants) and start changing their ever-dwindling supply of dollars for precious metals -- at least not in the numbers needed to move the price more than it already has.
That'll change.
It was Xi of China saying "Repeat", and "Repeat" was in reference to Trump saying that the US had just launched "about 57 missiles" at Syria. Trump mentioned Xi's comment because it was the ONLY word of English Trump ever heard him speak.
Xi acts as if he knows no English -- his translator does ALL the speaking for him when talking with English-speakers -- but Trump believes this incident shows that Xi is probably fluent in English.
I remember the round table discussion about HCQ and other early treatment that Trump did -- was probably on OAN or Newsmax or such; I don't recall which channel -- with doctors who had used early treatment successfully and patients who had been treated with HCQ and other interventions.
It was excellent and very persuasive. Trump made a number of statements reminding the public that no vaccine was needed; early treatment and prevention with HCQ, vitamin D, etc greatly reduced risk of getting COVID and almost entirely eliminated the chance of death.
It was all ignored by the mainstream media, other than to insult it briefly and then never mention it again.
We can no longer trust the gov. to ensure safety without transparency.
When could we EVER trust the gov. to ensure our safety? The entire history of the FDA, to name only one example, is filled with examples of corporate profit and convenience taking precedence over human safety and well-being. William Faloon of the Life Extension Foundation has called the FDA "the number one cause of death for American citizens" and written numerous articles on FDA malfeasance, corruption, and incompetence (for instance, Lethal Delays), which includes this:
In 1995 I was given an ultimatum by the FDA.
Either I stop educating Life Extension® readers about lower cost drugs from other countries or I would face criminal charges and years in prison.
I respectfully declined to accept the FDA’s censorship dictate that would deny Life Extension® readers access to lifesaving medications.
It took nine years in court, but Faloon prevailed against the FDA's attempt to shut him down.
What kind of agency tries to imprison someone for providing truthful and sometimes life-saving information to the public?
At this point, the answer is: Any federal agency in America, apparently.
Self-awareness isn't the only possible danger from AI.
Even the earliest electronic computers suffered from coding mistakes; they sometimes did things their programmers did not expect or foresee; they sometimes glitched when hardware problems or unexpected software interactions happend.
During the computer preparations for Y2K, a valve in a gasoline pipeline in a canyon opened at the wrong time, spewed gasoline which eventually ignited, killing (if I recall correctly) two people. We've all experienced stoppages and unexpected problems with computers.
A good many stories have been written or filmed about computers just following their seemingly-benign programming, only to take it to extremes that the programmers did not foresee -- and cause serious problems as a result.
Consciousness or self-awareness are not required for harmful computer action, and the bigger and more entrenched the computer system is, the larger the potential for serious harm.