Electric Newspeak

47
1700
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

It’s curious that an outfit styled the Zero Emissions Transportation Association – more about them here – is advocating for “national policies to enable 100 percent electric sales in the U.S. by 2030.”

Which just happens to be the same date for implementation of the Agenda of the same appellation.

2030 seems to be the convergence point of our corralling; the date when the gate closes for good and we are all wandering around the company feed lot, awaiting our allotted corn and maybe something else, too.

Own nothing, rent everything!

In other words, they will own us.

“For the first time in a generation, transportation is the leading emitter of U.S. carbon emissions,” claims Joe Britton – who is the spokesmouth for the ZETA. “By embracing EVs, federal policymakers can help drive innovation, create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and improve air quality and public health.”

Italics added.

When says embrace he means impose. Hence the need for “national policies” – like those not-asking us to “wear a mask” and to “practice” other forms of Sickness Kabuki, which is all part of Compliance Theater and all part of turning humans into compliant cattle, ready for the feed lot. 

“ZETA’s formation recognizes a pivotal moment for national leadership and reflects the will of the growing clean transportation sector,” he adds.

He means the growing impossibility of not doing otherwise by dint of having to comply with “national policies” that will wax under the regime of “national leadership” – i.e., under the Face Masked Man, who has promised  to cause them to wax should his selection stand.  

This is the “pivotal moment” Britton refers to.

In a remarkable example of NewspeakOrwell’s term for language that must be intuited in accordance with political orthodoxy to comprehend its actual meaning, which shifts according to changing political necessity – Britton adds:

“The group is putting in place the federal policies to support that goal — not mandate it . . . We need consumers, infrastructure and domestic manufacturing to all move in the same direction.”

 

It would be edifying to identify a federal policy that is voluntary. But then, when “consumers, infrastructure and domestic manufacturing” are free to choose they often do not “move in the same direction.”

Hence the need for  . . . policies.

Which, it is true, will not outright require everyone to buy an electric car – or rather, to make rental payments on electric transportation in perpetuity, ownership to be made impossible for most by making it unaffordable though still nominally available. It will just be very difficult – very expensive – to own anything else, in the same way that owning certain firearms isn’t outright forbidden. You can still legally possess them. You just have to pay an enormous sum of money for the necessary permissions.

See how that works?

The “policies” Britton speaks of are already in place and include federal ones requiring new cars to achieve a certain ever-upticking average miles-per-gallon, which can be increased to the point that no car with an engine can meet the requirement. It won’t be against the law to build a car with an engine – rather than an electric motor – that doesn’t meet the MPG minimum. It will just be Bentley-expensive, via “guzzler” and other fines embedded in the car’s price.

It’ll be like the classic ‘80s sci-fi movie, RoboCop, where everyone aspires to own a 6000 SUX but only the very privileged elite – a cohort of government-corporate power – actually does.

Other “policies” will include rendering gasoline exorbitantly expensive via new and heavy taxes, which will “support the goal” of “moving consumers, infrastructure and domestic manufacturing . . . in the same direction.”

Gas will still be available  . . . for those who can afford to pay five, six perhaps ten dollars per gallon.

You’ll still be able to register and plate your non-electric car  . . . provided you pay the requisite fees.

Just like you’ll be allowed to shop and work and transact with your bank, provided you “wear a mask” – and carry a vaccination card.

Britton lets loose some more Newspeak when he speaks of ”correct market signals” – by which he means the government “signaling” the market what it will be required to do. 

Yes, he actually said so. But not by actually saying so. You must intuit to comprehend.     

The “correct signals” will include “federal emissions and performance standards,” by which Britton means regulations that require the manufacture of more “zero emissions” electric cars, which will be favored in myriad ways while non-electrics will be not-favored – thereby discouraging the manufacture of other-than-electric cars  . . . as well as “investments” in “infrastructure and domestic manufacturing.”

He means forcing taxpayers to subsidize “infrastructure and domestic manufacturing,” something they are also already being forced to subsidize but will be forced to subsidize more of, to achieve the feedlot vision of 2030.

The cattle in feedlots having received the “correct market signals,” too.

To make sure the cattle understand them, there is the ZETA Education Fund, funded by interested parties such as Tesla, Rivian and GM, which is in cahoots with Nikola, the maker of the electric big rig that rolls down hills but not up them. The fund will, in the words of Automotive News, “focus on educating the public on (the) environmental and social benefits associated with EVs.”

The chief “benefit” being the end of the ownership society and its replacement by a rental society, which is a controlled society since those who own have control – and when you control nothing they own you.

Say moo!

It’s almost time.

. . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

If you’d like an ear tag – custom made! – just ask and it will be delivered.  

My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!

Share Button

47 COMMENTS

  1. I bought a used CTS-V that is very nice if you don’t like badges and all in black. Manual gearbox that had a fail on the clutch depressed switch immediately.
    There were some good engineers working on the car and then the millenials came along with gadgets. I do like electric windows and don’t care for individual A/C settings. They just had to juice a good car with hundreds of pounds of worthless crud like memory seats and electric doors. Memory seats? Just how many times is a spaz going to drive a car with a manual gearbox? Never is the answer. The rear seat latch is electric. The Emergency brake is some worthless electric latch. The latter tells you what you need to know about the dorks that designed it.
    Lettuce all go to electric, but I will not live that long.

    • I wonder when the road taxes land upon the deserving heads of the EV fanatics. I’ll bet that they will be outraged that the gasoline folks aren’t giving them a free ride. They will piss and moan that the tax subsidies are not good enough.

      • Another thing with electronic gages, there is no oil pressure showing. It must be tough for the affirmative action gals to copy a 1956 Studebaker Hawk instrument panel. Besides, they looked a lot nicer than leather coated plastic.

          • Hi Erie,

            One of the many appealing things about ’70s Trans-Ams is the engine-turned dashboard trim! These cars are blessed, in my opinion, with one of the best-looking interiors ever put into a car.

            • There is a difference between real engine turned dash and plastique appliques.
              Another question. It is depressing to get reviews on cars that I would dislike. Sometime soon you will review a strippo two seater that has a dog net in the right seat as a seatbelt thingy in the case one hits a deer; you get the idea. No A/C as the dog and myself do not need it, but a good heater when we do. Setters do not care at all when their ears flap in the wind. It is all about taking in the varied scents when driving through red areas.
              Yeah I know, the goomint outlawed any fun.

              ]

        • Erle, I had mid 60s Studebakers as my first 2 cars. Still love to see them on the road. Full gauge sets on even the cheapest Stude.

          • joeallen, I went to DMV in rotten Madison but came out somewhat happy. By random chance I got ED 1963 for a plate. Only one letter off for my 1963 GT hawk. At that time one could still get all of the sheetmetal for them for super cheap if you went to South Bend. Heck, a new engine was cheap. I still have a new in crate engine for a Champion that by brother bought for 110.00
            First one was a Lark coupe with a Paxton supercharger with a bad rod. It still would burn the bald snowtires. Nice enough car if it wasn’t stolen by the joggers and ruined.

  2. Its looking strange how different policies are all converging around that 2030 date. Just today our dear PM in Britain banned the sale of petrol cars out of the blue from 2030…. What I find surprising is how there seems to be some form of co-ordination happening behind the scene in the western countries. That build back better slogan popping up everywhere – the dems in the US – the ruling conservatives here in the UK, despite one being a so called left wing party and the other officially being a right wing party. Even PM Bieber of Canada was saying it some months ago (and I dont even know what he is)…. things are starting to look grim…

  3. A major news source has informed its readers that General Motors is recalling over 50,000 Chevy Bolts that can “Catch Fire When Charged To Nearly Full Capacity”. Am I permitted to offer these eco-idiots a free bag…NO…make that a case…of marshmallows?

    • I wonder how they’re doing it. Those battery packs are series/parallel networks of cells. If they’re just shoving charge at one end, i would reason that they are just shoving electrons in one end and allowing the charge to propagate through until the battery is filled to maximum potential. With a big and complex assembly like this you should be able to charge a bank at a time, in more systematic fashion, and potentially cut more time off this. Of course, the charge rate of a cell is ultimately limited by physics.

      So I’m sure they can improve on the rapid charge somewhat- unless they are already doing this. I have no idea if they are.

      BUT, there is nowhere the grid charging capacity to support this on any kind of scale. If you’re planning on forcing wind and solar power, that capacity is going to decrease because there is simply not enough energy density to maintain a modern and increasing civilization on wind and solar and there never will be.

      Also, if you’re an electric car fan, please mull over the idea that when power is needed for hospitals, or heat in city hall, your smart meter is going to put your charging in last place.

  4. 100% electric transportation is easily achievable within the New World Order-Agenda 2030-Great reset paradigm. Dictates 1 and 10 from the Georgia guidestones are the most telling:
    1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
    And
    10. Be not a cancer on the Earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.

    I read these as concentrate the few survivors of the global democide into cities and fence off the protected green spaces.

    Just like hunger games… Or your local parks that prohibit or shame people from walking off the designated paths. Or using wheeled vehicles including bicycles because “it damages the environment.”

    Newsflash green idiots- if we didn’t constantly beat back the jungle nearly everything we’ve built would be consumed by nature in a generation. If you want to save the planet go kill yourself in some sustainable fashion.

  5. 2030 is a nice date. Most everyone who’s advocating this crap will be dead by then.

    We’re still waiting for the “infrastructure” piece. Oh sure there are charging stations popping up here and there, but what about all that electricity that has to be generated to replace gasoline? Where are all the new transmission lines, generating stations, beefed up switchyards, “environmentally friendly” transformers, and yes, charging stations at scale? Where’s all that real estate going to come from? And even more real estate will be necessary if you want to attempt to do this with solar and wind.

    One idea might be to convert parking meters to charging stations. That would require ripping up the roads and sidewalks for months at a time, installing thousands of charging stations, creating the payment infrastructure (it won’t be a few quarters to charge, and you probably wouldn’t want to permit people to park without charging. And of course the cities aren’t going to allow just anyone to install a sidewalk charging station, they’d have to bid out for an exclusive contract, basically killing any chance for market forces. But at least the mayor’s kids and other crony capitalists will be able to secure a good income stream. And better be careful where those charging stations go, because the “unhoused” populations will tap into them for free electricity and Internet, while the more artistic types will personalize the chargers with their icons.

    • Hi RK,

      I’m not a “sparky” so hip me if I’m wrong about this but my understanding is that fast-charging EVs is not like having multiple IC cars filling up their tanks at once. The latter requires no geometric or exponential increase in the underlying capacity of the “system” to dispense fuel at the same fast rate into say eight cars at the pumps at once – but the former does require it.

      Put another way: It’s one thing to “fast” charge a single EV – but something else to charge eight of them at the same time.

      • Refueling a lot of vehicles at once actually does load down the pumps, as anyone who’s ever filled up at Sheetz after work on payday can attest. But there’s a pretty big difference between waiting a few extra seconds for the pump to deliver than the under voltage situation that will probably happen if there’s a big demand load on the electrical grid. Especially since the gas delivery system is separate and basically isolated from the electrical delivery grid (aside from electrically powered pumps). Gasoline has lots of buffered storage by design. The electric grid has very little to none because it is cost-prohibitive to store electricity, so electricity is created at the time of consumption. The idea of grid-level storage isn’t going to help either because ideally you’ll need to put the storage at the point of consumption to do the most good, much like having tank storage at the filling station. So now you’re back to the real estate problem and putting batteries everywhere.

        • Neglecting for break-downs neither system is designed for anything other than just in time delivery of energy.

          Gasoline isn’t stored in large volumes. Your local station has a couple of days supply but its refined more or less just in time and there’s not necessarily months of general purpose crude supply just sitting.

          The strategic petroleum reserve is about 640 million barrels as of 11/13/2020 (about 50/50 sweet vs sour crude) but it’s moved in and out by pumping (electricity!) water in and out. We use about 21 million barrels per day in the U.S. so the SPR is more about economic buffering than consumption buffering. We’d use the SPR in a month if all drilling stopped.

          A generating station is making power on demand but that’s how it has to work. The buffering is how much coal they have stored and how much hydroelectric or natural gas they have in reserve. The drive to eliminate coal is really what’s hurting us since that’s the predicable, base load generation.

    • The electric push / renewable energy push is a huge con. Even if you can work out charge and recharge issues on electric vehicles (and that’s a big IF that I wouldn’t hold my breath for). Once everyone’s forced onto the electric grid for everything including transportation, there won’t be nearly enough capacity for all our needs and I believe that’s by design – to leave us in the dark. It’s impossible to produce enough energy via renewables, and the SJW”s have all but ensured the death of nuclear power which is the only clean option that can properly satisfy our power capacity needs.

      • Natural gas powerplants are another clean option, and it’s better than nuclear. It’s not only clean; it’s cheaper, less dangerous, more reliable, and quicker to build a NG plant. Where a nuke plant takes decades to build, a NG plant can be build far more quickly; in fact, old coal plants can be changed over. A NG plant, if built from scratch, costs a $ billion; nukes cost tens of billions, and wouldn’t be built if not for gov’t subsidies. Finally, NG plants don’t leave nasty, long lasting radioactive waste in their wake.

        I grew up near the Oyster Creek nuclear plant in NJ. That sucker was ALWAYS shut down! Every time I turned around, OC was shut down for this or that. I wondered as a teenager if the damn thing ever served its purpose, i.e. generate electricity! NG plants offer more reliability than nukes. People rightly slam renewables for being unreliable; after all, the sun doesn’t always shine, nor does the wind always blow. Well, Oyster Creek wasn’t much more reliable than windmills or solar farms. Nukes are flat out unreliable.

        In closing, nukes aren’t a solution; natural gas is. Nukes are expensive, time consuming to build, unreliable, and dangerous. Even if a nuke plant doesn’t have an accident, there’s still the thorny problem of disposing of all that RADIOACTIVE WASTE! Why spend tens of billions on something dangerous, dirty, and unreliable when one can have cheap, plentiful, clean burning, and reliable natural gas?

        • I like the idea of natural gas but I wonder why we haven’t converted more plants to it. Here in IL, two thirds of our power is said to come from nuclear so the idea of getting rid of that has me shaking in my boots. I don’t know what’s worse, blackouts or the radioactive waste.

        • Mark, if we rely on 1950’s technology enforced by government, most of what you say is true.

          Having said that, technically, you can put up a modern safe nuclear plant in less than a year. You can make them portable/mobile, just like a natural gas plant. A coal plant takes longer because of the infrastructure and the bulk of the inputs, but most of the time and the cost comes from government meddling encouraged and enabled by shortsighted voters.

          The old generation of nuclear reactors are all based on GE designs from the 1950’s which are pretty good and produce electricity almost “too cheap to meter”, but in the intervening 70 years we’ve learned a few things about nuclear physics and automation. They rely on incoming power, they pump water to keep cool, their design allows meltdown to be possible.

          Three mile island, for all the hype, hasn’t been proven to cause any deaths. There was a major meltdown, which did happen, but it was contained and a small amount of radioactive gas was vented.

          Chernobyl was a different matter- they were trying to run it outside operational parameters to make weapons grade fissionables. The Soviet reactor had fuel rods and graphite moderators in a “swimming pool” without a containment vessel (the dome). They let it get away, induced a small runaway fission reaction (not a bomb, but a high energy hot spot) which caught the graphite on fire and couldn’t be put out. They did everything wrong, as communists will, and created an environmental catastrophe. And yet, to date, there are still very few documented deaths from it.

          It is also worth noting that under communism, there were lots of equally awful ecological catastrophes, from the soy based plastics in the cars being toxic and not recyclable, to the nerve agent stockpiles and most industry sacrificing everything to the central planning quotas.

          Look up modular pebble bed reactor and thorium reactor for a better idea of what is possible now.

          Radioactive waste is a function of government rules- low level stuff is rubber gloves, broken tools, protective equipment, etc. which is minimally dangerous. That is to say NOT dangerous and could be cleaned up and reprocessed.

          High level waste like spent uranium makes a dandy weapon (/s). It should probably be avoided, but it also can be handled. That does not mean dumping it underground or undersea where we can’t see it like the government does now. And you’re right- storing it on site in pools is crazy which is how we get stuff like Fukushima, another GE design.

          Natural gas is great, but if you want to try to maintain modern industrial society on it you’re also going to run into supply constraints and someone is going to complain that it pollutes- CO2 and water vapor if nothing else.

          Nuclear power is the only future for advanced civilization. The potential energy is orders of magnitude more dense than any alternative. Natural fuels are great, hydrocarbons ranging from heavy oil to natural gas are going to remain vital forever. If we somehow run out they can be synthesized by using energy from- nuclear power- to continue to fill society’s needs.

          • We’ve seen government and corporations screw-up literally everything they touch- whether through incompetence, corruption, the inefficiency of bureaucracy, the interfernece of ulterior agendas, ad-infinitum…and you guys want them playing with freaking nukes?!

            • Nunz, I want government to not monopolize the “nuke” business. Or the medicine business or the defense business. I want government to mind its’ own business which is strictly circumscribed by law and zealous private enforcement.

              If my nuke plant leaks on your lawn and I refuse to make it right, then you have the right to round up your neighbors in a government and come and make it right.

          • Ernie,

            If the new nuclear tech was so great, then it already would’ve been adopted. As is the case with batteries, we keep HEARING about Thorium reactors and other gee whiz nuclear tech, but it still hasn’t displaced the boiling water and pressurized water reactors that have been in use. Also telling is that the Navy hasn’t adopted the new tech, either, and they have the best track and safety record using nuclear power! Say what you want, but the US Navy knows what it’s doing with nuclear power. If this new tech were so wonderful, WHY havne’t they changed over to it? Wouldn’t a war fighting organization have the greatest incentive to use the best technology, as it does more to advance its mission?

            BTW, Oyster Creek was a GE Mark I, the same reactor design as used in Fukushima.

            How will we have supply constraints with NG? We have CENTURIES worth of it; we’ll never run out of it! It’s easier, cheaper, and safer to transport, as it can be brought in via pipeline; pipelines are the safest transportation method, bar none. That solves the bulk problems with coal; there’s no need to run three or four 120 car freight trains worth of coal to the power plant. I used to live about an hour away from a coal plant, and I lived near the train tracks that brought the coal to the plant; we’d see at least three 120 car unit trains (all coal hoppers) feeding that beast. BTW, coal plants have been converted to NG; it was done with a local powerplant that used to be coal fired.

            Again, there is the waste, and I’m not talking about just the stuff on site, either. The waste on site is eventually removed for storage. That begs the question: where are you going to PUT it? No one wants a nuclear waste dump near them! Also, much of the waste produced by nuclear plants, with the materials’ long half lives, will be with us hundreds or even thousands of years! Gee, do I want a little carbon and water vapor, or do I want lethal waste products that’ll be with us for eternity?!

            For our power needs, NG is the best bet. It’s cheaper and quicker to build a plant. The fuel is cheaper, not to mention safer. Can a nuke plant (with the gee whiz tech you talk about) be built in a year? Yes. Is it likely to be done any time soon, even if OM stays in? No. NG is safer, as it leaves no long lasting, dangerous nuclear waste. NG is more reliable; at least it won’t be shut down all the time! Again, I go back to Oyster Creek; when I was growing up, it was often shut down. Just on reliability alone, nuclear doesn’t make the grade! NG is cheaper, cleaner, safer, and more reliable. When it comes to power generation, reliability is eveyrthing. Renewables don’t have it, and neither does nuclear power. For all our generation needs, NG wins hands down!

        • In the 60s and 70s the nuclear wastes were easy to get rid of. Liquefy the wastes, then crack open the tanker valves as the rig goes down the highway. After a few hundred miles, the tanker was empty and the waste problem was solved.

    • According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the average U.S household uses 914 kilowatt hours per month.

      Now consider an EV that consumes 30 kWh per 100 miles. If you drive 1,000 miles per month, that’s 300 kWh per month … or a one-third hike in your electric bill.

      It’s obvious why electric utilities joined ZETA. Selling electricity is a no-growth business. But if utilities can grab market share with mandates, suddenly the ‘market’ is one-third bigger.

      I respect businesses that compete for a living. By contrast, hidebound monopolies that enlist government goons to conscript ‘customers’ at gunpoint deserve our withering contempt and relentless abuse.

      • Power companies can’t ignore the gubbermint as they’d regulate them out of business if they do nothing. And as bad as all the limited competition and local monopolies for power are it’s still better than having outright socialist utilities. The desire to make even some meager profit outweighs in the end. If a power plant fails a private power company makes zero profit so there’s some desire to keep it working. When’s the last time the DMV did anything effectively?

        In an honest market EVs might even have a legitimate application and I bet the free market solution would see utilities join with car companies. Since a whole lot of cars are used for commuting shuffling some of the energy supply from oil companies to electricity would create capital opportunities to pay for upgrades and new generation, which the grid needs badly anyway. A utility competing with an oil company is still competition and a pretty major growth opportunity.

        However at this point the corporatist market distortions are too deeply entrenched for anything other than nationalization and eventual collapse from greed and mismanagement. But as the grid hiccups and sputters eventually everything’s going to fall. Can’t pump oil, move it around the world and refine it without reliable power so ignoring the reality of a fragile grid isn’t a plan.

      • 300kWhrs * 20 cents/kWhr=$60/month to run an electric car. 1000 miles/30mpg= 33.3 gallons/month. 33.3 gallons *$5/gallon coming under a communist regime is $166.50/month.

        Apparently I’d better run right out and buy a new Nissan Leaf with $484/month payments or maybe a Tesla model 3 with $966/month to save that $106.50/month.

        Of course there is no way that the price of electricity will stay as low as 20 cents/kWhr, and that rate will also apply to my housing utilities.

        But we have to save the planet! (/s)

        • With a 50 mpg hybrid at $2 a gallon that is 20 gallons and $40 a month for that 1000 miles. Every hour you waste at the “fast” charger probably several times a road trip is time in your vacation you don’t get back. Time is money. In a free market electric cars are a lose lose. You pay more now and pay more in the future.

  6. Thanks, Eric, for the heads up about ZETA.

    ZETA’s ‘About’ page lists 28 corporate members. Besides EV and electrical equipment makers, six electric utilities are on the list.

    Though my brain-dead power monopoly isn’t on the list, one which serves a nearby area of the state is.

    Time to fire off letters to their regulator, with copies to local state legislators, outing this utility’s extremist green agenda.

    State legislators from my rural district are staunch 2nd Amendment Republicans. Probably they haven’t heard of ZETA. When they learn that one of our public utilities is self-servingly peddling an enforced-EV agenda, chances are it won’t go over well.

    Every day is a good day to monkey-wrench a green totalitarian.

  7. Many of us have been hollering for years on deaf ears that we were watching a turn key totalitarian police state being erected all around us on all fronts. Well, the key has been turned.

    Pro tip: Leave your personal tracking devices at the house next week if you travel to see others. The reasons should be evident to all.

    It feels like we are holding back the tide, Eric. We must stay strong for one another. Thanks for doing that.

    • Uncle loves you. That’s why he’s so interested in your whereabouts. He only wants what’s best for your safety. If he could he’d put you in a cardboard box with a blankie and 20 Watt light bulb to keep you warm. Lockdowns are Love.
      (blech)

  8. Indeed, it’s astounding, if you are somehow unaware of how the Psychopaths In Charge operate, that never, ever, are the true motives admitted. Always a fairy tale about how it’s for our own good. Never the truth that they mean to enslave you, pure and simple. I’m beginning to think that the only thing that can stop this male bovine fecal matter is the economic collapse of their ability to enact and enforce it. Part of which the intentional destruction of our economy will play a part in. Once one’s livelihood is destroyed, one has less incentive to kneel, since one has nothing to lose. Which self inflicted wound they may be about to suffer.
    It’s a numbers game:
    Tyrants don’t create tyranny, submission does.
    Masters don’t create slavery, slaves do.

    • An economic collapse is coming alright- but just for us– not for the ones who create fiat currency out of thin air, and who control armies. Just like during the Great Depression…..it was the people who were reduced to poverty and dependence on the government, who had the ‘resources’ to apportion-out to the compliant supplicants, which allowed FDR to transform this country into a totally controlled communistic state. That was just the dry-run for what is about to happen now.

      Wealth does not just vanish into thin air….it just gets transferred to someone else.

      • I think there are significant numbers that won’t take such lying down as they did in the 1930s. We won’t take the blame for it like our grandfathers did. They suffered enormous guilt for something that wasn’t their fault. After all, if you get hungry enough, the Psychopaths In Charge are edible. Be sure to cook them well done, to kill off those pesky human infections.

        Wealth can vanish. Natural disaster for example. If a storm blows down your house, that wealth is gone. Lord knows there are abundant forces in play that ARE destroying wealth, but you’re right, the 0.1% won’t go hungry. Unless of course vendors refuse to sell to them. I don’t think this collapse will look anything like the Great Depression. The wiser among us are more aware of what’s going on.

LEAVE A REPLY