Copied and pasted a long thread about the 2020s (part 2)
I have found a very interesting thread in a forum, I decided to copy and paste all the comments that the author of the post had made. The author posted this in 2019, the author also posted another in the past in 2018 about the same subject. But this will be about the 2019 post (part 2) I won't be sharing the link to the website because I want to protect the identity of the users since it is a mental health forum. But here is the link to part 1: https://www.reddit.com/The2020s/comments/dzpb6l/copied_and_pasted_a_long_thread_about_the_2020s/ --------------- Here we are! Today it is the year 2019, the near end of the 2010s.The 2010s was an interesting decade to say the least, internet use continued to spread like wildfire worldwide with more and more people becoming dependent on the internet. When I was a kid in the 2000s I felt like the odd one out because I was addicted to the desktop and I didn't know many other people who were addicted to computers, but today in the 2010s this seems like the new normal except now most people are carrying desktops in their own pockets (cellphones). In the 2000s politics was very moderate and there was much less polarization, now polarization is pretty much a growing trend with many people sharing very strong political believes on the internet. The internet became a political tool and metaphorically a source of political fuel in the 2010s, everyone can now share their believes on the internet and inspire a new group of followers, something that the world didn't have or realized it had until the 2010s and we are still getting used to this. In 2010 there were 6.9 billion people and 1.9 billion internet users, in 2019 there are about 7.8 billion people and about 4.5 billion internet users. Which means that internet use has increased by 237% while the world population has increased by at least 12%.By 2030 the world population is expected to reach 8.5 billion people and more than 7.5 billion people are expected to be internet users, that could very well be 90% of the worlds population. This means that the internet will truly begin to take over the world during the 2020s, it will continue to make big changes on how we will live and how we will communicate, it may become almost impossible to live in the western world without being online. Climate change is a big issue, in 2010 the global average temperature was 0.62 Celsius above 20th century average, in 2018 it was 0.79 Celsius above 20th century average. The 2018 temperatures may not seem like much but everyone who is informed about the summer of 2018 will agree that it was a very hot year, so hot that record wildfires within the arctic circle happened.By 2030 we could potentially reach 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming since pre-industrial times, again the number does not seem much but the consequences are huge. Mudslides from melting soil will turn mountains in death zones, lower food harvests and nutritional value will increase risks of starvation, loss of fresh water will result in wars over water, the Maldives will be flooded as well as Bangladesh which will cause huge mass migrations, the ice will melt even faster which are increasing sea levels, you get the idea.In the 2020s global warming will become a much bigger problem, but there is no guarantee that enough will be done to cut emissions. Developing countries such as India want nothing more than to have the same quality of life as the western world does, not much can be done to dissuade India until the country suffers greatly from global warming and the potential for growth seems impossible. As long as developing countries believe that growth is possible they will contribute massively to global emissions just as soon as the developed world begin to cut their emissions, and worse yet developing countries often have very high populations which will contribute to global warming even more than it could have done. In the 2020s there will be a new global superpower which would be decided by 2030, it is unlikely that America will remain the superpower due to its stagnant economy and the potential loss of trade partners in the near future. The most likely contenders for being the next global superpower is Russia and China, this struggle for power could potentially trigger a 2nd cold war. Global relations will change, there has been a growing loss of trust in the 2010s between nations and that trend will continue to escalate during the 2020s while new crises emerge.This loss of trust could result in balkanization in some parts of the world, particularly in ethnically diverse countries such as Papua New Guinea and Tanzania. Countries will begin to do their own thing and ignore international agreements as trust disintegrates, the Paris Agreement and the United Nations might be abandoned in the 2020s.To put it shortly, the world power will likely shift from Anglo-America to Asio-China/Russia, international co-operation and aid may regress into nationalistic autonomy, and from democracy to populism. Technologically, most breakthroughs will be related to the huge spread of the internet in some way, in other words most technological advances will be adaptations to the way we live with the internet and learning the full capability and power of it. 5g will be adopted reluctantly due to health concerns, but it will be adopted anyway at some point in the 2020s quickly and this will cause even more dramatic changes within our society. If you think our world has changed drastically so far just wait until 5g comes! By 2030 we could have fridges that are connected to the internet, many other inanimate objects would also be connected to the internet and whatever information is processed will be used to benefit companies as well as sniffing out bad behavior. Because of 5g, the 2020s may be the last decade when privacy is possible in society. Lastly, I am going to talk about generations and their role in the 2020s. Pretty much all Baby Boomers are going to retire in this decade to have their previous role as leaders replaced by Gen X, Gen Y will all be adults and will be trying to make big changes in the world, Gen Z will begin to grow into adults, there will be a new generation in the 2020s (generation beta). What do you think will happen in the 2020s? Very keen to read your thoughts about this topic!Have a good day. ------------------------- reply to user: Honestly I will never be able to answer with confidence about Brexit! I think many people in the parliament don't seem to know what to do, I think most likely Brexit will be on hold until the EU itself fails. Today the EU is already struggling to survive.How will the EU fail? When its financial situation gives European nations the incentive to leave so they can grow their economies by themselves without restrictions, the Syrian refugee crisis (5 million people) destabilized the EU to its core and it was the refugee crisis that started Brexit in the first place.Imagine what would happen to global politics if 20 million migrants went into Europe, it would certainly change a lot of things. reply to user:Religion could make a comeback in the 2020s, particularly in a scenario where climate change pushes people to turn to religion for comfort. Islam is on a sharp rise due to the fact that they have a lot of children, it will also become the biggest religion in the world in the near future, at that point most people on Earth will be Muslim.I think ISIS largely happened because of food shortages in Syria which resulted in civil war, if a similar thing happened in another vulnerable Muslim country then you can expect another wave of suicidal radicals wrecking havoc and forming another radical group.I have once predicted a similar uprising in North Africa resulting in a mass Christian migration into Europe, the number of Christian migrants could exceed 20 million. ----------------------- reply to user: Yeah the idea of the European Union has been a flawed and overly ambitious project right from the start, Europe is quite a divided continent with many countries having a strong sense of identity, trying to make Europe into one country will inevitably backfire. Without much doubt the EU will collapse, however it will live on under a different name by one or a few countries that still cling onto the vision.After EU falls there is a chance that a few more so-called unions may form, these unions may be alliances that share the same political views which could result in a polarization.Germany had a good shot at attempting to rule Europe again though, we tried it and probably won't do it again for a while. ----------------------- reply to user: Funny enough I have just very recently found out that the UK is going to have another general election, so far at the moment it looks like Labour is doing well with public approval, it is a likely possibility that Jeremy Corbyn may become the next prime minister.If Jeremy Corbyn becomes the next prime minister that would mean that Brexit will be cancelled, this could cause major polarization and unrest if there are still people who really want Brexit. Who knows what would happen if the majority of pro-Brexiteers protest in the streets because they didn't get what was promised to them? A British revolution is another real possibility. reply to user:Predicting elections will always be difficult for me because of how uncertain and at times random they all are, who would of thought that Trump would win in 2016? Would Trump win again in 2020? I mean it sounds crazy but if it happened in 2016 then it can certainly happen again in 2020. Although I do think that Trump has less of a chance of winning in 2020.A good thing to take note of is when Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement much of America didn't follow suite, there are many American companies who still follow the Paris Agreement guidelines because they don't agree with Trump, there are many Americans who have not been implementing Trumps policies.Elections can never be predicted with 100% confidence, but Trump is more likely to lose in 2020 than 2016. ------------------------------- Thank you all for your replies, they have been smart and intuitive contributions. :-D Last night I just began researching about the 1920s out of interest (I think I might have mentioned the 1920s in the old 2020s thread). I have just started learning about the 1920s so there is a lot that I don't know about it but there are a few themes that resonates with today trends, which I will mention below.And because I am not well informed about the 1920s the below information would be hypothetical and open to speculation. The 1920s was an economically prosperous time for the Western World, but the economic prosperity abruptly ended with the Stock Market Crash in 1929 and resulted in the Great Depression in the 1930s. A very similar situation is happening today but is happening much slower and at the moment is less severe, the Stock Market Crash in 2007-2008 resulted in an economic crawl that is still persisting to this day. I have a feeling however that the full effect of the 2007-2008 economic crisis is yet to be felt in full force. Political movements such as Socialism and Fascism were on the rise in the 1920s-1930s partly because of the economic situation, those parties believed that capitalism is out of control and needs intervention to prevent the degeneration of society. The term supercapitalism was created by Fascists, it pretty much means a degenerated form of capitalism that is doing more harm than good to society. The blame of the 1929 Stock Market Crash was placed on Capitalism by both Socialists and Fascists, anti-capitalism exploded in the 1930s which resulted in far-left/far-right nations fighting one another by the end of that decade. Lets say that the next Great Depression is to start in the early 2020s, we already have a lot of young people who have a favorable view on Socialism, on some level there are many people who are blaming Capitalism for the economic crisis. Nations have already been polarizing in the 2010s, so what would happen if we enter the next Great Depression and then a massive surge of Socialism/Fascism happens straight after? The world would be in a very similar situation as the world in pre-WWII. If the 2020s Great Depression happens then Capitalism in the Western World could end, the more young people has power over America the more likely that the nation will transition into a Socialist state. Kinda ironic because in the 20th century Anglo-America fought against Socialist Russia and in the end capitalism unexpectantly won as the leading world policy, but in the 2020s Russia may abandon their socialist past and turn to capitalism as they take advantage of the new resources revealed by global warming, just as Anglo-America turns Socialist Asio-Russia will turn Capitalist (I'm not sure about China, but I'm pretty sure that India is taking the capitalist route too). The Arctic will melt a lot during the 2020s, Russia may likely claim most of the new oil reserves which will cause worldwide tension as oil will be running out, America will be stuck with the last remaining reserves of oil in Alaska and Canada which may result in poor relations between Canada and America, eventually China may have most of the oil reserves in the Middle East because I believe that the Middle East will turn to China for economic interests as America begins to lose its grip on the region. Nothing is forever, everything changes.To those who fear for the future of America I just want to say this, even if America loses influence on the world America will still cling onto their core values in their own home and I can't see America giving up on the American dream, I think that the American dream is redefined by each of its passing generations. ------------------------------ This is probably the last comment I will post in this thread so I'll be sure to write out anything else I can predict or think about the 2020s, again I may be repeating things but at this point its hard to avoid because I posted quite alot about the 2020s at this point. I definitely agree with :user: that if WW3 were to happen in the 2020s it would be similar to how WW1 started, everything was fine then suddenly everything wasn't and the world fell into further chaos resulting in a world war. Currently I believe that the 2020s will start off with a cautious optimism, the decade where Gen X and Gen Y fully realises that the world is in their hands and they will bring about changes. If I could name a main theme of the end of the 2010s I would say 'youth in protest'. A growing number of young people believe that civilization won't be there when they grow up, they see no point in taking part in a society that they believe will inevitably fail due to climate change. In the 2020s the 'youth in protest' will grow to such a degree that societal values of the 20th century will be rendered obsolete. But where does the cautious optimism comes in? I believe the optimism is the result of hope of a better future as the youth wields more power to make changes. We will likely see a big wave of new famous Gen Z's and who knows what they could contribute to this world? Today(Nov,2019) we can all sense that things are changing but what if the changes of the 2010s are volcanic rumbles compared to the eruption of the 2020s? The 2020s will likely be a social and societal fragmentation, the crossroads of a post-consumerist world. Baby Boomers are largely responsible for the world we live in today, very soon Baby Boomers will lose their power over the world and that power will be passed onto the younger generations who have different values. Most Baby Boomers favor capitalism, a growing number of younger generations favor socialism. Conspiracy theories are a growing trend, due to the upheaval of technology it has become easier to believe in conspiracy theories because what was crazy 10 years ago seems feasible today. I think if everyone starts to believe in conspiracy theories then a lack of trust would become so hard to overcome that the government would have no choice but to allow a degree of autonomy. Allowing autonomy would cause more and more lands to demand independence, most of them will be city states like Hong Kong or Singapore. I can't think of anything else, going to conclude it here.The 2020s would either be the beginning of a new era or a long-winded dying of the present post-consumerist era. The Baby Boomers will recline on their chairs and leave the whole world to Gen X and Y, Gen Z will become adults. I haven't mentioned robots but they will begin to take some of our jobs, which can possibly trigger a neo-luddite movement. WW3 hopefully won't happen, a 2nd Cold War is more likely to happen though. Hopefully there won't be an epidemic like the Spanish flu, in this case it will most likely evolve from a strain of bird flu. Climate change will trigger protests and changes, some fear that its already too late to stop global warming. Thank you for reading, lets make the 2020s as good of a decade as possible. ---------------------------------- reply to user: Yeah I've been getting a growing sense that a British Civil War might happen, last year I could not see a civil war happening but now it seems like a real possibility, today it is easy to figure out why it would happen. I bet not many people in the 17th century civil war wanted it to happen and didn't think that it would happen but you can learn what ended up happening, Charles I got beheaded and maybe Boris Johnson might meet a similar fate.Not a certainty, I can never be certain but its something worth worrying and preparing for. In the 2020s, I think the U.A.E is a possible candidate for a world power and I can see them cutting deals from America and making deals with China instead 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend.'. Imagine if America-UK runs out of energy and oil resources, in this scenario it is likely that U.A.E+China+Russia will own all the remaining deposits by then and we may have no choice but to give up a degree of independence in exchange for some of their oil and energy.Another scenario is the race for the last of the remaining resources that our society still largely depends on, the nation that has the most resources will have the most power and nations that lack those resources will form alliances with them for resources in return.We may possibly see the first super-corporations being established, a very large and powerful corporation that may be the true power behind everything and maybe even more powerful than political figureheads.Those super-corporations may become independent nations that have their own goals and projects, mostly they involve technologies for either saving our eco-systems or to control us. I have once thought about the year 2075, I imagined a huge city (at that time many countries collapsed, civilization largely being left with city-states ran by trillionaires) the city uses mind control technology to maintain order, the A.I is used to help the elites figure out the next best course of action, human clones are used for labor and war, everyone is constantly being watched due to surveillance that will be almost everywhere.The 2020s will be the start of the new world that future generations will recognized as the true 21st century, 2000-2030 will be seen as a transitional period. ------------------------ We are only 2 days away from the 2020s, I am going to post about the decade predictions to avoid the regret of not posting it before the 2010s ends. I will have a bit of closure about my 2020s threads now that I'm doing this for the last time, I might be a bit risky and do my best to make a scenario story for fun even though about half of it will be inaccurate haha, since accurately predicting the future is like trying to fly without wings. But still, some of the predictions I have thought about have already come true even before the 2020s has started, which makes it clear that the world is changing faster than we thought and will continue to increase the throttle. There is already some tension between America and China over trade, at the moment as I write this they have agreed to a truce after a trade war that not many knew about but there is tension and might escalate in the near future, if America attacks another nation again then half of the world will turn against America and will cut all trade-ties with it which would cause America to descend into chaos. In short, America could get sanctioned but other nations will be at risk of being sanctioned if they commit any future acts of aggression. There would likely be more riots and terrorism, there will likely be a much worse refugee crisis caused both by climate change and acts of aggression by ISIS or a nation. There could be more online communities that provide a source of humanitarian relief and charity, some online communities will run on bitcoin(or other forms of cryptocurrency) so that they can afford more resources to help people with.I have once predicted that there will be a mass migration of Christians from North Africa due to Islamic radicalism, well as of 2019 there already are Christians in Nigeria (North Africa!) being beheaded by ISIS so a mass migration from North Africa is very possible, in fact the whole Arab Spring and its neighbors could produce masses of migrants due to the continuous descent into chaos. Out of all the Muslim nations Turkey-Saudi Arabia-Iran-U.A.E appear to be the most stable while others are highly vulnerable, I have a good feeling about U.A.E solely because it has many long-term goals to ensure economic security so I can see them having a good influence on Iran and Saudi Arabia, U.A.E will likely make trade deals with China and China could offer U.A.E military protection thus protecting the U.A.E from Saudi Arabia and Iran since the risk of a war going on in the Persian Gulf is high.Dubai will become a more important city and will become a cultural as well as scientific center, much of its workforce would likely be desperate people from South Asia looking for work. If a new superpower enters world-stage then the West could face sanctions for acts of war against the Arab Spring, especially if the new power is disapproving towards the West, if the West is sanctioned then it will enter a long-term economic depression and could be forced to house refugees.Populism will spread as more people feel like they are living through a crisis, populist candidates appeal to people by presenting themselves as the solution to their crisis. Populism has been on the rise in the 2010s and many people believe that most populist movements have been right-wing, the most common theme of 2010s-populism are anti-immigration and America/Britain first, those populist movements have resulted in Brexit and Donald Trumps presidency.If populism continues to spread in the 2020s then we will see more and more nations implementing anti-emigration policies and we will see them turn away from globalization as they retreat into the concerns of their own nation. The European Union will decay due to countries leaving, the United Nations too will decay as countries start to defy and leave so they can do their own thing, globalization is at a big risk in the 2020s. Largely due to technology more and more people will begin to lose their jobs, and more people will lose their homes to man-made disasters. Self-driving cars will begin to render Uber Drivers and Taxi drivers obsolete, mass-production is becoming more automatic so more people who work in mass-production will lose their jobs, self-checkout machines in shops will continue to slowly render retailers obsolete. Newspapers are dead, and soon TV will be.Nations will be able to provide more resources with robots but there will be less consumers since not many people would be able to afford to buy many things, this would cause a worldwide economic crisis and we are overdue for a 1920s-style economic crash.What will the government do with all those homeless and unemployed people? Universal income will be the most likely solution but it is highly unlikely that many people would live comfortably since they will have to work very hard to survive and you'd have to be very lucky to get a job, in turn people will begin to reject the government and the system, some (hopefully many) people could turn to online communities to support one another and due to the failing economy will turn to cryptocurrency which they use to support themselves. The Sagrada Familia will finally be complete, I think it would be nice to make the wonder of Sagrada Familia the icon of the 2020s. Other projects will be completed as well such as The London Super Sewer, The Giant Magellan Telescope, The Square Kilometer Array radio telescope, a few big bridges (and a tunnel for boats in Norway) and a few new railways here and there. There will be at least a few major space achievements thanks to Elon Musk and some privatized science projects will offer few more major breakthroughs in science, the first manned mission to Mars is scheduled in the 2020s but its chance for success is low due to the many risks and dangers, space junk will become a much bigger problem and will need to be cleaned up before we will never be able to leave the Earth. The mission to Mars would likely be re-scheduled or postponed. 3D printing is expected to enter mainstream which in itself will change many things, 3D printing could even render some shops obsolete because you could print whatever stuff you want at home instead of going to a shop looking for what you want, a creator sub-culture may develop from 3D printing enthusiasts.Vertical farms are expected to be erected for the first time in cities, this trend will grow because agriculture is also expected to fail in the long-run so there is a lot of funding put into vertical farming because vertical farming could replace conventional field farming, in the 2020s however vertical farms will only generate a very small percentage of food and its produce would not be sold in mainstream shops for a while.Lab grown meat will be a new growing trend in the 2020s, but its adoption will be slow due to skepticism and lack of popularity. Will there be wars? Likely more than the 2010s.Because not much has been resolved at 2019 we can expect things to grow more tense, especially since we are all facing an impending global warming crisis and a decline of globalization. Russia and China will become more dominant and influential throughout the world, developing countries will bear the brunt of climate change while the developed countries are increasingly destabilized by the flocks of refugees flooding in, developing countries could be reduced into war-zones like Syria in the 2010s.The trade-wars between America and China could involve other world powers and it could escalate into the 2nd Cold War, with a Cold War there is always the chance of a 3rd World War looming.The west will decay as the western economy worsens, Russia and China would exploit whatever resource they can get with their new influence in a decaying world but their economic growth will be fragile too.China is threatened by the loss of fresh water once the Himalayan ice melts, much of Chinese agriculture is threatened by floods, when the Chinese eco-system fails then you can expect them to attack their neighbours or best-case scenario demand resources from their allies.Russia is threatened by the same thing that will give them economic prosperity, global warming, when the ice melts the methane would doom us all and will also release long-forgotten epidemics into our world, Russia will face a huge refugee crisis coming from the south due to water shortages so you can expect Russia to heavily enforce their borders.European politics will change drastically due to responses from refugees, if Europe refuses most refugees then it is possible that armies of angry refugees could invade Europe in the future.Africa is gaining so much but that growth will not be expected to last due to climate change, water wars reduce some areas into anarchy like Libya in the 2010s, Nigeria-Ethiopia-South Africa would likely be the most prosperous countries of the continent, the African countries that are developing would likely begin to adopt the same lifestyle as the West is living like eating fast food and being online all day long. I do not know much about South America but some parts appear to be on a verge of political change and turmoil, I do believe that they are at risk for water shortages due to melting ice in the Andes, I can't see them stopping the destruction of the Amazon so that will be ongoing. South America will grow economically but like the rest of the world it will be a highly vulnerable growth.Australia will continue to be burnt alive by wildfires, we should start seeing more and more Australians moving to colder areas such as Tasmania New Zealand and Britain. Indonesia will continue to destroy their rain-forests to make money out of palm oil, don't know what their political situation would be though but would most likely go down the capitalist path. All in all the 2020s will be a time of disruption, the pace of life will get faster and faster, fake news and deep fakes will spread, misinformation will be rife, as the internet spreads and becomes more disruptive more restrictions will be put on the internet, because we are growing more dependent on technology cyber-attacks or power-cuts could bring us back to the late 20th century, people will grow more scared and desperate and may turn to drastic courses of action if said course of action is the only solution.We are at risk of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and bird flu, obesity and depression will become a bigger burden than it already is, transgender people will be the new normal as people are now coming out as transhuman, in some parts of cities driving a car could be banned because of driverless cars replacing transportation in some city centers, cars are switching to hybrid/electricity as electric car plugs appear in many built-up areas, more and more people have had their DNA stored into a database and I can't say for sure how this data will be used. Online communities give me hope, and I hope that online communities become so rich with cryptocurrency and popular that when the decaying society that thrived in the 20th century fails we got the new online society to fall back onto and rebuild a new society from scratch instead of trying to rebuilt a society that failed us. I wish us all the best of luck. --------- reply to user: I think you are definitely right about 2020 Britain being pretty much the same as 2019 Britain except that it could get worse especially since the NHS is in the process of being privatized which sucks for me too because I am a Type 1 Diabetic, I am inclined to think that Boris Johnson will resign in the near future just to be replaced by another equally unqualified/unpopular Tory. I am going to be a bit controversial and biased but I want to blame Democracy for the situation that Britain is in right now and I want to explain why I am skeptical towards Democracy.So the idea of Democracy is to get the public to choose who becomes the leader and its down to the public to make that important choice, but many people do not want to run the country and many people do not know what is best for their country.In a Democratic society the best way to win a vote is to promise the public everything and appeal to them, you don't have to be good at politics to win and you don't have to tell people of your true intentions all you have to do is lie and be charismatic. Politicians probably hire professional psychologists to trick people into voting for them because they know how to trick the system to get them into the position that they both don't deserve or are qualified for. Its no wonder why Politicians are losing their efficiency, they do it as a job because many politicians do not need to be good at running a country to become the leader and like I said they just need to know what the people want to hear and to put on a charismatic face.I believe that running the country should be reserved for those who want to run the country and have the countries best interest at heart, it should be reserved for professionals who know what they are doing and have had years of training as well as experience. In a Democracy if you get two candidates, one is a businessman who is very charismatic but only knows about business, the other one is a ex-Sergeant who has had 20 years of experience in the administrative field but he is not as charismatic. Even though the Businessman is less qualified he will win because he is charismatic and knows how to trick people into voting for him instead of the professional, repeat this process and you'll end up with a very ineffective government or circus full of charismatic millionaires who trick and lie to the public to maintain their lofty position in society. And that is probably how Britain ended up with the government it has, people have been lied to and people don't know who is best for their country so we end up voting for the wrong people or get tricked into believing that Democracy is the best form of government.Sadly Democracy will put Britain(as well as other nations) at risk of a power hungry Populist who will present him/herself as against the present government and will use his/her charisma to appeal to us to make us believe that the Populist is the solution to all of our problems caused by the government, but once the Populist gets elected s/he will show his/her true colors and the public will soon regret their vote.This process will keep repeating itself while we have Democracy, I believe that its not working and maybe we are better off leaving our politics to the professionals elected by professionals. I also want to thank you for all the replies you posted on my 2020s posts, they have helped keeping the 2020s posts alive. Again, thank you. --------------------- reply to user: Not only that but many people are also misinformed because Democratic candidates lie and be all fake to get votes and on top that they also spread rumors about other candidates or pretty much anything so that they'll get more votes, its bad because not only many people already don't know what is best for their country but they will find it very difficult to know for sure what will be best because of all the lies and misinformation. --------------------- reply to user: Its scary that some people out there actually believe that Jeremy Corbyn is anti-semetic, its such a ridiculous and desperate accusation just to make Jeremy Corbyn look bad and lose. And its scary because if people actually believe those bogus anti-Semetic accusations then it just shows how much the media controls us all.Donald Trump is indeed right about journalists and fake news being an issue, but I think the reason why journalism is such a joke in America is because it is privatized and they are becoming desperate so that they can survive kinda like 'IT' from the Steven King novel.Capitalism and privatization can corrupt journalism because capitalism makes journalism more about money and getting attention so it degenerates into what it currently is, but Donald Trump is very capitalist, which could mean that Donald Trump is a cause of journalism gone wrong and he is getting backlash from the world he helped to create whether he knows it or not. Journalism does need to be regulated, especially now we are becoming fully aware of how powerful mass media can be. I could be blaming capitalism because of mass media and it could turn out that capitalism isn't to blame after all, but I still believe that its probably best for journalism to just focus on entertainment and to leave actual news to a more professional environment where the professionals highly focus on telling the people about unbiased truths. ------------------------------
What A Day: D'oh Biden by Brian Beutler, Priyanka Aribindi & Crooked Media (06/19/19)
"I was talking about farting"—Presidential candidate/world’s most awkward person John Hickenlooper
Joe Biden told an audience of donors in New York City that his tax policies wouldn’t “fundamentally change” things, including their quality of life, and waxed nostalgic about his working relationships with segregationists when he was a young senator. Guuuulp. It has not gone over well! Here’s the full rundown. Biden has been campaigning on his ability to reach consensus with Republicans. As evidence of this, he cited his relationships with now-deceased Sens. James Eastland (D-MS) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA). Biden said Eastland “never called me ‘boy,’ he always called me ‘son,’” and called Talmadge “one of the meanest guys I ever knew,” but added, “at least there was some civility. We got things done.” Some problems with this!
Of course these segregationist Senators didn’t call Biden, a white man, “boy.” The implication, intended or not, is they were civil to him because he was white. Which, duh, but also not a great model for making positive change in America.
Whether they were civil with Biden or not, segregationist senators formed the backbone of a vicious, deadly regime that has echoes today in the form of racial inequality, mass incarceration, and other forms of systemic racism.
Eastland and Talmadge were Democrats! (See the Ds by their names?) The fact that Biden was able to cut deals within his own party in the 1970s has no bearing on whether he’ll be able to govern by consensus with Republicans today. In truth, today’s Republican Party has made that kind of governing impossible. Vice President Biden, we have Merrick Garland on line one with a history lesson for you.
Several Democratic presidential candidates have condemned Biden’s comments, including Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Beto O’Rourke, and Bill de Blasio. Biden went on to assure his donors that they won’t assume much financial risk by supporting him. “No one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change,” he said. But, “when we have income inequality as large as we have in the United States today, it brews and ferments political discord and basic revolution.” Some problems with this!
Biden has promised not to make a dent in rich people’s fortunes. Not the best way to drive home your income inequality message!
His comments are contradictory: If income inequality is so great that we’re on the verge of “revolution,” isn’t Biden flirting with disaster by promising, “nothing would fundamentally change”? Vote for me! Things most people hate won't get better!
There unfortunately aren’t many generous ways to interpret these comments. They have raised concerns across the party about what kind of nominee and president Biden would be, and so far he hasn’t sought to explain himself or walk the comments back. The good news: he’ll almost certainly face questions about them at next week’s debate. popcorn-eating.gif
Under the Radar
The number of refugees—people who’ve been forced to flee violence or persecution—has reached an all-time high of nearly 71 million people worldwide, and includes an estimated 13.6 million people who became refugees in the last year alone, according to the United Nations. Most of the world’s refugees come from just five countries: Syria, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Myanmar, and Somalia, and the greatest number of refugees live in Turkey, Pakistan, Uganda, Sudan, and Germany, respectively. While presenting the report, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees criticized “inward looking,” wealthy countries, many of which have sought to close their borders to these displaced peoples. That includes, um, us.
Trump administration officials have tried to convince Congress that Iran has ties to al Qaeda, suggesting the White House may try to use a post-9/11 war authorization as a legal justification for attacking Iran over Congress’s objections. There’s every reason to be skeptical of the administration’s claims, and House Democrats underscored their skepticism by voting to repeal that authorization. At a House subcommittee hearing on reparations, the writer Ta-Nehisi Coates called on Congress to “reject fair-weather patriotism, to say that a nation is both its credits and its debits,” and to create a commission to study ways the U.S. government can make amends for slavery and its legacy. Coates also rebutted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who expressed his opposition to reparations on Capitol Hill this Tuesday. President Trump’s former Communications Director Hope Hicks stonewalled Democrats during a closed-door interview with the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday because White House lawyers barred her from answering any questions about her time in the White House. Hey Democrats: instead of hearings nobody can watch with witnesses you won’t force to testify, have you considered the opposite? Speaking of which, House Democrats may have finally run out of patience with former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s reluctance to testify, but they still haven’t subpoenaed him. Reminder, again: Republicans hauled former FBI Director Jim Comey up to the Hill within two days of his decision to close the Hillary Clinton email investigation. And you might have noticed Republicans are pretty good at this “winning elections” thing. The Federal Reserve left interest rates unchanged today, resisting extraordinary and improper pressure from President Trump, who has suggested he might demote Fed Chair Jerome Powell, even though he does not have the legal authority to do so. International prosecutors indicted three men with ties to Russian intelligence and implicated a senior aide to Vladimir Putin for shooting a missile at Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine in 2014, killing all 298 people on board. The British research submarine Boaty McBoatface (this is what happens when you let the internet name things) discovered a significant link between Antarctic winds and rising sea temperatures. As the winds have grown stronger because of greenhouse gas buildup and the destruction of the ozone layer, they have caused more turbulence in waters, resulting in rising sea temperatures and sea levels. Not bad, Boaty. But, you know, bad in every other way. Trans author, activist, and television producer Janet Mock signed a multimillion dollar deal with Netflix to write, direct, and executive produce projects that tell stories about underrepresented people. She is the first out trans woman of color to score a deal like this with a major studio.
What A Sponsor!
Are you underpaid? Overworked? Not feeling the love for your job? Enter Flatiron School—a global school that trains change-makers in 21st-century skills like software engineering, data science, and UX/UI Design through immersive and online courses. In as little as three months, you’ll have the skills to land a cool new software engineering or data job with all the perks, snacks, and zeroes on that salary you’re hoping for. Within six months, 97% of Flatiron School grads land a new job, and every program has a money-back guarantee—get a job or get your tuition back. And now, applications are open for Flatiron School’s Online UX/UI Design Course!
Did You See That Thing?
Facebook confirmed this week that it has spent the past year working with 27 nonprofit, tech, and finance partners to create a cryptocurrency called “Libra.” Despite its classification as a cryptocurrency, Libra would be very different than Bitcoin. Facebook imagines it as a “new global currency standard” that’s stable, guaranteed by tangible assets, and part of a larger program that will be able to perform all the functions of a traditional bank (think accounts, loans, ATMs, etc.). Facebook claims it wants to offer the service to benefit the developing world, and its 1.7 billion adults who don’t have access to banking. This, however, is the same logic it used to promote its plan to offer free internet around the world—a plan that came under fire for attempting to make developing countries dependent on Facebook for access to the internet. On top of that, Facebook’s laundry list of privacy scandals, the rampant misinformation on its platform, and the way it’s been used to subvert elections have naturally made people skeptical that the company should be entrusted with vulnerable people’s money. OTOH maybe we should just blindly trust Zuck again for the 40,000th time.
Is That Hope I Feel?
New York lawmakers have agreed to one of the most ambitious climate plans in the world. The legislation, called the “Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act,” calls for the state to eliminate almost all greenhouse gas emissions with the goal of making the state's economy carbon-free by 2050. Currently, New York sources only 60 percent of its electricity from carbon-free sources.
US Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses – by Michael Hudson • 23 July 2019
https://outline.com/VM2DEM • 5,400 Words • Today’s world is at war on many fronts. The rules of international law and order put in place toward the end of World War II are being broken by U.S. foreign policy escalating its confrontation with countries that refrain from giving its companies control of their economic surpluses. Countries that do not give the United States control of their oil and financial sectors or privatize their key sectors are being isolated by the United States imposing trade sanctions and unilateral tariffs giving special advantages to U.S. producers in violation of free trade agreements with European, Asian and other countries. This global fracture has an increasingly military cast. U.S. officials justify tariffs and import quotas illegal under WTO rules on “national security” grounds, claiming that the United States can do whatever it wants as the world’s “exceptional” nation. U.S. officials explain that this means that their nation is not obliged to adhere to international agreements or even to its own treaties and promises. This allegedly sovereign right to ignore on its international agreements was made explicit after Bill Clinton and his Secretary of State Madeline Albright broke the promise by President George Bush and Secretary of State James Baker that NATO would not expand eastward after 1991. (“You didn’t get it in writing,” was the U.S. response to the verbal agreements that were made.) Likewise, the Trump administration repudiated the multilateral Iranian nuclear agreement signed by the Obama administration, and is escalating warfare with its proxy armies in the Near East. U.S. politicians are waging a New Cold War against Russia, China, Iran, and oil-exporting countries that the United States is seeking to isolate if cannot control their governments, central bank and foreign diplomacy. The international framework that originally seemed equitable was pro-U.S. from the outset. In 1945 this was seen as a natural result of the fact that the U.S. economy was the least war-damaged and held by far most of the world’s monetary gold. Still, the postwar trade and financial framework was ostensibly set up on fair and equitable international principles. Other countries were expected to recover and grow, creating diplomatic, financial and trade parity with each other. But the past decade has seen U.S. diplomacy become one-sided in turning the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, SWIFT bank-clearing system and world trade into an asymmetrically exploitative system. This unilateral U.S.-centered array of institutions is coming to be widely seen not only as unfair, but as blocking the progress of other countries whose growth and prosperity is seen by U.S. foreign policy as a threat to unilateral U.S. hegemony. What began as an ostensibly international order to promote peaceful prosperity has turned increasingly into an extension of U.S. nationalism, predatory rent-extraction and a more dangerous military confrontation. Deterioration of international diplomacy into a more nakedly explicit pro-U.S. financial, trade and military aggression was implicit in the way in which economic diplomacy was shaped when the United Nations, IMF and World Bank were shaped mainly by U.S. economic strategists. Their economic belligerence is driving countries to withdraw from the global financial and trade order that has been turned into a New Cold War vehicle to impose unilateral U.S. hegemony. Nationalistic reactions are consolidating into new economic and political alliances from Europe to Asia. We are still mired in the Oil War that escalated in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq, which quickly spread to Libya and Syria. American foreign policy has long been based largely on control of oil. This has led the United States to oppose the Paris accords to stem global warming. Its aim is to give U.S. officials the power to impose energy sanctions forcing other countries to “freeze in the dark” if they do not follow U.S. leadership. To expand its oil monopoly, America is pressuring Europe to oppose the Nordstream II gas pipeline from Russia, claiming that this would make Germany and other countries dependent on Russia instead of on U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG). Likewise, American oil diplomacy has imposed unilateral sanctions against Iranian oil exports, until such time as a regime change opens up that country’s oil reserves to U.S., French, British and other allied oil majors. U.S. control of dollarized money and credit is critical to this hegemony. As Congressman Brad Sherman of Los Angeles told a House Financial Services Committee hearing on May 9, 2019: “An awful lot of our international power comes from the fact that the U.S. dollar is the standard unit of international finance and transactions. Clearing through the New York Fed is critical for major oil and other transactions. It is the announced purpose of the supporters of cryptocurrency to take that power away from us, to put us in a position where the most significant sanctions we have against Iran, for example, would become irrelevant.” The U.S. aim is to keep the dollar as the transactions currency for world trade, savings, central bank reserves and international lending. This monopoly status enables the U.S. Treasury and State Department to disrupt the financial payments system and trade for countries with which the United States is at economic or outright military war. Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly responded by describing how “the degeneration of the universalist globalization model [is] turning into a parody, a caricature of itself, where common international rules are replaced with the laws… of one country.” That is the trajectory on which this deterioration of formerly open international trade and finance is now moving. It has been building up for a decade. On June 5, 2009, then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev cited this same disruptive U.S. dynamic at work in the wake of the U.S. junk mortgage and bank fraud crisis. Those whose job it was to forecast events … were not ready for the depth of the crisis and turned out to be too rigid, unwieldy and slow in their response. The international financial organisations – and I think we need to state this up front and not try to hide it – were not up to their responsibilities, as has been said quite unambiguously at a number of major international events such as the two recent G20 summits of the world’s largest economies. Furthermore, we have had confirmation that our pre-crisis analysis of global economic trends and the global economic system were correct. The artificially maintained uni-polar system and preservation of monopolies in key global economic sectors are root causes of the crisis. One big centre of consumption, financed by a growing deficit, and thus growing debts, one formerly strong reserve currency, and one dominant system of assessing assets and risks – these are all factors that led to an overall drop in the quality of regulation and the economic justification of assessments made, including assessments of macroeconomic policy. As a result, there was no avoiding a global crisis. That crisis is what is now causing today’s break in global trade and payments. Warfare on many fronts, with Dollarization being the main arena Dissolution of the Soviet Union 1991 did not bring the disarmament that was widely expected. U.S. leadership celebrated the Soviet demise as signaling the end of foreign opposition to U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism and even as the End of History. NATO expanded to encircle Russia and sponsored “color revolutions” from Georgia to Ukraine, while carving up former Yugoslavia into small statelets. American diplomacy created a foreign legion of Wahabi fundamentalists from Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya in support of Saudi Arabian extremism and Israeli expansionism. The United States is waging war for control of oil against Venezuela, where a military coup failed a few years ago, as did the 2018-19 stunt to recognize an unelected pro-American puppet regime. The Honduran coup under President Obama was more successful in overthrowing an elected president advocating land reform, continuing the tradition dating back to 1954 when the CIA overthrew Guatemala’s Arbenz regime. U.S. officials bear a special hatred for countries that they have injured, ranging from Guatemala in 1954 to Iran, whose regime it overthrew to install the Shah as military dictator. Claiming to promote “democracy,” U.S. diplomacy has redefined the word to mean pro-American, and opposing land reform, national ownership of raw materials and public subsidy of foreign agriculture or industry as an “undemocratic” attack on “free markets,” meaning markets controlled by U.S. financial interests and absentee owners of land, natural resources and banks. A major byproduct of warfare has always been refugees, and today’s wave fleeing ISIS, Al Qaeda and other U.S.-backed Near Eastern proxies is flooding Europe. A similar wave is fleeing the dictatorial regimes backed by the United States from Honduras, Ecuador, Colombia and neighboring countries. The refugee crisis has become a major factor leading to the resurgence of nationalist parties throughout Europe and for the white nationalism of Donald Trump in the United States. Dollarization as the vehicle for U.S. nationalism The Dollar Standard – U.S. Treasury debt to foreigners held by the world’s central banks – has replaced the gold-exchange standard for the world’s central bank reserves to settle payments imbalances among themselves. This has enabled the United States to uniquely run balance-of-payments deficits for nearly seventy years, despite the fact that these Treasury IOUs have little visible likelihood of being repaid except under arrangements where U.S. rent-seeking and outright financial tribute from other enables it to liquidate its official foreign debt. The United States is the only nation that can run sustained balance-of-payments deficits without having to sell off its assets or raise interest rates to borrow foreign money. No other national economy in the world can could afford foreign military expenditures on any major scale without losing its exchange value. Without the Treasury-bill standard, the United States would be in this same position along with other nations. That is why Russia, China and other powers that U.S. strategists deem to be strategic rivals and enemies are looking to restore gold’s role as the preferred asset to settle payments imbalances. The U.S. response is to impose regime change on countries that prefer gold or other foreign currencies to dollars for their exchange reserves. A case in point is the overthrow of Libya’s Omar Kaddafi after he sought to base his nation’s international reserves on gold. His liquidation stands as a military warning to other countries. Thanks to the fact that payments-surplus economies invest their dollar inflows in U.S. Treasury bonds, the U.S. balance-of-payments deficit finances its domestic budget deficit. This foreign central-bank recycling of U.S. overseas military spending into purchases of U.S. Treasury securities gives the United States a free ride, financing its budget – also mainly military in character – so that it can taxing its own citizens. Trump is forcing other countries to create an alternative to the Dollar Standard The fact that Donald Trump’s economic policies are proving ineffective in restoring American manufacturing is creating rising nationalist pressure to exploit foreigners by arbitrary tariffs without regard for international law, and to impose trade sanctions and diplomatic meddling to disrupt regimes that pursue policies that U.S. diplomats do not like. There is a parallel here with Rome in the late 1st century BC. It stripped its provinces to pay for its military deficit, the grain dole and land redistribution at the expense of Italian cities and Asia Minor. This created foreign opposition to drive Rome out. The U.S. economy is similar to Rome’s: extractive rather than productive, based mainly on land rents and money-interest. As the domestic market is impoverished, U.S. politicians are seeking to take from abroad what no longer is being produced at home. What is so ironic – and so self-defeating of America’s free global ride – is that Trump’s simplistic aim of lowering the dollar’s exchange rate to make U.S. exports more price-competitive. He imagines commodity trade to be the entire balance of payments, as if there were no military spending, not to mention lending and investment. To lower the dollar’s exchange rate, he is demanding that China’s central bank and those of other countries stop supporting the dollar by recycling the dollars they receive for their exports into holdings of U.S. Treasury securities. This tunnel vision leaves out of account the fact that the trade balance is not simply a matter of comparative international price levels. The United States has dissipated its supply of spare manufacturing capacity and local suppliers of parts and materials, while much of its industrial engineering and skilled manufacturing labor has retired. An immense shortfall must be filled by new capital investment, education and public infrastructure, whose charges are far above those of other economics. Trump’s infrastructure ideology is a Public-Private Partnership characterized by high-cost financialization demanding high monopoly rents to cover its interest charges, stock dividends and management fees. This neoliberal policy raises the cost of living for the U.S. labor force, making it uncompetitive. The United States is unable to produce more at any price right now, because its has spent the past half-century dismantling its infrastructure, closing down its part suppliers and outsourcing its industrial technology. The United States has privatized and financialized infrastructure and basic needs such as public health and medical care, education and transportation that other countries have kept in their public domain to make their economies more cost-efficient by providing essential services at subsidized prices or freely. The United States also has led the practice of debt pyramiding, from housing to corporate finance. This financial engineering and wealth creation by inflating debt-financed real estate and stock market bubbles has made the United States a high-cost economy that cannot compete successfully with well-managed mixed economies. Unable to recover dominance in manufacturing, the United States is concentrating on rent-extracting sectors that it hopes monopolize, headed by information technology and military production. On the industrial front, it threatens to disrupt China and other mixed economies by imposing trade and financial sanctions. The great gamble is whether these other countries will defend themselves by joining in alliances enabling them to bypass the U.S. economy. American strategists imagine their country to be the world’s essential economy, without whose market other countries must suffer depression. The Trump Administration thinks that There Is No Alternative (TINA) for other countries except for their own financial systems to rely on U.S. dollar credit. To protect themselves from U.S. sanctions, countries would have to avoid using the dollar, and hence U.S. banks. This would require creation of a non-dollarized financial system for use among themselves, including their own alternative to the SWIFT bank clearing system. Table 1 lists some possible related defenses against U.S. nationalistic diplomacy. As noted above, what also is ironic in President Trump’s accusation of China and other countries of artificially manipulating their exchange rate against the dollar (by recycling their trade and payments surpluses into Treasury securities to hold down their currency’s dollar valuation) involves dismantling the Treasury-bill standard. The main way that foreign economies have stabilized their exchange rate since 1971 has indeed been to recycle their dollar inflows into U.S. Treasury securities. Letting their currency’s value rise would threaten their export competitiveness against their rivals, although not necessarily benefit the United States. Ending this practice leaves countries with the main way to protect their currencies from rising against the dollar is to reduce dollar inflows by blocking U.S. lending to domestic borrowers. They may levy floating tariffs proportioned to the dollar’s declining value. The U.S. has a long history since the 1920s of raising its tariffs against currencies that are depreciating: the American Selling Price (ASP) system. Other countries can impose their own floating tariffs against U.S. goods. Trade dependency as an aim of the World Bank, IMF and US AID The world today faces a problem much like what it faced on the eve of World War II. Like Germany then, the United States now poses the main threat of war, and equally destructive neoliberal economic regimes imposing austerity, economic shrinkage and depopulation. U.S. diplomats are threatening to destroy regimes and entire economies that seek to remain independent of this system, by trade and financial sanctions backed by direct military force. Dedollarization will require creation of multilateral alternatives to U.S. “front” institutions such as the World Bank, IMF and other agencies in which the United States holds veto power to block any alternative policies deemed not to let it “win.” U.S. trade policy through the World Bank and U.S. foreign aid agencies aims at promoting dependency on U.S. food exports and other key commodities, while hiring U.S. engineering firms to build up export infrastructure to subsidize U.S. and other natural-resource investors. The financing is mainly in dollars, providing risk-free bonds to U.S. and other financial institutions. The resulting commercial and financial “interdependency” has led to a situation in which a sudden interruption of supply would disrupt foreign economies by causing a breakdown in their chain of payments and production. The effect is to lock client countries into dependency on the U.S. economy and its diplomacy, euphemized as “promoting growth and development.” U.S. neoliberal policy via the IMF imposes austerity and opposes debt writedowns. Its economic model pretends that debtor countries can pay any volume of dollar debt simply by reducing wages to squeeze more income out of the labor force to pay foreign creditors. This ignores the fact that solving the domestic “budget problem” by taxing local revenue still faces the “transfer problem” of converting it into dollars or other hard currencies in which most international debt is denominated. The result is that the IMF’s “stabilization” programs actually destabilize and impoverish countries forced into following its advice. IMF loans support pro-U.S. regimes such as Ukraine, and subsidize capital flight by supporting local currencies long enough to enable U.S. client oligarchies to flee their currencies at a pre-devaluation exchange rate for the dollar. When the local currency finally is allowed to collapse, debtor countries are advised to impose anti-labor austerity. This globalizes the class war of capital against labor while keeping debtor countries on a short U.S. financial leash. U.S. diplomacy is capped by trade sanctions to disrupt economies that break away from U.S. aims. Sanctions are a form of economic sabotage, as lethal as outright military warfare in establishing U.S. control over foreign economies. The threat is to impoverish civilian populations, in the belief that this will lead them to replace their governments with pro-American regimes promising to restore prosperity by selling off their domestic infrastructure to U.S. and other multinational investors. chart hudson There are alternatives, on many fronts Militarily, today’s leading alternative to NATO expansionism is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), along with Europe following France’s example under Charles de Gaulle and withdrawing. After all, there is no real threat of military invasion today in Europe. No nation can occupy another without an enormous military draft and such heavy personnel losses that domestic protests would unseat the government waging such a war. The U.S. anti-war movement in the 1960s signaled the end of the military draft, not only in the United States but in nearly all democratic countries. (Israel, Switzerland, Brazil and North Korea are exceptions.) The enormous spending on armaments for a kind of war unlikely to be fought is not really military, but simply to provide profits to the military industrial complex. The arms are not really to be used. They are simply to be bought, and ultimately scrapped. The danger, of course, is that these not-for-use arms actually might be used, if only to create a need for new profitable production. Likewise, foreign holdings of dollars are not really to be spent on purchases of U.S. exports or investments. They are like fine-wine collectibles, for saving rather than for drinking. The alternative to such dollarized holdings is to create a mutual use of national currencies, and a domestic bank-clearing payments system as an alternative to SWIFT. Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela already are said to be developing a crypto-currency payments to circumvent U.S. sanctions and hence financial control. In the World Trade Organization, the United States has tried to claim that any industry receiving public infrastructure or credit subsidy deserves tariff retaliation in order to force privatization. In response to WTO rulings that U.S. tariffs are illegally imposed, the United States “has blocked all new appointments to the seven-member appellate body in protest, leaving it in danger of collapse because it may not have enough judges to allow it to hear new cases.” In the U.S. view, only privatized trade financed by private rather than public banks is “fair” trade. An alternative to the WTO (or removal of its veto privilege given to the U.S. bloc) is needed to cope with U.S. neoliberal ideology and, most recently, the U.S. travesty claiming “national security” exemption to free-trade treaties, impose tariffs on steel, aluminum, and on European countries that circumvent sanctions on Iran or threaten to buy oil from Russia via the Nordstream II pipeline instead of high-cost liquified “freedom gas” from the United States. In the realm of development lending, China’s bank along with its Belt and Road initiative is an incipient alternative to the World Bank, whose main role has been to promote foreign dependency on U.S. suppliers. The IMF for its part now functions as an extension of the U.S. Department of Defense to subsidize client regimes such as Ukraine while financially isolating countries not subservient to U.S. diplomacy. To save debt-strapped economies suffering Greek-style austerity, the world needs to replace neoliberal economic theory with an analytic logic for debt writedowns based on the ability to pay. The guiding principle of the needed development-oriented logic of international law should be that no nation should be obliged to pay foreign creditors by having to sell of the public domain and rent-extraction rights to foreign creditors. The defining character of nationhood should be the fiscal right to tax natural resource rents and financial returns, and to create its own monetary system. The United States refuses to join the International Criminal Court. To be effective, it needs enforcement power for its judgments and penalties, capped by the ability to bring charges of war crimes in the tradition of the Nuremberg tribunal. U.S. to such a court, combined with its military buildup now threatening World War III, suggests a new alignment of countries akin to the Non-Aligned Nations movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Non-aligned in this case means freedom from U.S. diplomatic control or threats. Such institutions require a more realistic economic theory and philosophy of operations to replace the neoliberal logic for anti-government privatization, anti-labor austerity, and opposition to domestic budget deficits and debt writedowns. Today’s neoliberal doctrine counts financial late fees and rising housing prices as adding to “real output” (GDP), but deems public investment as deadweight spending, not a contribution to output. The aim of such logic is to convince governments to pay their foreign creditors by selling off their public infrastructure and other assets in the public domain. Just as the “capacity to pay” principle was the foundation stone of the Bank for International Settlements in 1931, a similar basis is needed to measure today’s ability to pay debts and hence to write down bad loans that have been made without a corresponding ability of debtors to pay. Without such an institution and body of analysis, the IMF’s neoliberal principle of imposing economic depression and falling living standards to pay U.S. and other foreign creditors will impose global poverty. The above proposals provide an alternative to the U.S. “exceptionalist” refusal to join any international organization that has a say over its affairs. Other countries must be willing to turn the tables and isolate U.S. banks, U.S. exporters, and to avoid using U.S. dollars and routing payments via U.S. banks. To protect their ability to create a countervailing power requires an international court and its sponsoring organization. Summary The first existential objective is to avoid the current threat of war by winding down U.S. military interference in foreign countries and removing U.S. military bases as relics of neocolonialism. Their danger to world peace and prosperity threatens a reversion to the pre-World War II colonialism, ruling by client elites along lines similar to the 2014 Ukrainian coup by neo-Nazi groups sponsored by the U.S. State Department and National Endowment for Democracy. Such control recalls the dictators that U.S. diplomacy established throughout Latin America in the 1950s. Today’s ethnic terrorism by U.S.-sponsored Wahabi-Saudi Islam recalls the behavior of Nazi Germany in the 1940s. Global warming is the second major existentialist threat. Blocking attempts to reverse it is a bedrock of American foreign policy, because it is based on control of oil. So the military, refugee and global warming threats are interconnected. The U.S. military poses the greatest immediate danger. Today’s warfare is fundamentally changed from what it used to be. Prior to the 1970s, nations conquering others had to invade and occupy them with armies recruited by a military draft. But no democracy in today’s world can revive such a draft without triggering widespread refusal to fight, voting the government out of power. The only way the United States – or other countries – can fight other nations is to bomb them. And as noted above, economic sanctions have as destructive an effect on civilian populations in countries deemed to be U.S. adversaries as overt warfare. The United States can sponsor political coups (as in Honduras and Pinochet’s Chile), but cannot occupy. It is unwilling to rebuild, to say nothing of taking responsibility for the waves of refugees that our bombing and sanctions are causing from Latin America to the Near East. U.S. ideologues view their nation’s coercive military expansion and political subversion and neoliberal economic policy of privatization and financialization as an irreversible victory signaling the End of History. To the rest of the world it is a threat to human survival. The American promise is that the victory of neoliberalism is the End of History, offering prosperity to the entire world. But beneath the rhetoric of free choice and free markets is the reality of corruption, subversion, coercion, debt peonage and neofeudalism. The reality is the creation and subsidy of polarized economies bifurcated between a privileged rentier class and its clients, their debtors and renters. America is to be permitted to monopolize trade in oil and food grains, and high-technology rent-yielding monopolies, living off its dependent customers. Unlike medieval serfdom, people subject to this End of History scenario can choose to live wherever they want. But wherever they live, they must take on a lifetime of debt to obtain access to a home of their own, and rely on U.S.-sponsored control of their basic needs, money and credit by adhering to U.S. financial planning of their economies. This dystopian scenario confirms Rosa Luxemburg’s recognition that the ultimate choice facing nations in today’s world is between socialism and barbarism. Keynote Paper delivered at the 14th Forum of the World Association for Political Economy, July 21, 2019. Notes  Billy Bambrough, “Bitcoin Threatens To ‘Take Power’ From The U.S. Federal Reserve,” Forbes, May 15, 2019. https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/05/15/a-u-s-congressman-is-so-scared-of-bitcoin-and-crypto-he-wants-it-banned/#36b2700b6405.  Vladimir Putin, keynote address to the Economic Forum, June 5-6 2019. Putin went on to warn of “a policy of completely unlimited economic egoism and a forced breakdown.” This fragmenting of the global economic space “is the road to endless conflict, trade wars and maybe not just trade wars. Figuratively, this is the road to the ultimate fight of all against all.”  Address to St Petersburg International Economic Forum’s Plenary Session, St Petersburg, Kremlin.ru, June 5, 2009, from Johnson’s Russia List, June 8, 2009, #8,  https://www.rt.com/business/464013-china-russia-cryptocurrency-dollar-dethrone/ . Already in the late 1950s the Forgash Plan proposed a World Bank for Economic Acceleration. Designed by Terence McCarthy and sponsored by Florida Senator Morris Forgash, the bank would have been a more truly development-oriented institution to guide foreign development to create balanced economies self-sufficient in food and other essentials. The proposal was opposed by U.S. interests on the ground that countries pursuing land reform tended to be anti-American. More to the point, they would have avoided trade and financial dependency on U.S. suppliers and banks, and hence on U.S. trade and financial sanctions to prevent them from following policies at odds with U.S. diplomatic demands.  Don Weinland, “WTO rules against US in tariff dispute with China,” Financial Times, July 17, 2019. https://xenagoguevicene.wordpress.com/2019/07/29/u-s-economic-warfare-and-likely-foreign-defenses-by-michael-hudson-%e2%80%a2-23-july-2019/
The United Nations set up a digital group research blockchain. Ma Yun Gates is co-chairman.
The United Nations established a digital group research blockchain, and Ma Yun Gates served as co-chair of the group The UN News Center announced on July 12 that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres established the "United Nations Secretary-General's High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation" and clearly proposed to put blockchain technology on the agenda of the group. It is reported that the group will bring together 20 celebrities from all walks of life to strengthen cooperation in the digital field by governments, the private sector, civil society, international organizations, technology and academia, and other relevant stakeholders. According to the news, the Secretary-General has announced the appointment of Melinda Gates (Mr. Bill Gates, Chairman of the Bill & Melinda Gates Fund Opportunity) and Ma Yun as co-chairman of the group. The United Nations has been exploring the application of blockchain technology in humanitarian applications. In April of this year, the United Nations World Food Program (WFP) began using blockchain technology to assist Syrian refugees, benefiting 10,000 people. In addition, the United Nations has implemented a digital identity system based on blockchain technology to combat global trafficking in children. Gates keeps a distance from Bitcoin, but Microsoft has a long-term layout of the blockchain. During Reddit Ask Me Anything in February this year, Bill Gates sneered at the cryptocurrency. Gates attacked the anonymity of virtual currency because they hindered the identification of anti-money laundering, anti-terrorist financing, and anti-tax evasion. In an interview with CNBC's Squawk Box, he said, "If there is a simple method, he will short the bitcoin." But on the other hand, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been supporting blockchain projects, especially in Africa. In 2015, the foundation donated $100,000 to the Kenya Bitcoin merchant payment platform Bitsoko. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been driving the development of virtual currency in Africa because they can provide low-cost trading services for the poor. In addition, Microsoft's layout in the blockchain field is also deep. In 2015, Microsoft launched the "Azure Blockchain as a Service (BaaS)" program. The program introduces blockchain technology to the Azure cloud computing platform to serve financial industry customers using Azure cloud services, allowing users to tailor their blockchain services to their business and innovation needs. In 2016, Microsoft further relied on Azure cloud services to launch the “Open, Modular Blockchain Component” program, using Microsoft's own architecture to create a blockchain enterprise ecosystem, and open a series of blockchain agreements to address early cross-spans. The problem of industry blockchain users is integrated in terms of platform openness, user identity, key management, privacy security, operations management and interactivity. In May of this year, Microsoft released the Azure blockchain work platform at the Global Developers Conference, which has been used by hundreds of companies. In June of this year, Microsoft acquired GitHub, a world-renowned software hosting platform, with a $7.5 billion Microsoft stock. GitHub is an important gathering place for blockchain projects, with more than 80,000 blockchain projects. In addition, Microsoft has expanded its strategic partnership with R3 to integrate R3's distributed ledger platform, Corda and R3Net, with Azure. Microsoft has also strengthened cooperation with super-books, the United Nations, and Cornell University's blockchain research groups to conduct blockchain research. Ali is also actively trying blockchain business, Ant Financial is a pioneer In July 2016, Ant Financial Services joined the blockchain technology in Alipay's love donation platform; in October 2016, Ali Financial Cloud and Yicheng Interactive jointly launched “Yunyou Mall”; in the same month, with Microsoft, Xiao ant, Fa Da, etc. Co-developing “Law Chain”; cooperating with PricewaterhouseCoopers in March 2017 to build a traceable cross-border food supply chain; investing in Symbiont in May 2017; and in August 2017, Ali Health and Jiangsu Changzhou will cooperate The joint + blockchain pilot project; in October 2017, Ant Financial CTO first disclosed the "BASIC" strategy, B is the blockchain; in November 2017, Tmall International announced the upgrade of the global origin traceability plan; the same month, Ali built the digital Xiong'an blockchain implementation platform; in January 2018, the ant blockchain was launched, and Xiong'an built a blockchain rental application platform; in February 2018, the rookie and Tmall International enabled blockchain technology tracking Logistics full link information on imported goods; in June 2018, AlipayHK launched the world's first blockchain-based e-wallet cross-border remittance service. Among them, the most important thing to ignore is the breakthrough of Ant Financial in the cross-border remittance service of e-wallet based on blockchain. As early as 2016, Ma Yun proposed eWTP to make Ali's business worldwide, which requires worldwide data flow, capital flow, and material flow. Aliyun is responsible for data flow, rookie logistics is responsible for material flow, and cross-border flow of funds is the task of Ant Financial. In fact, Ant Financial's use of blockchain technology for cross-border remittances is a part of Alipay's globalization. In the form of acquisition or investment or cooperation, Ant Financial has covered Alipay's globalization strategy to more than 70 countries and regions. For example, in the eight countries of Southeast Asia, support local Alipay wallets: Touch’n Go in Malaysia, Emtek in Indonesia, GCash in the Philippines, Paytm in India, Easypaisa in Pakistan, BKash in Bangladesh, AscendMone in Thailand, and Hellopay in Singapore. There are also Kakao Pay in Korea and Telenor in Norway. In addition, Alipay's international partners include Worldpay in the UK, Concardis and Wirecard in Germany, Ingenico in France, Recruit in Japan, ICB and KICC in Korea, Supay in Australia, Magic Compass and IE money in New Zealand, Webmoney and Qiwi in Russia, and Boleto in Brazil. All in all, Alipay's globalization strategy has begun to take shape. From AlipayHK's launch of the world's first blockchain-based e-wallet cross-border remittance service, the use of blockchain technology to support cross-border remittances may be around the world. Each country's “local Alipay” node builds a blockchain solution for cross-border remittance services. Invited to serve as co-chair of the UN High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation, Ma said that in the DT era, data and technology are more widely available, which is an opportunity for all young people, small businesses and women. He is happy to join and promote global cross-disciplinary cooperation to create a digital future for universal young people. https://preview.redd.it/z3h92sq26aa11.png?width=900&format=png&auto=webp&s=929cd1312ab7be0c61bc4f2cb217f2dba6012a7b
Today we will cover the WHY of Bitcoin. Due to the expanding reach of the Crypto Currency many people now know what Bitcoin is but most of them don't know why it's important and what the benefits of investing in Bitcoin could be? The most basic use of the technology is to transfer money between two people without the the involvement of any bank or middlemen. Because there are no banks or any middleman involved therefore the people using this service will have to go through less procedures and conditions. However that is not the only use of the technology, Bitcoin is much more than just a digital currency. It was basically designed as an alternative to the modern day financial system. It's a complete system with security protocols, custody rights, transaction settlement, lending, borrowing etc. The next thing we need to know is that the production or mining of Bitcoin is strictly limited to a maximum of 21 Million Bitcoins that can be mined.The limited amount of Bitcoin available is a contrast to the government money/FIAT which can be printed to no limit. Key thing here to be noticed is that when government prints more money this can cause inflation or even hyperinflation which doesn't happen with Bitcoin because of its limited supply. Example of inflation : If a country produces goods worth $10 Million example 1 Million Tables worth $10 each then the money supply is $10 Million. If the government doubles the money in circulation and starts printing more money to let's say support a war then there will be more demand with the same quantity/number of goods available. This will increase the demand thus increasing the prices of the goods If there is more inflation in a country this effects bonds which is a way governments borrow money from the people. Investors buy bonds because of good safe yields offered by the governments assuming that the key inflation will remain the same however if prices are doubled because of inflation then investors will seek opportunities else where with greater returns to counter the rising inflation. High inflation also effects savings of people and national debt. There have been many instances in history of hyperinflation resulting in collapse of solid economies. The hyperinflation in Germany in the 1920s is one of the many examples of this. Bitcoin is extremely divisible meaning that one can send $0.10 worth of Bitcoin or $10,000 worth of bitcoin just as easily. The system runs through a decentralized network of servers all around the globe 24 hours a day and has a credible security protocol. Another reason we might be turning to Bitcoin technology is the debt that is pilling up all around the world.When a debt becomes too big of an issue the currency then crashes.Historically debilitating inflation is the result of such crisis. We can see uses of Bitcoin in many other spheres nowadays and there is more acceptance of the technology as compared to some years ago when everyone thought of it as a bubble with high risks. Today on November 11, Singapore Exchange Limited (SGX) & Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) have successfully tested the block chain technology for tokenized asset settlement. It's being taught in many of the National Universities around the globe such as Malaysia etc. Many refugee camps are also using the technology to keep check on the ration for the camps. We can see many other uses in Asset Management, Insurance Claim Processing, Cross Border Payments, Smart Contracts, Smart Appliances, Personal Identification etc. The increased acceptance of the technology is the key factor increasing the demand of Bitcoin in trading for investors. JOIN the global trend and INVEST in Bitcoin today before it's too late. To keep up to date with the latest trends in Crypto, Forex & Stock Market updates visit Stratton Forex. Subscribe to our blog for keep up to date with the latest market trends and opportunities.
If you've paid attention and understand how to read between the lines, you might have noticed that our society has reached its peak. Generally speaking, things aren't going to get much better than they are today. In fact, most of the luxury we've grown accustomed to will disappear. You might get faster internet speeds, your telephone might learn some new tricks, but that's about all you can realistically expect to get. We should count our blessings in fact, if we survive through the coming decades without people dying of hunger in first world nations. In many third world nations, that prospect is already unavoidable. The UN has declared the worst humanitarian catastrophe since world war II, because numerous nations throughout Africa face unprecedented famines, brought on by political instability, eroding soils, expanding populations and a rapidly changing climate. You might have noticed that all these gleeful predictions that the whole world would soon cease to reproduce out of its own volition because girls are sent to school have so far ceased to apply to Africa. With every new revision of its population prospects, the United Nations target for 2100 creeps up. This is all due to Africans, who simply can't be made to agree that reproduction is a 20th century relic and the future lies in taking care of cats and dogs as you spend until your mid thirties finishing your Phd. When it comes to Europe, there are two possible courses. Europe could embark on an isolationist course, trying to fence off its borders and ensure that the people who managed to kickstart the industrial revolution manage to survive through its hangover as well. This would require a switch towards a continent dominated by far right parties that hardly have a clue in regards to the kind of climatic catastrophe we have to prepare for. The established European parties seem unlikely to drastically change course in regards to their political position on the growing migration waves that Erdogan and other dictators now happily use to slap freebies out of them like a giant piñata. They harbor the vision that every individual is a unique person with his own human rights that have to be enforced, ignoring the fact that we can only enforce the concept of human rights we came up with ourselves because we live in an era of abundance that is now drawing to an end. During the refugee wave of 2015, mayors in the Netherlands proclaimed that "nobody sleeps on the streets" in the Netherlands, as they hurried to find shelter for all the newcomers. Well, they're about to face much worse. If you think you can sustain a world where nobody will have to sleep on the streets, reality is about to hit you in the face like a brick wall. Even the United States has tent cities filled to the brim with regular middle class professionals who fell on bad luck. What I would like to know is what these European politicians who nearly annihilated our civilization in 2015 plan to do in the years ahead as the refugee crisis continues to expand. In 2015, we saw a fake dichotomy between "real refugees" and "economic migrants", the prior facing death in political violence, the latter seeking opportunities abroad. The idea was that the prior deserve a ticket to paradise, whereas the latter need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Well, in the years ahead, you'll notice these lines begin to blur further. The economic migrants we speak of, are the same type of people living in overpopulated nations where people are dying of hunger. Before the industrial revolution, Niger sustained around 3 million people. Today it hosts 18 million, by 2100 it's expected to house 210 million people. If we discover economic migrants fleeing our way, it will be because the local economy will consist of the exchange of mud cookies and bullets. Europe will eventually figure out that it will have to choose between becoming a giant battered women shelter for sub-Saharan Africa, or accepting that its traditional vision of human rights will have to be abandoned. If you wonder how I can be so sure of a catastrophe that lies ahead, consider that we house 7.5 billion people today on our planet and expect to have nearly 10 billion by 2050. Meanwhile, the capacity for feeding them is shrinking. In the past 40 years, we've lost a third of our arable land to soil erosion. Historically, this has brought multiple civilizations to their end. In the years ahead, the problem will get worse. In the Middle East, 550 million people are said to live inside “the margin of what is physically possible”. Guess where they'll be headed when the mercury smashes through said margin, which could happen in a few decades. Similarly, a billion people worldwide depend to some degree on the coral reefs for nutrition. I don't know if you've noticed how the coral reefs are doing lately, but they won't be here anymore in a few decades. The temperature rise over the past 250 years has been mostly helpful to our civilization and increased yields, but except perhaps for some very Northern latitudes, we're now moving beyond the optimal range for agriculture, at a speed that vastly exceeds the changes we've so far experienced. It would be catastrophic enough on its own if this were the only problem we faced, as these problems have historically brought down most civilizations. We face a different situation however, as we're also dependent for our way of life on non-renewable resources. Without oil, coal and natural gas, this party comes to an end. The fact that you can theoretically produce these resources on your own through photosynthesis doesn't get you very far when you're already struggling to feed everyone. What's necessary is that you look at these problems with some degree of realism. This will be beneficial to you yourself. You might tell yourself: "I'm better off not knowing about all of these doom scenarios." Well, that's where you would be wrong. To start with, if you have options, you'd try to move away from a city like Los Angeles and relocate instead to a city like Invercargill, New Zealand. Most of us don't have such options of course, we're stuck right where we live today. If you live in the type of place where the death of a criminal at the hands of the police is enough to start a riot, any place would be preferable to that in the years ahead, when the government will place its priorities on encouraging the survival of those who can contribute to society over those who make a living by massaging your guilt feelings. But what if you're poor? Even then, there are advantages to knowing that business as usual will not continue. Let's say you have a seventeen year old son who's planning to go to college to study something that's supposed to start paying off by the time he's in his late forties. Well, you might wish to make it clear to him that the world thirty years from now will hardly look like the world that economists and politicians plan for. If you're sacrificing earnings now, in exchange for earnings thirty years from now that will be taxed highly because the government will need the money to keep people from starving, how does this benefit you? You might wish to recommend learning a trade to your son instead. Similarly, if you're in your twenties today and face the prospect of retiring at the age of 72, as I do, what point is there realistically speaking to saving for retirement? Do you think I'm seriously going to save a dime so that I get to spend it by the time I'm 72? Do you think I seriously trust the money will still be there? I have a pleasant job, but I'm not putting anything away for my eventual retirement. I trust that today's generations will empty the retirement funds before I'll ever get to stake a claim to them. In addition, realistically speaking I may simply never live to be 72. Ask yourself how many years you have left until retirement and ask yourself how the world will look by then. There is hardly a difference between the poor and the middle class today, how do you expect it to look in the future? I'm well aware that generations that preceded me have had the same thoughts. Survivalists in the 90's must have thought the world would be in flames by now. Boomers who didn't bother saving for retirement because they figured Jesus would have returned by now are starting to sweat as they realize they didn't prepare for old age. The thing is however, that the failure of a prediction doesn't prohibit its predicted outcome from being correct. I can look at a 400 pound man and predict he'll have a heart attack in the next ten years. If it turns out ten years later I was wrong, that doesn't mean his risk of suffering a heart attack has dropped to zero. What you're going to notice sooner or later is that we have not just failed to live up to the scientific accomplishments hoped for by our ancestors, we're going to fail to sustain the accomplishments they made. Consider for example, our discovery of antibiotics. You'll notice soon enough that these antibiotics will cease to work. We're similarly reaching the point where many of the pesticides we depend on will cease to work. We have a very limited range of fungicides and we're starting to face the question of whether we want to sacrifice yields or lives. There will be real catastrophic collapses, of the type you see predicted by angry guys with blogs. I'm sure we will see places rendered uninhabitable by nuclear disasters, dams failing that kill tens of thousands of people in first world countries and render hundreds of thousands more homeless, I'm sure we'll see lasting power outages, or even dramatic civil wars between migrants and indigenous people. What happened in Japan was supposed to be impossible too, according to nuclear engineers. "If you were sitting on top of the plants' chimney when they were venting, you should probably give up smoking to return to your former life expectancy." Remember this old line by any chance? Those are the words of Josef Oehmen, an MIT scientist and they were parroted everywhere, until they were hurriedly scrubbed from the Internet. As is surprisingly often the case, the ALL CAPS rantings by basement-dwellers with tin-foil hats were closer to the truth than the soothing words of what we imagine to be credible experts. I could dig up similar soothing commentary here on Reddit if I wanted, but I trust that you yourself remember the time when the narrative had not yet switched to of course you shouldn't build these wonderful inventions of ours near fault lines. I expect that genetic engineering will have its own Fukushima moment eventually when it triggers the kind of irreversible damage to our ecosystem that was supposed to be impossible, which will be followed by similar science-loving intellectuals on Reddit who will insist that those responsible were simply doing it wrong. The dramatic unanimous insistence by anonymous commentators on the Internet who seem to have no dog in the fight that vaccines and genetic engineering are safe is perhaps the biggest reason there is to worry about their safety. In all likelihood however, places that suffer a dramatic collapse of the type seen in Syria or Fukushima will be in the minority. What the majority of you will live through is a slow grind, as the type of standard of living we can sustain begins to decline. Look at the Netherlands today and you will see prominent former politicians choose euthanasia with their wives, because their health is declining and they realize how terrible conditions in our modern nursing homes are. You can expect that euthanasia is going to be one of the new normals in our society, not because people suffer deeply, but because they realize we don't have the wealth available to us to guarantee them dignified lives when they become disabled. Another trend you'll notice is that there will be no real genuine incentive to work for a lot of you. If you're not part of the ruling class and don't have some job as a code-monkey, you will work primarily out of status concerns. In the Netherlands and many other European nations, being a single mother on welfare earns you roughly as much money as working most full-time jobs would. The main reason more people don't apply for welfare is the fact that they discourage people capable of working from receiving welfare benefits, in addition to the public humiliation commonly used to encourage people to find something to do. Unless you're part of the small elite, it won't matter much whether you spend your day in a cubicle or watching tel sell commercials instead. So how do you cope with this prospect? Well, if the middle class will be the same as the lower class, you could strife even harder to become part of the upper class that will prove to be the main target of the lynch mob. We all dream of having a mansion where we can live by ourselves without any neighbors, but those mansions are like an advertisement board encouraging criminals to break into your house and keep you hostage. If you don't plan on having your whole family carry guns with them continually, don't bother aiming for the stars. Aristocrats are beheaded, the poor starve in famines, but average people inherit the future. Wiser than hoping to become part of the 0.1% is to accept the prospect that lies ahead of us and trying to make the best of it. Again, if you live in the kind of city where people riot whenever a criminal is put out of his misery, your priority should lie with getting out of there. Find a community of people who look and behave similar to you and settle down there. This is bigger than just ethnicity, social class matters as well. If you work as a bearded hipster with your own microbrewery, go live around other overeducated special snowflakes. You don't want to stand out from the crowd and you don't want your neighbors to pretend not to notice when you're starving or chained to a chair by criminals. If you're part of an ethnic minority, you'll similarly want to live around others belonging to your community. If you notice the mentality is starting to look very grim, you'll want to work on getting out of the country. Three years before the Kristallnacht, Germany implemented laws defining who's a Jew and who Jews are allowed to marry. Hindsight is 20-20, but when you notice such tendencies emerge it's time to get out, as it's only downhill from that point on. This ties into another grim reality, which is that if you're a Syrian or a Nigerian it makes perfect rational sense to try to flee to Europe, as the third world will suffer a dramatic population contraction. Europeans however will do what makes perfect sense for them, which is to try to prohibit you from entering their continent. The simple process of group polarization will likely lead even those nationalist parties who today see themselves as moderate and rational to implement policies that would horrify us today. Humans in an era of abundance are much nicer to each other than they are in an era of scarcity. Perhaps equally useful advice is to plan for a lifestyle that is nomadic. The work I do allows me to live essentially anywhere. If I felt the need, I could theoretically move to Eastern Europe and keep the same income while cutting my cost of living by 50%. More likely, I would try to move to an impoverished rural region of my own country. I always have some Bitcoin I can hold onto as well, in case everything goes to hell in a hand basket. If you decided to get a mortgage, so that you could build up assets that will make you rich thirty of forty years from now, my opinion would be that your decision was not very wise. Besides the fact that real estate may very well be in a bubble, you have to understand that the government will tax anything it can tax. It can't tax off-shore bank accounts, so it will happily tax your property instead. Look at Detroit, a failed community that has the second highest property taxes in the United States, to understand what will happen. By virtue of the fact that you own property, you become a cow to milk. One important factor to consider is that a mortgage can have the effect of tying you to a piece of land. That's perhaps the worst problem you can be dealing with if your community faces social meltdown. If I have a mortgage that's higher than the value of the property I own and I need to pay a tax when I wish to buy a different house, how will I ever leave the place I'm stuck in? In Groningen here in the Netherlands, we have thousands of people who are stuck living in houses falling apart due to earthquakes. These people have mortgages and live in houses nobody wants to buy any longer, so they're stuck living in houses they fear could collapse any moment and unable to move elsewhere. As we continue pumping up gas, the earthquakes they suffer will merely get worse. These people would have been much better off renting a house instead. Situations like these will be very common in my country as the sea level rises. Consider this: Almere is a city roughly 5 meter beneath sea level. The soil is expected to sink by roughly another half meter by 2050, while the sea can be expected to rise by anywhere up to half a meter by then. If you plan on buying a house there, I've got a bridge to sell you with it. The ultimate form of nomadism is perhaps to buy a boat and to live on your boat. As babyboomers watch their pensions dry up, these boats might very well become quite affordable. A boat allows you to leave, regardless of where you live. Hurricane incoming? You leave. Some "youth" got shot after robbing a gas station? Time to set sail. The local dam is about to spil over? Time to leave. Some guy in a white coat on TV announces that there's "no reason to panic"? You leave immediately. This is the best option available to you that I can imagine. Of course in the real world, you don't control everything. There's a lot of random chance involved when it comes to your survival odds for the years ahead, although the odds are generally stacked against you if you live in Niger or Uganda and in your favor if you live in Denmark or New Zealand. It's not going to go wrong simultaneously everywhere. It should be clear that it already went wrong in Syria and Yemen. These places will soon be joined by large parts of Africa, which will trigger unprecedented waves of migrants. Places like Japan and New Zealand may very well get through the coming decades unscathed. For the rest of us, that's unlikely to be the case.
[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] BTC vs BCH is Brexit is Trump
The following post by kit_hod_jao is being replicated because the post has been silently removed. The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link: np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/7d22h2 The original post's content was as follows:
Although it seems crazy to bring politics into the already toxic BTC vs BCH debate, I can't help but notice the parallels. First, a wild-card outsider (BCH/Trump/Nigel Farage) promises to replace the sinister established Cabal (BlockStream "Core" devs / Deep State / EU) with a new system (bigger blocks / America first trade rules / no EU payments & rules) that's better for the little guy (those wanting cheap p2p payments / coal miners and disenfranchised workers who can't afford Obamacare / Fishermen and farmers caught in EU red tape). Second, massive FUD & bot campaign on social networks (TwitteReddit/Facebook) about the existing world order (Blocks are full, txs costly and slow / Hillary will start a war with XYZ / Moslems refugees from Germany will eat your babies). The outsider seems to have widespread grassroots support, but on closer inspection they speak ??????? ???? or are unable to maintain a coherent technical argument, demonstrating they are repeating talking points but have no deeper understanding. Third, complaints of oppression & censorship - the outsider rallies the converts with exposes of how their argument is being systematically suppressed and censored, and if only everyone knew the truth they would join the revolt. Finally, the trap is sprung on the poor dupes who believed the lies: We have the huge BCH pump and dump, which burns anyone who converted (including ME, I'm a foolish weak hodler). We have the republican healthcare debacle. And we have the pending collapse of the UK health system all of which are caused by the forces of the outsider having defeated the established order. In all these examples, the outsider is funded by shady groups of super-wealthy oligarchs (Chinese miners / Russian+Chinese governments, Mercer, Kochs / Russian government, Mercers, Dacre). Ladies and gentlemen, it's taken me nearly a year to recognize it, but this is how wars are fought in the 21st Century. Trust no one, it's the Bitcoin way.
09-12 16:52 - '[quote] Sir, you seem to be hysterical here - are you from ANTIFA or something? Because - no one yet mentioned a race (or what do you mean by "fascism" anyway?) besides you. / Main problem with rapefugees is not their race, but t...' by /u/Etovia removed from /r/Bitcoin within 7-17min
Thankfully rapists, like fascists such as yourself, are a very small minority
Sir, you seem to be hysterical here - are you from ANTIFA or something? Because - no one yet mentioned a race (or what do you mean by "fascism" anyway?) besides you. Main problem with rapefugees is not their race, but their moral values, and civilization that says raping infidels is a good thing. Or that promotes murdering own daughter "for honor" if she has sex with someone besides husband (including - if she is a victim of rape). If someone physically assaults, beats up woman, he deserves the proper punishment and then deportation. And if he has such values then he should never be let in at all. Besides this violent crimes, handing out free food and houses to anyone, instead offering them a job, as a permanent solution (besides the brief period of "well start doing something like everyone else or get out") always is a bad idea and attracts free-loaders. Anyone can say "Im a refugee" and get free house, free food, and free cash on top of that - and live like that entire life. Insanity.
are a very small minority
No, violent crimes are committed vastly by the migrants. For a quick example: it was the rapefugees who committed the night of thousand sexual assaults, nothing like that before happened in Europe in last decades. [link]1 Anyone can google up crime rates, and statistics of origin of perpetrators (though sadly, leftists governments like Nordic countries and most of cucked EU - are hiding and censoring such statistics now). This is getting offtopic, I just wanted actually to correct what this "migrants" mean nowdays in Europe, for any readers outside that have no idea what is going on. Leftists, SJWs, ANTIFA and other commies will anyway not change their mind, but curious people can easily google it and watch countless examples even on censored youtube how "rafugees" behave in Europe. Just google "refugees riots" "refugees europe" and so on. Do not limit yourself to CNN and other fake-news :) I'm pretty sure you're not here to learn anything new on this topic (if you want then just google that), so I'm ending this offtopic. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: Etovia 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year%27s_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany