Connect with us

Government

How We Arrived At The Globalist Calls For A “Great Reset”

How We Arrived At The Globalist Calls For A "Great Reset"

Published

on

How We Arrived At The Globalist Calls For A "Great Reset" Tyler Durden Sat, 06/27/2020 - 07:00

Authored by Steven Guinness,

The unveiling on June 3rd by the World Economic Forum of ‘The Great Reset‘ agenda appears on the surface to be a newly devised concept created directly in response to Covid-19. As it turns out the first soundings of a ‘reset‘ were actually made as far back as 2014.

To appreciate the significance of the WEF’s intervention, it is important first to recognise the years leading up to 2020 and how they laid the foundations for where we are today.

2014

Each January the WEF host their annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland. In 2014, Christine Lagarde, who was then the managing director of the IMF, called for a ‘reset‘ of monetary policy, the financial sector regulatory environment and structural reforms of global economies.

Lagarde was adamant that a reset was required ‘in the way in which the economy grows around the world‘.  Fleshing this out, Lagarde cited the dangers to financial stability due to ‘bubbles developing here and there‘, the over 200 million globally who were unemployed and economic growth being too slow.

Despite these concerns, Lagarde’s view was that fiscal consolidation within national economies was still necessary in order to control spending and ensure the post 2008 ‘recovery‘.

In January 2019 I posted an article that went into detail about the monetary policy aspect of the ‘reset‘ promoted by Lagarde (Monetary Policy ‘Reset’: From Rhetoric to Actuality). I raised how at the time of Lagarde’s intervention the Federal Reserve were tapering their asset purchasing scheme (quantitative easing), introduced in the aftermath of the collapse of Lehman Brothers that triggered the 2008 financial crisis.

Come the end of 2014, the Fed had called a halt entirely to QE. A year later in December 2015, they began to raise interest rates for the first time in over a decade and would later go on to introduce an asset reduction programme where the central bank began to roll off assets from its balance sheet.

For Lagarde, international cooperation would be essential for a reset to succeed. Without nations cooperating, it would likely be fraught with instability and market turbulence. In an interview with Bloomberg at the time of the WEF meeting, Lagarde stressed the importance of the ‘medium term‘ when it came to achieving the reset:

The short term collides with the medium term but the question is to bring the medium term into the personal, political and corporate equation. And that’s the job of the IMF.

2015

Looking back, 2015 was a highly significant year that saw global planners state quite openly their ambitions for a New World Order to be implemented over the next decade and a half.

First came the unveiling of the United Nation’s derived Agenda 2030 in September, and with it seventeen main objectives known as the Sustainable Development Goals. Agenda 2030 was adopted by the 193 members of the UN, with adoption coinciding with the 70th anniversary of the institution’s existence.

Chief amongst the seventeen goals were to end poverty by 2030 and for there to be zero hunger. Action on climate change was also needed, as was the creation of sustainable cities and communities and good health and wellbeing (which the UN directly associate with vaccinating families).

Agenda 2030 replaced the Millennium Development Goals, which were introduced in 2000 and encompassed a series of targets to be completed by 2015. According to the UN, ‘enormous progress‘ had been made ‘but more needs to be done‘.

To get a sense of what the UN means by ‘more‘, when the Sustainable Development Goals were signed off Claire Melamed, who in 2015 was Director of the global think tank Overseas Development Institute, told the BBC:

If they’re going to be met we’re going to have to see huge amounts of money. We’re going to have see governments behaving in a completely different way. We’re going to have to see companies totally changing their business practices. It can be done, but the real question is whether we want to do it enough.

Melamed is now the Chief Executive Officer of Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data. Amongst the organisation’s funding partner’s are the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is a prominent organisation in the drive for a vaccine to immunise people against Covid-19.

In December 2015, three months after the announcement of Agenda 2030, came the founding of the Paris Climate Agreement at the COP21 conference. The agreement ties directly into the United Nations and operates within the bounds of the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, and was the first ever universal and legally binding agreement adopted on the subject.

To achieve the goals of the agreement, one of which is limiting global warming to below two degrees, ‘appropriate financial flows, a new technology framework and an enhanced capacity building framework will be put in place, thus supporting action by developing countries and the most vulnerable countries, in line with their own national objectives.’

So far, 189 countries have ratified the agreement out of 197 that were present at the Paris conference. In October 2016, the required threshold was reached for the accord to enter into force.

2016

With Agenda 2030 and the Paris Climate Agreement now set in motion, the World Economic Forum (which fully endorses the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals) ran with the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) as the theme for it’s annual meeting. I wrote about this in 2018 (Fourth Industrial Revolution: Mission Creep towards a New World Order – Part One) and picked up on how the executive chairman of the WEF, Klaus Schwab, described the impact that the Fourth Industrial Revolution would have on the world.

First, it would be all encompassing and involve all stakeholders of the global polity, meaning full engagement with the public and private sectors, academia and civil society. Some aspects to the revolution include disruption to jobs and skills, business disruption, innovation and productivity, agile governance and security and conflict.

Second, connecting through these areas are a whole raft of concerns which comprise the rise of blockchain technology, global governance, the future of enterprise, workforce and employment, the future of government, the future of production, sustainable development and social protection systems.

The revolution is dubbed as a digital revolution, one where the ‘fusion of technologies‘ embodying the physical, digital and biological spheres come together. Artificial intelligence, robotics, nano and bio technology are all part of the vision for 4IR.

Schwab made it very plain that the world can expect the revolution to be a ‘symbiosis between micro-organisms, the human body, the products people consume and the buildings we inhabit.’  One consequence of this is that human beings will no longer just be users of technology, rather they will start to converge with both the digital and biological worlds to become part of it. A second consequence is that every industry on the planet will be subjected to a degree of ‘disruption‘ as the 4IR advances, resulting in the systems of production, management and governance being transformed.

It does not stop there. Outside of jobs, human identity, privacy, notions of ownership, consumption patterns, the time devoted to work and leisure, how we develop as individuals and how we meet people and nurture relationships will all have to change to accommodate 4IR. Since the onset of Covid-19, many of these things have already undergone significant ‘disruption

Soon after the 2016 WEF meeting, the world experienced substantial geopolitical ructions with the UK voting to leave the European Union and Donald Trump being elected as the United States’ 45th President.

2019

Three years after they signalled major technological, political and societal change was coming, the World Economic Forum were back with a new theme – ‘Globalization 4.0: Shaping a New Architecture in the Age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution‘. It was a subject I covered in an article published around the time (Why Dismissing Globalist Warnings as ‘Project Fear’ May Prove a Mistake).

Executive chairman Klaus Schwab was at it again, reiterating that ‘our systems of health, transportation, communication, production, distribution, and energy – just to name a few – will be completely transformed.’ Included in the breadth of transformation would be blockchain and distributed ledger technology, two fundamental components in the drive towards a global digital currency network.

In talking about ‘Globalization 4.0‘, Schwab described the present day as an ‘era of widespread insecurity and frustration‘, and went on to blame this environment for a rise in populism.

What Schwab did not make direct mention of is how a resurgence of protectionist tendencies was assisting the WEF in being able to push the argument for 4IR. The greater the level of global disunity, the more opportunity that groups like the WEF have in being able to cultivate the concept of a New World Order and convince people of its necessity. Globalization 4.0 is a facet of 4IR, a vision that Schwab is unreservedly committed to:

Globalization 4.0 has only just begun, but we are already vastly underprepared for it. Clinging to an outdated mindset and tinkering with our existing processes and institutions will not do. Rather, we need to redesign them from the ground up, so that we can capitalize on the new opportunities that await us, while avoiding the kind of disruptions that we are witnessing today. 

Ready or not‘, Schwab warned, ‘a new world is upon us‘.

Five months on from the WEF meeting, the Bank for International Settlements introduced a new concept called the ‘BIS Innovation Hub‘, also known as ‘Innovation BIS 2025‘. This is a topic I have also written about previously (Innovation BIS 2025: A Stepping Stone Towards an Economic ‘New World Order’).

The BIS described the Hub as a medium term strategy consisting of three main elements:

  • Identify and develop in-depth insights into critical trends in technology affecting central banking

  • Develop public goods in the technology space geared towards improving the functioning of the global financial system

  • Serve as a focal point for a network of central bank experts on innovation

When launching the hub, BIS General Manager Agustin Carstens spoke of ‘reshaping the financial landscape‘ following ‘the scars left by the financial crisis‘. According to Carstens, now was the time to set about reforming the way that the central banking community operates.

When digging down into the BIS Innovation Hub, it becomes clear that at the core of the project is the creation of central bank digital currency (CBDC). In practice, this would mean the abolition of tangible assets such as banknotes and coins and see the creation of a new form of digital money issued by central banks.

Global payment systems are in the process of being reformed to accommodate the use of blockchain and distributed ledger technology, and central banks are now beginning to disseminate technological detail for how a CBDC could be issued.

As it stands, a volatile geopolitical climate, exacerbated by Covid-19 and the unproven fear that handling physical money could transmit the virus, is assisting the BIS in their ambitions for completely resetting how the general public will interact with central bank money over the coming years.

In a follow up article we will look specifically at what the World Economic Forum have termed ‘The Great Reset‘ and what exactly global planners are seeking to achieve.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

America’s Top Graduates Don’t Want Jobs On Wall Street

America’s Top Graduates Don’t Want Jobs On Wall Street

Even after trading Midtown and Wall Street skyscrapers for the familiarity of their parent’s basement, the army of junior investment banking analysts employed at Goldman Sachs and the…

Published

on

America's Top Graduates Don't Want Jobs On Wall Street

Even after trading Midtown and Wall Street skyscrapers for the familiarity of their parent's basement, the army of junior investment banking analysts employed at Goldman Sachs and the other major investment banks quickly found that there was no way to avoid the punishing 90+ hour weeks that are a hallmark of the investment-banking analyst programs across Wall Street. However, with the explosion of deals during the pandemic, a cadre of Goldman junior analysts decided to go public with their complaints about the hopelessly skewed work-life balance.

That sparked a conversation about whether investment banking analyst slots, once seen as a virtually guaranteed path to success in one of the world's most lucrative industries, were still worth the tremendous effort required to succeed. While the jobs typically offer six-figure compensation packages, competition from the world of tech - not to mention the buy side, where both work-life balance and compensation are more desirable - has stunted their allure.

And as bankers rebel against management's demands that they return to offices full-time, the NYT has just published a story proclaiming that "the lure of investment banking is fading" for the youngest members of the workforce.

To try and give their reporting an empirical basis, the NYT cited data from top MBA programs showing fewer graduates are finding jobs on Wall Street.

The number of applicants to banking analyst programs is hard to track, but business school data, which captures a slightly older cohort of potential financiers, shows a broad decline in interest in investment banking. Last year, the five top-ranked U.S. business schools sent, on average, 7 percent of graduates from their master’s of business administration programs into full-time investment banking roles, down from 9 percent in 2016. The decline was pronounced at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, where bankers were 12 percent of the M.B.A. cohort in 2020, compared with more than a fifth of the class a decade earlier. Harvard sent just 3 percent of its 2020 class.

After the data, the reporters included a comment from an Accenture consultant who specializes in recruiting.

"The industry is not as attractive" as it once was, said Rob Dicks, a consultant at Accenture who specializes in recruiting in financial services. "Employees want a hybrid model, and the banks are saying no," he said, referring to a combination of in-person and remote work. "The message is: 'The bank knows best, we have a model for doing this, and you will conform to that model.'"

But perhaps the most tantalizing detail included in the story was an interview with Jamie Lee, the son of legendary JPM banker Jimmy Lee. Apparently, before his death, Jimmy Lee advised his son not to accept an offer for an analyst position.

"The technology sector has just completely changed the game," said Jamie Lee, 37, who worked in banking before starting a venture-capital firm this year. "The opportunity cost is simply too high to be sticking around in a job where you’re not getting the treatment that you want."

Mr. Lee’s father, the JPMorgan banker Jimmy Lee, was for decades one of the best-known players in his field, advising companies like Facebook and General Motors before he died in 2015. But when the younger Mr. Lee was finishing college in the mid-2000s, his father urged him to avoid the analyst programs.

"He said, 'Honestly, J, the way that I’ve seen that we work these kids, I’m not sure that I want that for you,'" Mr. Lee recalled.

Even foreign students who once comprised one of the most reliable cohorts for young Wall Street recruits due to the high pay and visa help see tech companies as their No. 1 choice. If they are going into banking, most are hoping to work as an engineer, not a banking analyst.

Before graduating from Mount Holyoke College in 2016, Areeba Kamal worked for a summer as a trading intern handling complex bond products at Bank of America’s Midtown Manhattan tower. She arrived around 8:30 a.m. and often stayed until 10:30 p.m., trying to learn the intricacies of her product. She sent money to her family in Pakistan.

"If you’re an international student, early on you realize your two options are finance and tech," said Ms. Kamal, 29, noting that those fields offer the most pay and help with work visas.

But after that summer in finance, she gravitated toward tech. “I don’t want to work 14 to 15 hours a day on something I don’t care about because it pays a ridiculous amount of money,” Ms. Kamal said. She now works for Apple.

In summary, maybe Goldman CEO David Solomon shouldn't have been so dismissive of his junior employees' complaints.

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/30/2021 - 18:40

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Wrong Predictions Don’t Deter The Predictors

Wrong Predictions Don’t Deter The Predictors

Authored by Cal Thomas via The Epoch Times,

We have always had them among us: fortune tellers, diviners, readers of palms, tarot cards, tea leaves, stars, horoscopes, discerners of animal entrails

Published

on

Wrong Predictions Don't Deter The Predictors

Authored by Cal Thomas via The Epoch Times,

We have always had them among us: fortune tellers, diviners, readers of palms, tarot cards, tea leaves, stars, horoscopes, discerners of animal entrails, calling on gods of wood and stone, and all sorts of other “seers” who have attempted to convince the gullible that they have the power to predict the future.

To some, climate change proponents are little more than modern-day soothsayers that media continues to legitimize, even when their dire predictions of global catastrophe turn out to be not so dire.

The latest, but assuredly not the last, is President Biden’s climate envoy, John Kerry. Kerry, whose scientific credentials are nonexistent, recently predicted we have only “100 days” to save the planet from climate disaster. That “Chicken Little” prediction was made at the U.N. Climate Summit a few days ago, so we had better subtract the days that have followed.

Kerry said on “CBS This Morning” in February that the world has “nine years” to avert a climate catastrophe.

What happened in the last five months to advance his forecast? He doesn’t say and reporters won’t ask him.

In 1967, a Los Angeles Times story reported, “It is already too late for the world to avoid a long period of famine,” this according to Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich, author of the controversial book “The Population Bomb.” Ehrlich also said the U.S. population was “too big” and that involuntary birth control might have to be imposed through sterilizing agents put into staple foods and drinking water. Ehrlich added the Roman Catholic Church might have to be pressured into going along to control the population. In 2018, Ehrlich was still at it claiming that climate disruption was “killing people” and that the collapse of civilization is a “near certainty.”

America is not experiencing a famine, is it? And contrary to too large a U.S. population, the 2020 Census Bureau report showed that the U.S. population has slowed in the past 10 years to its lowest rate since the 1930s. To quote from a Stephen Sondheim musical, “I’m still here.”

In 1970, a scientist named James P. Lodge, Jr. predicted “a new ice age” by the 21st century. Here we are 21 years into the 21st century and some experts are saying the opposite. No wonder critics call it junk science.

Apologists often claim their predictions were based on information available at the time. Yet they want to make changes that would affect our lives and lifestyles, perhaps forever. It’s all about control, not individual freedom.

In 1972, two members of the Department of Geological Science at Brown University wrote President Richard Nixon following a “meeting of 42 top American and European investigators.” Their letter said, “The main conclusion of the meeting was that a global deterioration of climate, by order of magnitude larger than any hitherto experienced by civilized mankind, is a very real possibility, and indeed may be due very soon.”

Nearly 50 years later we are still waiting on the sky to fall.

There’s much more for anyone who takes time to do the research.

Today, because of fear surrounding COVID-19, we have similar apocalyptic statements emanating from politicians and scientists. Are these statements their attempt to obtain more power for themselves and rob us of our individual liberties and the right to make our own choices?

Has much changed since those ludicrous statements were made a half-century ago? Are doomsday predictions being repeated in new ways today by John Kerry and his fellow climate scare travelers?

Will we resist, or blindly follow?

Tyler Durden Fri, 07/30/2021 - 18:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

74% Of COVID-19 Cases From Massachusetts Outbreak Occurred In Fully Vaccinated People: CDC

74% Of COVID-19 Cases From Massachusetts Outbreak Occurred In Fully Vaccinated People: CDC

Authored by Zachary Steiber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A COVID-19 outbreak in a Massachusetts county in July primarily occurred among vaccin

Published

on

74% Of COVID-19 Cases From Massachusetts Outbreak Occurred In Fully Vaccinated People: CDC

Authored by Zachary Steiber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A COVID-19 outbreak in a Massachusetts county in July primarily occurred among vaccinated people, sparking fears that a variant of the CCP virus can impact that population more than other strains.

Of the 469 cases detected in Barnstable County, 74 percent occurred among the fully vaccinated, according to a new study published on Friday.

Genomic sequencing of 133 patients showed most of them were infected with the Delta variant of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

The bulk of the infected people did not require hospital care, but among the five that did, four were fully vaccinated.

The study, published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), helped drive agency officials to change masking guidance.

CDC officials announced Tuesday that even vaccinated persons should wear masks indoors, an abrupt shift from under three months ago.

The CDC was unable to point to any published data at the time of its announcement, though an internal document leaked Thursday pointed to some published studies, as well as what was at the time unpublished data from Massachusetts.

The agency recommended that both the vaccinated and unvaccinated should don face coverings indoors in areas with high or substantial transmission of the CCP virus. More than half the counties in America meet one of those designations.

[ZH: And as Bloomberg notes, the CDC scaled back their hunt for breakthrough cases just as Delta emerged.

While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stopped comprehensively tracking what are known as vaccine breakthrough cases in May, the consequences of that choice are only now beginning to show.

At the time, the agency had identified only 10,262 cases across the U.S. where a fully vaccinated person had tested positive for Covid. Most people who got infected after vaccination showed few symptoms, and appeared to be at low risk of infecting others. 

But in the months since, the number of vaccine breakthrough cases has grown, as has the risk that they present. And while the CDC has stopped tracking such cases, many states have not. Bloomberg gathered data from 35 states and identified 111,748 vaccine breakthrough cases through the end of July, more than 10 times the CDC’s end-of-April tally.]

Researchers, though, said their investigation suggests people in any area should wear masks inside.

“Findings from this investigation suggest that even jurisdictions without substantial or high COVID-19 transmission might consider expanding prevention strategies, including masking in indoor public settings regardless of vaccination status, given the potential risk of infection during attendance at large public gatherings that include travelers from many areas with differing levels of transmission,” they wrote.

Some of the researchers are CDC officials. Others are with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, which declined to facilitate an interview on the findings.

The cases in Barnstable County stemmed from summer events and large public gatherings held between July 3 and July 17, the researchers said in the study.

A graph from a new study published by the CDC shows that many of the COVID-19 cases linked to an outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, this month were among vaccinated people. (CDC)

The events attracted thousands of tourists to the area.

The average of COVID-19 cases in the county rose sharply from July 3 to July 17.

Using travel history from the state’s COVID-19 surveillance system, officials identified a cluster of cases among Massachusetts residents. Additional cases were pinpointed by local health officials.

The cluster cases were defined by a positive COVID-19 test within 14 days of travel or residence in Barnstable County since July 3.

By July 26, 469 COVID-19 cases were identified among state residents, with dates of positive specimens ranging from July 6 to July 25.

Researchers found that the bulk were fully vaccinated, a term that refers to people who have gotten two Moderna or Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines, or the single-shot Johnson & Johnson jab.

Initial data—chain reaction cycle threshold values from some of the specimens—indicate that the viral load of the vaccinated and unvaccinated cases are similar, researchers said. However, they said microbiological studies are required to confirm those findings.

Further, the Infectious Disease Society of America and the Association for Molecular Pathology earlier this year said that such values “should not be considered quantitative measures of viral load.”

Still, the findings were among those used by the CDC to justify the sudden shift this week. Where before vaccinated people were told they did not need to wear a mask anywhere, they are now being told to don a face covering inside.

The data demonstrate “that Delta infection resulted in similarly high SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated people,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s director, said in a statement on Friday.

High viral loads suggest an increased risk of transmission and raised concern that, unlike with other variants, vaccinated people infected with Delta can transmit the virus. This finding is concerning and was a pivotal discovery leading to CDC’s updated mask recommendation.”

The recommendation is not binding but the CDC’s advice is widely adopted by counties, states, and businesses.

The rise in cases in Provincetown, part of Barnstable County, prompted town officials earlier this week to adopt an indoor mask mandate.

The mandate will shift to an advisory when the daily positive testing rate stays below 3 percent for at least five days, according to Town Manager Alex Morse.

While vaccinated people must wear masks inside, unvaccinated people, including children under the age of 12, must wear face coverings in outdoor crowded areas as well as indoors.

As of July 29, 882 cases were linked to the Barnstable County cluster, 531 of whom are state residents. The percentage of breakthrough cases remained at 74 percent.

Follow Zachary on Twitter: @zackstieber
Follow Zachary on Parler: @zackstieber
Tyler Durden Fri, 07/30/2021 - 17:11

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending