Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
All Covid-19 measures are permanent, don't be a boiling frog!
Options
Comments
-
no, because hospitalisations and ICU numbers go up 2-4 weeks after infection, and possibly when the R rate is above 1 at that point ....
Then you're back into re-action rather than pro-active
Heard immunity will go hand in hand with vaccination numbers and will be tied in with positive test cases as part of the metric...
edit:
Christmas was a prime example of this, with the first rise in infection rates after New Years, with hospitalisations starting to rise shortly after....
The restriction measures came in straight after Christmas, if it were left until the 2 weeks after when hospital numbers started to rise, we'd still be cleaning that mess up now
But if the vaccines don't stop transmission (I know that it looks like they do) but people aren't getting seriously ill or being hospitalised then why do case numbers matter?
Shouldn't all testing end once herd immunity has been achieved? Isn't the point of the vaccine to go back to normal? Not Ronan Glynn's 'a degree of normality' but actual normal.0 -
"All measures are permanent"
Why?
211 pages of evasion, contradictory theories and not a single coherent answer to that0 -
Deleted User wrote: »But if the vaccines don't stop transmission (I know that it looks like they do) but people aren't getting seriously ill or being hospitalised then why do case numbers matter?
Shouldn't all testing end once herd immunity has been achieved? Isn't the point of the vaccine to go back to normal? Not Ronan Glynn's 'a degree of normality' but actual normal.
The metric won't be a single thing, broadly speaking it will be positive cases, hospitalisations and vaccinated numbers...
a lot of testing is intrusive at the moment, contacts being tested, schools being tested, employees being tested.... so you will have high numbers (possibly a stable number indefinitely when heard immunity is achieved and it is fully confirmed covid 19 can still be present and transmissible in an "immune" person)
testing in this way is still a sledge hammer approach and doesn't account for false positives and people with unknown immune deficiencies....
that's one side of it...
hospitalisations are reducing, and will be a key metric for some countries, particularly Ireland
Vaccination numbers, as point one may not be fully trusted until better testing methods come into play, will be the only valid number for "heard immunity"
but, if you have a reduction in people presenting for testing because of symptoms, this will inevitably lead to a reduction in mandatory testing, which in turn will reduce hospital numbers.... if there is a sufficient amount of people vaccinated at this point, it has cost benefit sense to reduce restrictions, not only from an economy perspective, but making places covid secure and implementing testing, is ****ing expensive0 -
The metric won't be a single thing, broadly speaking it will be positive cases, hospitalisations and vaccinated numbers...
a lot of testing is intrusive at the moment, contacts being tested, schools being tested, employees being tested.... so you will have high numbers (possibly a stable number indefinitely when heard immunity is achieved and it is fully confirmed covid 19 can still be present and transmissible in an "immune" person)
testing in this way is still a sledge hammer approach and doesn't account for false positives and people with unknown immune deficiencies....
that's one side of it...
hospitalisations are reducing, and will be a key metric for some countries, particularly Ireland
Vaccination numbers, as point one may not be fully trusted until better testing methods come into play, will be the only valid number for "heard immunity"
but, if you have a reduction in people presenting for testing because of symptoms, this will inevitably lead to a reduction in mandatory testing, which in turn will reduce hospital numbers.... if there is a sufficient amount of people vaccinated at this point, it has cost benefit sense to reduce restrictions, not only from an economy perspective, but making places covid secure and implementing testing, is ****ing expensive
But if you have consistently have 500 or so cases and 0 hospitalisations then why would case numbers be important? Do you not think mass testing should stop once herd immunity is achieved and people just go to the doctor if they're feeling unwell and then diagnosed as having covid or not? Like what happens with other viruses.0 -
"All measures are permanent"
Why?
211 pages of evasion, contradictory theories and not a single coherent answer to that
It’s about being against the mainstream, being the special people who get it. If the death toll was higher then the fantasy would be that the globalists are out to cull us instead of saying jump.0 -
Advertisement
-
Deleted User wrote: »That's something that people are concerned about, I imagine. There was an article in the Irish Mirror a couple of days ago comparing level 1 in Ireland with life Australia and New Zealand, which are practically restriction free domestically. Victoria scrapped masks in all retail a few days ago and, while a bit behind the other states, is gradually lifting all restrictions. Level 1 in Ireland is still heavily restricted. It includes mask wearing and social distancing as well as capacity limits. Ronan Glynn has for some time now being talking about 'a degree of normality'. Level 1 would be a degree of normality. I think the worry is that the media will increasingly push level 1 as being the best people can expect in terms of normal.
I’m in NSW and you only need masks for live theatre which is 100% capacity but you don’t need them in cinemas which is 100% capacity or even to visit hospitals. The government just recommends them on pubic transport.
Everywhere has QR code’s that you scan on you way in.
There are few restrictions now, all pubs, cafes, restaurants over a capacity of 25 are based on 1 person per 2m2.
Nightclubs are open.
You can have as many people in your home as you want but over 100 you need to set up a covid safe plan such as QR code that guests can scan.
No limits on Weddings and funerals.
No restrictions on singing and dancing.
Just so you can get an idea this was how we celebrated Paddy’s day and last weekend.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?vanity=TheMercantileHotel&set=a.4212405355460548
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?vanity=TheMercantileHotel&set=a.42306902802987220 -
?
The original poster believes all measures are nothing to do with the pandemic and everything to do with some loony dystopian Communist fantasy.
Conspiracy theorists are paranoid, they think politicians wake up every day consumed with nefarious notions to enslave/control humanity, and even since Covid has come along they've all gone into overdrive imagining that common sense measures against the virus are in fact secret permanent measures to "control" people, yadda, yadda
Some individuals can't comprehend that we aren't in control of this pandemic, and they comfort themselves with these fantasies.
RT is Russia Today, an English speaking outlet for the Kremlin which entertains just about every crank conspiracist and anti-Westerner going.
Do you think it's over in the UK? There were 19 covid related deaths today in the UK out a population of 65 million. Or if not over at least under control?
I reread the original post and brianhere gives reasons as to why he believes the measures are permanent. He gives examples of measures introduced in the past that persisted when the need for them was no longer there.
And Neil Clark appears to have been consistently been right in what he's said. He has an inside source.0 -
mandrake04 wrote: »I’m in NSW and you only need masks for live theatre which is 100% capacity but you don’t need them in cinemas which is 100% capacity or even to visit hospitals. The government just recommends them on pubic transport.
Everywhere has QR code’s that you scan on you way in.
There are few restrictions now, all pubs, cafes, restaurants over a capacity of 25 are based on 1 person per 2m2.
Nightclubs are open.
You can have as many people in your home as you want but over 100 you need to set up a covid safe plan such as QR code that guests can scan.
No limits on Weddings and funerals.
No restrictions on singing and dancing.
Just so you can get an idea this was how we celebrated Paddy’s day and last weekend.
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?vanity=TheMercantileHotel&set=a.4212405355460548
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?vanity=TheMercantileHotel&set=a.4230690280298722
Thank for that. I wasn't aware they were required for live theatre. I thought they were completely scrapped. I guess they'll eventually go for live theatre as well. Is that the plan?
Those photos are great. I'm very envious. I have friends in Adelaide and they tell me life is completely normal there.
But are people worried that there's always the possibility of restrictions being reintroduced if there's even just a single case? And what happens once the border reopens? Because there will be case numbers.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »But if you have consistently have 500 or so cases and 0 hospitalisations then why would case numbers be important? Do you not think mass testing should stop once herd immunity is achieved and people just go to the doctor if they're feeling unwell and then diagnosed as having covid or not? Like what happens with other viruses.
I think you need to re-read what I just posted and digest it a little0 -
I never thought I'd be posting in this thread but I was thinking about the separate rules for different people today.
Have you seen Norma Foley's haircut? Or any of the *newsreaders? They still have access to grooming services because they are "public figures".
Honestly when I heard that I felt like a second class citizen.
Eat the rich.
*not Virgin media, just the state broadcaster if you would believe it0 -
Advertisement
-
Deleted User wrote: »Thank for that. I wasn't aware they were required for live theatre. I thought they were completely scrapped. I guess they'll eventually go for live theatre as well. Is that the plan?
Those photos are great. I'm very envious. I have friends in Adelaide and they tell me life is completely normal there.
But are people worried that there's always the possibility of restrictions being reintroduced if there's even just a single case? And what happens once the border reopens? Because there will be case numbers.
Varies state to state, each state is like its own country with its own laws and government so they can do things independent of each other...we had no lockdown like Victoria or Ireland not even close.
They won’t open the border to the likes of Europe until October as by then everyone here will be vaccinated but its currently open to NZ and I think possibly Singapore from July0 -
Is there a conspiracy theory explaining why Australia and New Zealand are not part of the global C19 conspiracy that the OP detailed ?0
-
mandrake04 wrote: »Varies state to state, each state is like its own country with its own laws and government so they can do things independent of each other...we had no lockdown like Victoria or Ireland not even close.
They won’t open the border to the likes of Europe until October as by then everyone here will be vaccinated but its currently open to NZ and I think possibly Singapore from July
I really like the federal system. I think it's a great idea. The good thing about a country that's made up of states is that you if a person finds that a state doesn't suit them they can go to a different one where there are a different laws and a different way of doing things.0 -
-
"All measures are permanent"
Why?
211 pages of evasion, contradictory theories and not a single coherent answer to that
I think the argument is pretty simple. The reasoning would be because the people don't have any power to stop them. If the covid measures end it won't be because the people ended them.0 -
SlowBlowin wrote: »Is there a conspiracy theory explaining why Australia and New Zealand are not part of the global C19 conspiracy that the OP detailed ?
they weren't in the originals
0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Are you not concerned that there's no level 0 in the 'living with covid plan'? Does the fact that level 0 in Scotland includes mask wearing concern you? Does it suggest that the Scottish Government has no plans to scrap masks?
I just had a quick look at the 'living with covid' plan, and I have no concerns that it only goes from level 1 to level 5.
I have confidence that the government are competent enough to make reasonable decisions in the circumstances.
As regards Scotland having masks in level 0, again it doesn't concern me in the context that the virus will be circulating in the world for a good while yet, and we have yet to see how effective the vaccinations are, and if new strains of covid cause any problems, etc.
I imagine the Scottish government are also reasonably competent and won't be doing anything totally unnecessary.
Does it suggest that the Scottish government has no plans to scrap masks?
It only suggests that they see it as prudent to keep masks on the table for the near term future, it says nothing about longer term!Deleted User wrote: »Is it not the Government that's deciding on things? Sweden, and Norway and Finland to a lesser extent, chose a different approach. It wasn't the virus that chose that approach.
Yes, each government has to make its own decision based on what is happening at the time, so they are reacting to the virus.
It's like a doctor treating a patient. As the patient's symptoms change the treatments change.
Sweden took a different approach to most of Europe.
Norway, Finland, and Denmark did Not take the Swedish approach.
The results: Sweden, with a population of 10.2m had 12,798 covid deaths so far (=1,255 per m)
Denmark + Norway + Finland, with combined population of 16.7m, have had 4,331 deaths so far (= 259 per m)
And this is with Sweden in effect having a semi lockdown (masks were on public transport, social distancing, 20 people can attend a funeral, public gatherings limited to 8 people, etc)
So like doctors, governments differ and patients die (and a lot more people died in Sweden)!!
However even Sweden reacted due to the virus, with restrictions edging progressively closer to the rest of Europe during the winter.Deleted User wrote: »But it doesn't it increasingly look as though the OP might be right? Test kits, according to Johnson, are set to be a feature of school life for years. There is no guarantee from the UK Government that mask wearing will be scrapped or made voluntary. Gibraltar has vaccinated its almost its entire adult population and they're still compulsory in shops and on public transport|: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-gibraltar-masks-idUSKBN2BK0F7
Scrapping masks for me includes scrapping them in shops and on public transport. But Dr Mary Ramsay of PHE is of the opinion that mask wearing, and social distancing, believe it or not, are low level measures that should stay in place for years. That would mean it wouldn't really be possible to stage concerts, gigs, have fans in football stadia etc.
All those things are designed to reduce the transmission of the virus.
It would be nonsense to just say we've had enough of masks now, let's just get rid of them, unless the conditions dictated that!
It'd be like the doctor saying, regardless of the sickness of the patient, let just stop taking those silly antiboitics!!Deleted User wrote: »Post-vaccination, and with herd immunity achieved, do you believe all restrictions should go and complete normality resume? What do you make of Ronan Glynn talking about 'a degree of normality'?
Post vaccination, if we effectively achieve herd immunity, and if restrictions become unnecessary, then of course they should go.
In those circumstances, if there was no threat, why would we keep the restrictions?Deleted User wrote: »Post-vaccination, and with herd immunity achieved, do you believe all restrictions should go and complete normality resume? What do you make of Ronan Glynn talking about 'a degree of normality'?
What do you make of this article: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/02/the-great-reset-global-digital-sustainability/
"Individuals, much as we each yearn to return to life as it was before the pandemic, have to adjust to a life that has greater restrictions on what we can do"
Did you vote for WEF or Chandran Nair to decide how you should live your life? Does it look as though WEF is taking advantage of covid to usher in a new normal restricted way of life?
As I said above, I have confidence the government will make reasonable decisions based on the information available at any particular time.
The WEF comments are just that, comments by an onlooker, and to me don't carry any more weight that anyone else.Deleted User wrote: »Does it look as though WEF is taking advantage of covid to usher in a new normal restricted way of life?
Are the WEF making any decisions in any country with regards to how they combat covid?
The answer is surely no, each government is making it's own decisions, and those decisions vary a bit (and more than a bit in the case of Sweden).
So no, it doesn't look like the WEF is taking advantage of anything,
they are effectively just a talking shop for different countries and business leaders to get together and talk about things that affect everyone.0 -
timeToLive wrote: »I think the argument is pretty simple. The reasoning would be because the people don't have any power to stop them. If the covid measures end it won't be because the people ended them.
Yes, I think you're right. I think countries constitutions have been shown to be incredibly weak in the past year. Even the US Constitution, which I always thought was a robust and a strong safeguard.
I haven't heard an explanation for what the World Economic Forum means by the following:
"To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed."
I was told that the World Economic Forum doesn't make decisions. The above looks like a decision made to me. It'd be like discussing a presentation with someone and before you sit down to discuss they send you a description of what the presentation is going to be.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Yes, I think you're right. I think countries constitutions have been shown to be incredibly weak in the past year. Even the US Constitution, which I always thought was a robust and a strong safeguard.
I haven't heard an explanation for what the World Economic Forum means by the following:
"To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed."
I was told that the World Economic Forum doesn't make decisions. The above looks like a decision made to me. It'd be like discussing a presentation with someone and before you sit down to discuss they send you a description of what the presentation is going to be.
Sounds like some sort of Great Reset0 -
PintOfView wrote: »I just had a quick look at the 'living with covid' plan, and I have no concerns that it only goes from level 1 to level 5.
I have confidence that the government are competent enough to make reasonable decisions in the circumstances.
As regards Scotland having masks in level 0, again it doesn't concern me in the context that the virus will be circulating in the world for a good while yet, and we have yet to see how effective the vaccinations are, and if new strains of covid cause any problems, etc.
I imagine the Scottish government are also reasonably competent and won't be doing anything totally unnecessary.
Does it suggest that the Scottish government has no plans to scrap masks?
It only suggests that they see it as prudent to keep masks on the table for the near term future, it says nothing about longer term!
Yes, each government has to make its own decision based on what is happening at the time, so they are reacting to the virus.
It's like a doctor treating a patient. As the patient's symptoms change the treatments change.
Sweden took a different approach to most of Europe.
Norway, Finland, and Denmark did Not take the Swedish approach.
The results: Sweden, with a population of 10.2m had 12,798 covid deaths so far (=1,255 per m)
Denmark + Norway + Finland, with combined population of 16.7m, have had 4,331 deaths so far (= 259 per m)
And this is with Sweden in effect having a semi lockdown (masks were on public transport, social distancing, 20 people can attend a funeral, public gatherings limited to 8 people, etc)
So like doctors, governments differ and patients die (and a lot more people died in Sweden)!!
However even Sweden reacted due to the virus, with restrictions edging progressively closer to the rest of Europe during the winter.
All those things are designed to reduce the transmission of the virus.
It would be nonsense to just say we've had enough of masks now, let's just get rid of them, unless the conditions dictated that!
It'd be like the doctor saying, regardless of the sickness of the patient, let just stop taking those silly antiboitics!!
Post vaccination, if we effectively achieve herd immunity, and if restrictions become unnecessary, then of course they should go.
In those circumstances, if there was no threat, why would we keep the restrictions?
As I said above, I have confidence the government will make reasonable decisions based on the information available at any particular time.
The WEF comments are just that, comments by an onlooker, and to me don't carry any more weight that anyone else.
Are the WEF making any decisions in any country with regards to how they combat covid?
The answer is surely no, each government is making it's own decisions, and those decisions vary a bit (and more than a bit in the case of Sweden).
So no, it doesn't look like the WEF is taking advantage of anything,
they are effectively just a talking shop for different countries and business leaders to get together and talk about things that affect everyone.
But if you go by 'potential variants' then it means never going back to normal. There would always be the risk of a potential variant.
Would you agree that level 1 is highly restricted? There is nothing in that plan about 100% normality. And Ronan Glynn keeps talking about 'a degree of normality'. He never mentions 'normality'.
I would argue that the fact that they're in level 0, the lowest level possible, suggests that they're going to be sticking around. Many seem to be of the opinion in the UK that masks are a low level measure. Dr Mary Ramsay of PHE says they are and predicts they'll be in place for years. Do you agree with her?
Masks aren't mandatory on public transport in Sweden. They're only recommended for certain times during the day.
Do you think covid is over in the UK, or almost over? There were 19 covid related deaths in the UK today out of a population of 65 million.
So even post-vaccination you think restrictions would be acceptable?0 -
Advertisement
-
Is there anyone here who can interpret the data here from the CDC website?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7010e3-H.pdf
To me this looks like masks provide 0.5% less chance of death and 0.7% less chance of death.
Why continue?0 -
Deleted User wrote: »I reread the original post and brianhere gives reasons as to why he believes the measures are permanent. He gives examples of measures introduced in the past that persisted when the need for them was no longer there.
Not really no. He labels measures as "social/population control measures" right off the bat, they aren't. They are anti-virus measures. He labels this as a "health scare", no it's a pandemic.
What you are trying to do is pick through someone else's nonsense to find something, anything you can cling to, in this case it's that "all the measures will be permanent", which is false, multiple countries have already started relaxing measures.0 -
MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 wrote: »Is there anyone here who can interpret the data here from the CDC website?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7010e3-H.pdf
To me this looks like masks provide 0.5% less chance of death and 0.7% less chance of death.
Why continue?
It basically states that masks reduce the spread of the virus.
If you don't already know, the virus spreads on droplets and aerosols from your mouth/nose. Tests have shown that the spread of those droplets/aerosols decreases up to 99% when someone is wearing a mask.0 -
It basically states that masks reduce the spread of the virus.
If you don't already know, the virus spreads on droplets and aerosols from your mouth/nose. Tests have shown that the spread of those droplets/aerosols decreases up to 99% when someone is wearing a mask.
That's not what I just read on the CDC study I posted.0 -
MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 wrote: »That's not what I just read on the CDC study I posted.
I read the same report.
"In this study, mask mandates were associated with reductions in COVID-19 case and death growth rates within 20 days, whereas allowing on-premises dining at restaurants was associated with increases in COVID-19 case and death growth rates after 40 days. "
" Community mitigation policies, such as state-issued mask mandates and prohibition of on-premises restaurant dining, have the potential to slow the spread of COVID-19, especially if implemented with other public health
strategies (1,10)."
It concludes that mask mandates reduce the spread of Covid.
A question, do you believe masks don't reduce the spread of Covid?0 -
MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 wrote: »That's not what I just read on the CDC study I posted.
literally in the opening paragraph of the study you posted:
"Because the virus is transmitted
predominantly by inhaling respiratory droplets from infected
persons, universal mask use can help reduce transmission"0 -
Yes, you are being selective. You've argued that lockdowns do not slow or stop the spread of the virus.
None of the studies you've posted actually say that
You're now trying to shift the goalposts because you aren't able to find any studies that support your claim.
Remember also that you have claimed that covid isn't real and is just the flu in disguise.
None of your studies agree with this claim and would be completely invalid if your claim was true. You are selectively ignoring this.
You also claimed that the big shadowy cabal behind the conspiracy are suppressing any scientists or studies that disagree with their supposed narrative.
Yet you are also claiming there are tons of studies that do this and all the data released contradicts the "official narrative".
Again you've selectively ignored this contradiction.
And that's all not to mention the dozens of points and questions you've selectively ignored previously.
Particularly the ones where I showed you were
lying about some of the studies you posted.
All of the studies I posted say lockdowns are ineffective. You’re delusional.
There is a cabal that runs the world by the way and smashing all dissent to their official covid narrative is a vital part of their plan.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/youtube-cancels-the-u-s-senate-116122880610 -
All of the studies I posted say lockdowns are ineffective. You’re delusional.
There is a cabal that runs the world by the way and smashing all dissent to their official covid narrative is a vital part of their plan.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/youtube-cancels-the-u-s-senate-11612288061
tell them a few of the countries didn't get the message and are starting to open up0 -
PintOfView wrote: »I just had a quick look at the 'living with covid' plan, and I have no concerns that it only goes from level 1 to level 5.
I have confidence that the government are competent enough to make reasonable decisions in the circumstances.
As regards Scotland having masks in level 0, again it doesn't concern me in the context that the virus will be circulating in the world for a good while yet, and we have yet to see how effective the vaccinations are, and if new strains of covid cause any problems, etc.
I imagine the Scottish government are also reasonably competent and won't be doing anything totally unnecessary.
Does it suggest that the Scottish government has no plans to scrap masks?
It only suggests that they see it as prudent to keep masks on the table for the near term future, it says nothing about longer term!
Yes, each government has to make its own decision based on what is happening at the time, so they are reacting to the virus.
It's like a doctor treating a patient. As the patient's symptoms change the treatments change.
Sweden took a different approach to most of Europe.
Norway, Finland, and Denmark did Not take the Swedish approach.
The results: Sweden, with a population of 10.2m had 12,798 covid deaths so far (=1,255 per m)
Denmark + Norway + Finland, with combined population of 16.7m, have had 4,331 deaths so far (= 259 per m)
And this is with Sweden in effect having a semi lockdown (masks were on public transport, social distancing, 20 people can attend a funeral, public gatherings limited to 8 people, etc)
So like doctors, governments differ and patients die (and a lot more people died in Sweden)!!
However even Sweden reacted due to the virus, with restrictions edging progressively closer to the rest of Europe during the winter.
All those things are designed to reduce the transmission of the virus.
It would be nonsense to just say we've had enough of masks now, let's just get rid of them, unless the conditions dictated that!
It'd be like the doctor saying, regardless of the sickness of the patient, let just stop taking those silly antiboitics!!
Post vaccination, if we effectively achieve herd immunity, and if restrictions become unnecessary, then of course they should go.
In those circumstances, if there was no threat, why would we keep the restrictions?
As I said above, I have confidence the government will make reasonable decisions based on the information available at any particular time.
The WEF comments are just that, comments by an onlooker, and to me don't carry any more weight that anyone else.
Are the WEF making any decisions in any country with regards to how they combat covid?
The answer is surely no, each government is making it's own decisions, and those decisions vary a bit (and more than a bit in the case of Sweden).
So no, it doesn't look like the WEF is taking advantage of anything,
they are effectively just a talking shop for different countries and business leaders to get together and talk about things that affect everyone.
You are tragically naive. The WEF is more than a talking shop and it’s not the only place the elite meet. The true darlings are the council of foreign relations, the royal institute of international affairs. These boys have 50 year plans for all of us peasants and they usually come true.
“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.”
Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations0 -
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement