Thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen an accelerated shift toward digital banking, This means that local branches of banks are shuttering in record numbers. Furthermore, the most powerful countries and institutions have pledged their support for the Great Reset. The new global economic overhaul will encompass ESG metrics, which rate sustainable investments and force the world to adopt “green” energy sources - all essential elements of the Great Reset plan to transform the world. Tonight on Ground Zero, Clyde Lewis talks with financial analyst, Alan Johnson about PENNY DREADFUL - A SWIFT AND MODEST PROPOSAL.
SHOW SAMPLE:
SHOW PODCAST:
https://aftermath.media/podcast/10-11-22-penny-dreadful-a-swift-and-modest-proposal-w-alan-johnson/
SHOW TRANSCRIPT:
In order to understand what we are up against, I must illustrate our plight by creating some outrageous examples of how we as a people will give up and barely live in a country that is taking a major economic downturn.
I have often said that people will only be concerned about something when it becomes a matter of mainstream discourse. There is an unseen framing system that is employed by the media and experts where they use political, cultural, and media techniques to make forbidden topics acceptable, popular, and even policy-changing.
The classical model of framing discussions that are abhorrent and making them acceptable is proposing the unthinkable, employing a radical change in order to make the idea radical, or revolutionary. It is then when the idea gains momentum becomes acceptable, sensible and popular.
When all of these steps are satisfied. the old policy will be shifted into a new one
Pulling an idea from the “unthinkable” to “policy” stage may take a couple of decades, or just a couple of years, depending on how much media resources do people who are interested in shaping society in a certain way have.
For example we have had many occasions to speak about the unthinkable idea of people eating insects in order to combat Climate change. It may not stop there undefined I mean if people are eager to eat insects what would it take to propose the unthinkable- namely the eating of the elderly like in the film Soylent Green
They would first finance the media to make a report, or a documentary, about some mentally unstable persons eating their pets or even road kill. It would initially cause shock and aversion, but, nevertheless, people would start talking about it. Then the media comes in to entertain the idea of cannibalism as an alternative. There will be movies and TV shows where people would have to come to terms with the idea of using the elderly for sustenance.
This kind of topic would begin receiving more and more attention from the media, there would be Internet memes on that. And that would eventually result in more and more deviant and attention seeking people attempting to eat their pets undefined being arrested and others saying that it would be much more preferable to eat the flesh of the dead.
There would be debates on TV, with various “experts” on biology and zoology telling that it may not be that unnatural after all, since there are multiple examples from nature where animals eat their own kind, where some females eat their young. It becomes justified as scientifically acceptable.
The representatives of the side that opposes such disgusting practices would be chosen from unpopular marginals, overly conservative senior leaders and various unpleasant personalities, so that the public would associate all the anti-cannibalistic arguments with them.
There would be a serious public debate on this issue.
Then, perhaps, there would be stories about some kid being bullied at school for his habit of biting the skin from his hangnails and consuming them. The media would have people condemning the bullies, saying how wrong it is to bully people who make their own choices of what to ingest.
It is the kids’ body and it is his choice. If he wants to chew away his own skin, eat his scabs, and crunch on his nails undefined it is his right. It would be framed that others also have the right to eat themselves and if it is consensual maybe we could bend the rules to have people eat various parts of each other.
We would all be urged to be open minded. That soon the eating of the dead would be a perfect solution for world hunger.
Those who strongly oppose it would be demonized. They would be told to follow the science, and if doctors would object and say that it may cause Kuru or some other brain disorder undefined they would be blocked on social media.
Then it may actually turn into a popular trend with everyone, including pop-stars and big media figures jumping on the human eating bandwagon. Then, quite naturally, business companies would start coming up with ways to make money out of it, so it would turn into an industry. And then, finally, it might pressure the government to change the policy where human meat substitutes would include the eating of human flesh.
There would be groups warning against prion disorders -and the answer would be a vaccine against any prion disorders brought on by flesh eating undefined employers would then require all omnivores that eat both lab, natural and human meats to be vaccinated or eat an all vegan diet.
I know that this is probably absurd, but it illustrates the mechanics of changing cultural norms by those who own concentrated wealth and control large media resources.
The truth is that as the economy continues to go on this downward spiral, the world bankers are going to propose some drastic changes to how you handle your money, and how you spend it.
The Great Reset has already shown how clever they can be is controlling a population using the threat of death, and bought and paid for scientists to get you to compromise your morals.
They are not asking you to eat your loved ones undefined not yet, but they will be asking you to reject the current cash system, for a chipped and cashless society.
Banks are reducing their branch footprints as more customers choose to manage their accounts through mobile and other digital channels, instead of banking at traditional brick-and-mortar retail locations.
Thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic we have seen an accelerated shift toward digital banking, This means that local branches of banks are shuttering in record numbers.
COVID has always been the encompassing excuse for everything undefined including the push for a digital currency, and less personal banking and more direct relations with the blockchain.
Many powerful institutions have pledged their support for the Great Reset. Groups like the International Monetary Fund, Prince Charles, the head of the United Nations, CEOs from major international corporations, and the World Economic Forum—which we know is the key ringleaders of the Great Reset.
Every country, from the United States to China, must participate [in the Great Reset], and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed,” according to Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum.
The initial justification for the Great Reset was the COVID-19 pandemic, but from the start, supporters of the global economic overhaul repeatedly said that climate change was the long-term justification, the one that would allow a sustained, massive transformation of society. Doing nothing, they argued, would pose an “existential threat” to the human race—a completely ludicrous argument many on the left continuously make without a shred of solid scientific evidence to support the claim.
Among the most important figures in the Great Reset movement are gigantic financial institutions and/or their CEOs, including Bank of America and MasterCard.
Although many Great Reset supporters have called for dramatic expansions of government welfare programs, including job guarantees, government-provided health care, etc., the heart of the Great Reset is something called environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics.
ESG metrics offer public policy leaders, economists, investors, and banks an entirely new way of evaluating businesses. Instead of looking at how profitable a company is, how many employees it has, its business model, and other traditional metrics, ESG adds to those concerns a whole host of left-wing causes, including how “green” a company is, having the “right” ratio of minorities, whether a business is involved in politically disfavored industries (such gun manufacturing and sales), as well as other, similar considerations. Companies are then given a score or rating to determine how well they align with ESG goals.
Hundreds of the world’s largest corporations, including financial institutions, have already created ESG systems and reporting metrics within their companies, and investor groups worth trillions of dollars have pledged to prioritize these companies over those that refuse to participate.
ESG systems, sustainable investment, and forcing the world to adopt “green” energy sources are all essential elements of the Great Reset plan to transform the world.
Parts of the Great Reset are theoretical and have yet to be put into place, but some components of the plan have already been rolled out or are now being put into place. One of the most important is financial institutions’ commitment to mandate that virtually all businesses in America adopt renewable energy.
In February 2021, Bank of America, citing its “longstanding support for the Paris Climate Agreement,” announced, “the company today outlined initial steps to achieve its goal of net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in its financing activities, operations and supply chain before 2050.”
Note that the “net-zero greenhouse gas emissions” rule will be applied not only to Bank of America’s own operations and supply chain—meaning every company that does business with Bank of America—but also its “financing activities.”
Put more simply, if you want a loan from Bank of America in the future, you better toe the globalist line on climate change.
Of course, Bank of America isn’t the only bank with these policies. Wells Fargo CEO Charlie Scharf made a comparable announcement as well.
Climate change is one of the most urgent environmental and social issues of our time,” Scharf said, “and Wells Fargo is committed to aligning our activities to support the goals of the Paris Agreement and to helping transition to a net-zero carbon economy.”
Citi, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and JPMorgan Chase—which, together with Wells Fargo and Bank of America, make up the six largest banks in the United States—also made similar commitments.
And do not think for a moment that these requirements will only apply to businesses, either. Some financial institutions have already started to give ESG scores to individual investment accounts, sending a clear signal that everyone will be required to adopt the Great Reset in the coming years.
The simple way of controlling commerce in favor of the reset is to roll out a cashless society, where all transactions will be transparent to the world government.
If banks are allowed to collectively decide to stop financing any group of people they want, based not on financial concerns but ideological considerations, then banks and their Great Reset allies will have, in effect, near-total control over society—especially if they begin to tie lending decisions to a vast ESG system.
In a cashless world, where your money is entirely digital, you’re never more than a computer glitch or a power outage from going bankrupt. A hack away from identity theft. A forgotten pin from being locked out of your own money. A clerical error from the complete collapse of your finances.
This vulnerability is undeniable, and yet the cashless society IDs being actively encouraged all over the world. You see how that works.. it is similar to example I gave of people being encouraged to eat their elders.
This time, you are encouraged to hand a vast amount of power over to financial institutions.
In a cashless world, no one has anything, except what the bank says they have. And banks can lie, or make mistakes, or cheat, or steal. It’s practically all they do.
In a cashless world, every single payment you make can be traced, reported to the tax office, used to surveil your behavior, pinpoint your location or even create blackmail material, real or invented, it makes little difference these days.
Deeper than that, in a cashless world, where your money is entirely digital, the state can take your money via the bank without your permission or even knowledge. Claim “back taxes” or levy fines or punish you for whatever petty reason they can think of.
If you are ever seen speaking against undefinedthe scienceundefined or undefinedthe world governmentundefined They can immediately cut off your funds or keep you from getting it.
But we have covered this many times undefined and it still seems to be seen as an overreaction.
But in time it will not be an overreaction but an unheeded warning.
Despite privacy being one of the main concerns citizens have about central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), the heads of the United States (US) Federal Reserve and European Central Bank (ECB) have confirmed that their respective CBDCs will not be anonymous.
During an appearance at a Banque de France (Bank of France) event, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, said if the US were to pursue a central bank digital currency (CBDC), it would be “identity verified” and “not anonymous.”
“We would be looking to balance privacy protection with identity verification, which…has to be done, of course, in today’s traditional banking system as well,” Powell added.
The President of the European Central Bank (ECB), Christine Lagarde, acknowledged that privacy was one of the main concerns Europeans had about the European Union’s (EU’s) proposed CBDC, the digital euro. Despite these concerns, she confirmed that “there would not be complete anonymity as there is with…bank notes” when using the digital euro.
“There would be a limited level of disclosure and certainly not at the central bank level,” Lagarde added.
Lagarde also noted that the ECB will decide whether to move into the prototype phase for the digital euro in 2023 and discussed the important characteristics of a potential digital euro. One of these characteristics would seemingly give the ECB the power to limit individual user balances.
“We also believe that there should be well-designed safeguards that either would include limitations to the holdings or would include a sophisticated tiering system in terms of remuneration, in order to prevent that the digital euro become a very attractive investment more than a mean of payment,” Lagarde said.
Powell and Lagarde’s comments reflect the concerns that citizens have raised about CBDCs as governments around the world are pushing to introduce them. The lack of anonymity erodes privacy because governments can see all of their citizens’ account balances and transactions while the “safeguards” that Lagarde referenced give governments an unprecedented level of control over how citizens spend and save their money.
Before these comments were made, the US had increasingly embraced the idea of a digital dollar and the EU had outlined its plans for a full rollout of the digital euro by 2026. Other countries, including the United Kingdom (UK) and Canada, have also started exploring CBDCs.
Even without the never before seen level of financial control that CBDCs would give to governments, some countries have already demonstrated that they’re willing to use their financial systems to target protestors. One of the most prominent examples of this was the Canadian government’s actions against the Freedom Convoy which was protesting vaccine mandates. The Canadian government froze the bank accounts of protesters and their family members and gave protestors permanent records.
This is troublesome news as world wide economies are tanking and US inflation is not improving.
Americans are set to pay an extra $11,500 this year if they want to enjoy the same standard of living they maintained in 2020, according to new estimates from NerdWallet.
The estimates, published in August, were based on inflation and annual spending data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Analysts at the personal finance company looked at how spending would compare this year to 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic began.
Analysts said 2020 was the “last full year when inflation was relatively stable.” In that year, the U.S. inflation rate was 1.23 percent.
As of August, inflation in the United States stands at 8.3 percent, according to BLS data.
“In all of 2020, American households spent $61,300, on average,” the analysts wrote. “This number includes everything we spend our money on housing, food, entertainment, clothing, transportation, and everything else.
A separate analysis from the Republican members of the House Joint Economic Committee estimates that inflation is now costing U.S. households an extra $717 each month, although that’s even higher in the states of Colorado ($937), Utah ($910), and Arizona ($833).
On an annual basis, the committee estimates that households will have to pay an extra $8,607. “In 2022, it stands to reach $72,900, a difference of more than $11,500 if consumers want to maintain the same standard of living.”
NerdWallet analysts said this is an average estimate, and therefore, one that’s “exact to a very few.” “Those who earn (and therefore spend) more will see more dramatic dollar increases. Those who earn less may see less dramatic dollar jumps, but the impact of these rising prices could be more significantly felt,” they wrote.
According to analysts, total monthly household expenditures are up by $961 from 2020, while spending on groceries is up by $101. Shelter is up by $120 and household utilities are up by $70 per household, while gasoline has risen by a whopping $209.
Recent indicators point to modest growth in spending and production. Job gains have been robust in recent months, and the unemployment rate has remained low. Inflation remains elevated, reflecting supply and demand imbalances related to the pandemic, higher food and energy prices, and broader price pressures,” the Fed said in a statement. Fed officials also cited Russia’s war in Ukraine for creating additional upward pressure on inflation and adding weight to global economic activity.
And yet we are applauding the trillions of dollars being sent to Ukraine to fight the war against Russia undefined there are not any real protestors of this war, nor are there to many people wanting to block the attempts at a digital monetary system undefined that will rob us of our freedoms and our privacy.
Somehow the government has convinced you that some of the most immoral and abhorrent things should be implemented and before people start doing the unthinkable like eating their pets undefined maybe we should just get on with the bug eating and having grandma and grandpa over for dinner.
undefined
SHOW GUEST: ALAN JOHNSON
Alan Johnson is a conservative radio commentator who appears regularly as a guest on Ground Zero with Clyde Lewis and Americaundefineds First News with Matt Ray Alan is a serial entrepreneur and business owner providing financial and IRA services specializing in Precious Metals IRA accounts. His website is unitedgoldgroup.com and his phone number is (800) 753-8534.
