Is This the Beginning of Mass Sterilisation?
The New Demographic
We hear a lot of talk about demographics. Usually the argument goes like this. We need more people to support us in the future. The more people there are on the planet the more people we need to support those people who have already retired and are no longer producing.
It doesn't take much brain power to realise what an utterly absurd concept that is. Let us have a quick look at the reasons why such a deduction is just plain silly.
First, it would lead to an ever increasing world population, until the globe did really run out of facilities to provide for such a huge population. Are you ready to move to Mars? If the population increase even carries on at half the current rate that would become necessary within the next generation.
We're over-reaching ourselves already. That is clear from the mess the Green parties of this world have backed us into. Green energy is a jolly good idea, but we cant get rid of the non-green energy when sun and wind only provide less than 10% of our energy needs. The result of the Green agenda is that rather a lot of people are going to die. Maybe that's a good thing, but the Greens remain rather quiet about that skeleton in their cupboard.
Haven't the Greens noticed that just about everything we use runs on some kind of energy. Even if we could get green energy to run 20% of our modern equipment for living, what is going to power the other 80%? The Greens are silent on that rather fundamental question.
Without oil and gas in large amounts modern civilisation simply stops.
Wait a minute, if we increase the population at the same time that we are reducing our energy footprint, how are we going to feed all these new people?
I thought the whole demographic argument was about increasing the population so future generations would have people to work and provide a living for those now retired. Sounds as though that is a rather big snag (for the Greens anyway). But it does show how ridiculous the Green agenda is.
We obviously cant keep increasing the world population indefinitely, so somewhere along the line we have to make a change. When is that to take place and what will that change look like? I haven't heard any answers to those questions. I guess there aren't any. So much for snag number two.
I have made an argument earlier in this work for linking income to work. What's the problem with that? Currently we link income to work via human effort. Why not make a very simple and very small change and in future link income to those who do actually provide the work. Increasingly that is going to be machines, including software and robots.
If a machine can work twenty-two hours a day whereas a human can work eight, or even less if you factor in rests, trips to the loo, and other distractions, including holidays, sick periods, and good old fashioned skiving, then you will probably find that one machine can do the work of at least four people. That's quadrupled the work force straight away.
I ask again, what's the problem?
If we adopt my pension plan, that produces, after about one generation, a fund large enough to run forever because as one recipient dies that unit within the sovereign trust becomes available to another. We will have something akin to a perpetual money machine. With such a fund in place precisely the opposite to an increasing population becomes advisable.
In short, two problems solved with one solution. We can now look forward to a gradually decreasing world population which will mean less and less energy required as time goes on, and maybe we can get back to sustainable economies.
There is one big snag to all this. Naturally there are snags to everything, but the really big snag is in the nature of one of those conspiracy theories. Unfortunately this one really does seem to be a little more than a theory. I am, of course, talking about the various attempts to hoodwink people into taking injections of noxious substances.
There are several documents uncovering the nefarious ways in which vast populations have been persuaded to take injections as a means to prevent them from catching covid-19.
We now know that this all sprang from a series of experiments which required playing about with species-jumping substances that were being tested way back in 1966 at the University of North Carolina. I dont propose to cover ground already adequately covered elsewhere, but this recently led to a particularly unpleasant strain of the flu virus, and a massive con to make serious amounts of money based on fears stoked up in the general public.
With most conspiracy theories one of the best ways to uncover the truth is to follow the money. Al Gore managed to bump his wealth tenfold with his green agenda. I'm not sure it did anyone else much good. Europe is paying quite heavily for the fallout of that theory right now. But what about covid-19?
It is now known that the vaccines peddled round the world do nothing to stop the disease. That was known before they were peddled across the globe. The US regulatory centre for drugs refused to give the drugs clearance for public use. There is still no such clearance, and the drug cartel refuses to be responsible for any damages claims. In other words the makers of the drugs dont believe in them to start with, so why should you?
One of the interesting (worrying) problems is the sheer quantity of contra-indications that should have been released with the drugs.
They were not released. There had to be a court order obtained to get the list. It consisted of eight pages of tightly printed warnings. Those warnings are now coming true. Not only do the drugs not work. Every person I know who has had one or more injections has caught the disease. More worrying is the number of people who have had heart problems, some leading to death.
However, the interesting contra-indication concerns the problems with the reproductive processes. Pregnant mothers have been experiencing pregnancy terminations. And there are indications that young women are finding they are no longer able to have children.
This kind of process seems to be growing, with children being given injections without any consultation with their parents. This means it is easy to hide what injection has been administered, and how do you protect against something you as a parent aren't aware of?
What is in these injections? Why are they being given to children without proper parental consent? What is being hidden?
Naturally I dont know. But some people are beginning to ask a very simple question. Is this the preferred way to cut the population, by sterilising as much of the younger generation as possible?
Are we beginning to see some parallel strands emerging?
There are many discussions concerning the unusual death patterns of the past two or three years.
Why have governments made it mandatory that people should be vaccinated with substances that have not passed the most elementary safety tests?
Why are children being clandestinely vaccinated, and what with?
With the current techincal advances in AI and robotics it is clear that we are entering an age when less people will be needed to work the factories of the future.
What are all the displaced people going to do when they are replaced by robots?
Sterlising large swathes of the population does solve a looming problem. I certainly think it's another of those technologies which has a bright future.
What do you think?