Why COVID-19 was used to bring down the Global Economy

cupom com desconto - o melhor site de cupom de desconto cupomcomdesconto.com.br


Why COVID-19 was used to bring down the Global Economy 2

The
following post is a snap shot of the current global Geo-economic picture from
the World Economic Forum’s point of view including analytical commentary by
yours truly, Stewart Brennan.

cupom com desconto - o melhor site de cupom de desconto cupomcomdesconto.com.br
The
World Economic Forum is one of the main Western Economic Cartel think tanks.
Global
domination has been the goal of every empire or conqueror of the past 3,000
years. The Romans, Greeks, Macedonians, Mongols, Chinese, Brits, French,
Germans, Spanish, etc.…they all had one thing in common, an unquenchable greed
and lust for power; and the application of it through their form of
“Economics”.
In
case there are some not familiar with who the Western Economic Cartel
is, I will tell you. The Economic Cartel is a consolidation of business,
finance and private banking institutions of the wealthiest families on the
planet who have total economic and governing control over large swaths of the
world. The World Economic Forum is their think tank, and the fractal reserve,
interest bearing debt, private banking system is their tool and means to
achieve global domination.
The
Western Economic Cartel through the “World Economic Forum”, has laid out a plan
for a global economic reset in 2021 [01]. To understand the bigger
picture in what they are after, and why they used COVID-19 as an excuse to lock
down the global economy and Geo-Economics, it is imperative to read the section
of their plan on “Geo-Economics” (which I have included below) and then ask the
question, “Why did the Western Economic Cartel back US Military and economic
domination of the world since 1945 while also backing China’s rise and drive
for economic domination since the 1970’s?” – I’ll tell you, because maintaining
“Global Economic Control” through banking via the Bank of
International Settlements, Central and Private Banks by the few requires a
“Reset” once the old fraudulent economic system can no longer function due to
extreme debt, inflation and poverty.
Private
banking is set up as a pyramid scheme where the bulk of all wealth flows in one
direction to the top…to put this into context, the people of the US and China
were used as pawns to achieve total control of global economics for an over
privileged gang of crooks and predators who made their way to the top of the
food chain by economic stealth. Global Economic control in today’s world is a
consolidation of wealthy families and oligarchs who own the majority shares of
private banks and Industry from just about every nation.
The
topic below, is from the World Economic Forum’s “Geo-Economics”.
———————————————————————
Geo-Economics
from “The World Economic Forum”.
Geo-economics:
[02]

where nation-states impose control over the logic of commerce to achieve their
goals. While the term was first coined in 1990, geo-economic rivalries did not
fully emerge until after the 2008 financial crisis. Particularly since about
2014, countries have refined the use of economic tools to attain their
geopolitical objectives and weaken rivals; some analysts have characterized
this as the “weaponization of interdependence.” This exposes people to
increasing related pressures, and multinational corporations and banks have had
to adapt to heightened related risks. Global stakeholders should think
about how to best contain geo-economic tensions, in the interest of more
effective international cooperation on matters like climate change,
migration,
and the impacts of COVID-19.
This
briefing is based on the views of a wide range of experts from the World
Economic Forum’s Expert Network and is curated in partnership with Nicholas
Mulder, Postdoctoral Associate at Cornell University.
Institutional
and Regulatory Instability
As
traditional authority frays and trade wars mount, geo-economic institutions
are being undermined.
Geo-economic
concerns are beginning to shape economic regulation, both domestically and
internationally. Individual states are increasingly invoking special
circumstances in order to withdraw from, or to simply ignore international
agreements. As a result, institutions such as the World Trade Organization are
under serious pressure as their authority frays in a global trading landscape
wracked by political disputes. The privileging of strategic industries in some
countries – and the provision of subsidies to state enterprises – has made it
more difficult to establish international norms on competition policy, product
regulation, quality control, and environmental protection. Concerns about the
security of access to resources such as food, water, and minerals, as
well as a mounting wariness of the potential for corporate abuse (embodied in
the European Union’s General Data Privacy Regulation, a measure aimed at
helping people track use of their personal data that is the current gold
standard for global data governance) may result in an even more divided global
regulatory environment.
Traditional
rules and institutions that rely on a politically harmonious global economy
face an increasingly uncertain future
. The EU, for example, has a reputation
for effective and influential rule-creation – but its relatively strict
competition policy enforcement has attracted criticism for preventing mergers
in the defense, manufacturing, and technology industries that are seen as
strategically important for geo-economic competition. Meanwhile newer
institutions are shifting power away from the Bretton Woods Institutions (the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund)
established at the end of
World War II, which grant Western states a disproportionate amount of global
influence. Asian economies are at the forefront of this rebalancing; the New
Development Bank, established by the BRICS countries
(Brazil, China, India,
Russia, and South Africa) in 2014, is headquartered in Shanghai and is
committed to financing infrastructure and sustainable development projects in
emerging economies and developing countries, and the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank, headquartered in Beijing, began operations in 2016 with an eye
to financing infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region – and its lending
activity is growing.
Security
Scrutiny of Foreign Funds
Governments
are taking a closer look at investment directed at strategic industries and
infrastructure.
The
increased prominence of geo-economic policy has cast global “Foreign Direct Investment”
patterns in a new light. The global stock of FDI grew significantly beginning
in the late 1980s, before coming to a halt during the global financial crisis
more than a decade ago. Although it recovered slightly in the immediate
aftermath of the crisis, overall levels have since declined. Global foreign
direct investment fell by 13% in 2018 compared with the prior year, marking the
third consecutive annual decline, according to the United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development. Increased government scrutiny of foreign investment in
key industries may only further dampen FDI activity. The US and the European
Union have each passed legislation that imposes stricter standards on foreign
investment in their defense and telecommunications sectors, electricity grids,
power installations, and pharmaceutical, IT, aerospace, and shipbuilding
industries. The Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA) of
2018 changes the way the US reviews foreign investment based on national
security concerns, while the EU’s FDI screening regulations established in 2019
set requirements for security reviews by member states.
Some
recent examples of close scrutiny applied by domestic governments to foreign
investment include the US’s reluctance to permit the use of technology from
China’s Huawei in American communications networks
, Germany’s decision in
2018 to block the purchase of tool manufacturer Leifeld Metal Spinning by a
Chinese suitor, and Canada’s decision that same year to block the planned
takeover of construction firm the Aecon Group by a Chinese company. Although
these geo-economic measures are unlikely to lead to a total collapse of FDI,
they do create a more complicated new landscape for international investors. If
they continue unabated, the investment ecosystem is likely to split into two
spheres.
One is a large domain accessible to global players and marked by
high levels of competition and speculation. (I.e.: The Economic Cartel) The
other is a smaller, less accessible national realm where governments maintain
tight control over investment and production (in a way that verges on a
monopoly or oligopoly) in the interest of national security (I.e.: CHINA) –
with correspondingly high profit margins for the small cartel of firms operating
within it.
Infrastructure
Decoupling
If
you are a country at risk of losing access to vital infrastructure, you may
want to create your own.
One
of the most consequential recent trends in geo-economic competition – which is
usually expressed through sanctions and tariffs, regulatory competition, and
intense investment scrutiny – is the effort being made by national governments
to create their own alternatives to global infrastructure networks. These
attempts at rewiring globalization are often responses to the political
exploitation of crucial channels of exchange. The US-instigated removal of
Iranian banks from the SWIFT international payment network in 2012, and again
in 2018, is a case in point – a supposedly neutral payments infrastructure was
manipulated for political purposes by a powerful government, calling into
question that network’s reliability as a safe, impartial technical system. In
response to similar sanctions threats, Russia began in 2014 to develop an
alternative to SWIFT, dubbed SPFS, which went into operation in late 2017 and
has since been linked to China’s international payments system, CIPS. SPFS has
reported that it now has hundreds of users and agreements with a number of
foreign banks and legal entities in Iran, Turkey and India.
In
addition to financial payments systems, the trend towards “decoupling” from
established infrastructure is becoming more prominent in the realms of
computing and 5G communications networks (which deliver far greater internet
speeds and hold out the promise of modern economies built around
internet-connected devices and autonomous mobility). Although the Chinese firms
ZTE and Huawei hold globally dominant positions when it comes to 5G equipment
and phones, other firms such as Sweden’s Ericsson and Finland’s Nokia have also
been rolling out 5G networks. Because of its connection to the so-called
Industrial Internet that connects growing parts of national manufacturing
sectors to the web, 5G-related competition between the US and China has been
particularly fierce
. It has mixed up the commercial motives of chip and
technology producers with the strategic objectives of national governments (and
their intelligence services) keen to retain control over data and
information-sharing networks. Although the US has labelled Huawei a security
risk, it remains to be seen whether its concerns related to Chinese government
surveillance will have an impact on the broader spread of 5G infrastructure.
Global
trade and manufacturing supply chains were disintegrating even prior to
COVID-19.
Under
the Trump Administration, the US has pursued aggressive trade policies
targeting China. This has resulted in what are now the highest tariff levels
inhibiting international trade since the early 1960s. Combined with the
COVID-19 crisis, the Sino-American rivalry is causing serious geo-economic
instability. Progress made by January 2020 in easing bi-lateral tensions may
now be lost – through unintended consequences, such as trade barriers to
imported Chinese medical supplies, have forced a limited policy reversal by the
US. The global recession triggered by the pandemic may be considerably worse
than the 2008 global financial crisis – and it comes as the US has ramped up
hostilities not only with China but also traditional allies such as the
European Union, Japan, and Canada. This has prompted some leaders to reassess
their trade relations with the world’s premier superpower, and in certain cases
resulted in retaliatory tariffs targeting the US. These trade hostilities
already in place before COVID-19 may significantly hamper the global economy’s
ability to quickly recover once the pandemic recedes.
While
much of the current trade hostility has its roots in a growing American desire
to regain competitiveness (with rivals and allies alike), economic rivalries
are feeding greater levels of political antagonism. The longer the general
atmosphere of trade conflict continues, the more it is likely to spur wider
strategic and ideological conflicts among the US, the EU, China, and Russia.
While some protective and retaliatory tariffs may be justified in specific
industries, there is a real danger when these measures become entrenched –
especially during a pandemic, when greater collaboration is needed. However,
another important area of tariff development is one that could have a genuinely
positive effect on international cooperation:
so-called carbon border
adjustments, which incentivize both developed and developing country exporters
to fulfill their emissions reduction targets under the Paris Agreement on
climate change. Unlike other tariffs, these measures create new opportunities
for investment in renewable technology, and can help create greener supply
chains. A productive way to wind down the current period of trade conflict
would be to embrace these carbon tariffs while removing others.
Countries
are increasingly targeting each other with economic sanctions.
Countries
have been applying economic sanctions since the end of World War I. But their
use has increased dramatically since the 1970s – and since the end of the Cold
War in particular. The US, the European Union, and the United Nations are the
most avid users of sanctions, though the breadth and impact of their individual
programs vary considerably. The most severe variety are US extra-territorial
sanctions, such as those targeting Iran and North Korea;
these measures
block global firms and banks from conducting business with or in targeted
countries, on pain of legal prosecution in the US and exclusion from US
markets. Sanctions can potentially inflict serious damage on the social,
economic, and environmental conditions of targeted countries, but their
effectiveness as policy measures is often mixed at best (most research suggests
that their economic effects are more significant than their political efficacy,
which is generally limited). The most effective sanctions are often those that
are merely threatened, rather than actually imposed.
The
growing use of sanctions poses three specific risks to the global economy.
Mounting compliance costs for any firm engaged in international trade and
investment can be onerous, and even when sanctions are lifted these firms
require reliable guarantees that formerly-targeted countries are once again safe
for doing business. This means that a country’s post-sanctions economic
recovery is often lacklustre. Oftentimes, sanctions are left in place for many
years – or even decades. This can stunt economic development, and entrench
political animosity. Governments and businesses should explore all available
options to curb the growth of sanctions, which reduce prosperity, impose severe
material and social costs, and often deepen rather than resolve international
political disagreements. There is also a risk of unintended negative
consequences; by further antagonizing countries, sanctions can raise the risk
of war.
Even for those countries clinging to a tenuous peace despite
ongoing economic conflict, sanctions are fragmenting the international networks
of exchange that they rely on, and generally pushing globalization in a more
unstable and military conflict-prone direction.
Strategic
Industrial Policy
A
growing number of countries are developing the means to weather storms and
spread influence.
Industrial
policy has been an important part of many countries’ economic development for
the past two centuries. In the US these policies have been used since World War
II to build up autonomous research, development, and production capacities in
strategic industries – particularly in defense. More recently, China has begun
to actively use industrial policy to reduce its reliance on foreign suppliers
in high-tech industries, under the “Made in China 2025” program. In the realm
of central banking, Russia is building up a large reserve of foreign currency
in order to help it independently weather crises – something that Southeast
Asian countries did in aftermath of the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Meanwhile
South Korea and Gulf states like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have
developed strategic food policies that involve purchasing vast tracts of land
in East Africa to grow cereals and grains. While policies like this can bolster
growth and socio-economic development – especially when geared around positive
efforts tied to renewable energy and green technology – they can also have
detrimental effects on the well-being of local populations and the quality of
governing institutions.
This
tension is apparent in China’s ambitious Belt and Road infrastructure-building
initiative. Belt and Road has led to a boom in construction activity due to
lending standards that are looser than those at the Bretton Woods Institutions
(the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank). It has also increased
Chinese control of key foreign ports and railroads, and local populations have
been excluded from many of its benefits due to its reliance on Chinese workers.
The ultimate geo-economic consequences of the initiative remain unclear; many
participating countries continue to have serious governance problems,
exacerbated by being flush with foreign money with few strings attached. On the
other hand, Belt and Road has provided development finance for countries that
face serious structural challenges. While Western institutions like NATO show
no sign of clashing with Belt and Road projects in the countries where they
overlap (including Italy, Greece, Turkey and several Balkan states), there is
increasing concern about growing Chinese power in many Western capitals. As
long as such concerns do not produce more pro-active Western economic and
financial engagement with the underdeveloped regions participating in Belt and
Road, the underlying causes of these anxieties will remain.
———————————————————–
At
face value, every word and action made by the western economic cartel revolves
around economic control but what is not talked about is the truth of what controls
economics and our economic destiny…and that topic is energy. i.e. “OIL”, but
more urgently in regards to our economic destiny is, “Peak Oil[03].
We
are now at a point in history where constant economic growth can no longer be
maintained due to the limited supply of cheap oil and the growing demand by a
growing global population. Economic growth takes on an exponential nature
[04] under the current private banking system which is controlled by oil
in terminal decline. Therefore, we can no longer count on the current consumer
debt economic system to continue providing a way of life. If we continue
relying on a decaying system built by consumer growth and debt, it will cause great
harm to the global population through its economic collapse. [05]
Oil
is a part of every consumer item we produce. It is also very prevalent in the
production of our food, its growth, packaging and transportation. Higher energy
costs mean higher food prices and I’m sure you would agree that food more than
anything outweighs non-essential consumer items.
Therefore,
in a time of growing demand and increasing prices due to inflation, cost
reduction becomes tantamount to a corporations’ bottom line and continued
existence or they simply cannot survive in this economic paradigm. I.e. When
growth is no longer possible in a market and costs exceed the products value, a
company must inflate prices or go bankrupt.
When
inhouse materials become too costly to make (as overhead costs are factored in)
they are outsourced to other companies that produce the products at a lower fixed
price. That is why most of the North American industrial capacity was moved to
China, I.e. cheap production costs…the western Industrial capacity and economy was
directly affected by the offshoring of these jobs to China and the jobs were allowed
to go because western governments were lobbied by corporate and private banking
interests of the western economic cartel into accepting their growing Chinese exports.
NAFTA played an important role in this from 1992 to present as it allowed
companies to leave North America via Mexico and then straight on to China. There
was no consideration for our communities by western governments or corporations
when they offshored the manufacturing jobs to China, and so the North American
standard of living has shrunk considerably.
In
the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, China was labeled as an unfriendly communist
country and not a good potential business partner by the United States, Great
Britain, and Canada, especially after the Tiananmen Square incident, at least
that was the “verbal appearance” our governments made to the public but in
reality, China and the western economic cartel were in stealth business
together. I was in the packaging Industry so I saw it first hand.
If
there are doubts about this, then ask yourself, how is it that the western
governments allowed our Industrial capacity to be sent to China while allowing
the import of “Made in China” products to flood our markets since the 1990’s
while also plugging China into all the oil they needed even in Canada’s Tar sands[06] to power up their economy?
China
needs to import vast amounts of oil to maintain its huge economy and today,
they get the oil from every oil producing country on the planet, including
those under the western economic umbrella.
The
western economic cartel, helped built China’s economy, and now China is poised
to assume the global economic leadership from the USA. Is this not by design?
It’s
true that in the past 20 years, we have seen technology fixes that have helped
reduce our consumption of oil such as the elimination of products by
digitization (music, movies, photos, paper, etc.) including the consolidation
and contraction of business volume with products manufactured in China. But the
COVID-19 event has single handedly reduced oil consumption by an incalculable
amount across the world and we are still in the throws of this seemingly
never-ending operation.
However
green it may seem, we still rely 100% on jobs created within a collapsing economic
system, when we should actually be focused on a new deal and the preservation
of the basic elements of life and community. Unfortunately, the majority of us are
disconnected from nature and the environment which is needed to sustain our
existence.
What
we have not seen, and probably never will, is the western economic cartel
relinquish their economic power; nor have we seen them converse with the public
in a truthful honest way forward out of the peak oil and economic mess we are
in. They seem more concerned with spinning a web of lies to maintain control of
economics and power rather than the preservation of humankind.
With
the “Global Economic Reset” slated for 2021 as per the World Economic
Forum, China is waiting patiently to assume the global leadership role on technology,
global economics and military power. The only hurdle in their way is Donald
Trump, who has thrown a wrench into the economic gears of the western economic cartel’s
plans to crown China as their New World Order champion; replacing the USA.
Ever
since Donald Trump came to office in 2016, the western economic cartel has been
in overdrive trying to thwart his every move while also trying to remove him
from office.
As
Donald Trump overturned the economic cartel’s trade agreements (TPP &
NAFTA)
and then imposed economic sanctions with mounting tariffs on Chinese
goods, he made a stand against the western economic cartel and China by
maintaining a nationalist position and keeping a 2016 campaign promise.
China,
for its part, reciprocated the Trump Administration sanctions and countered
each US economic slap with one of their own, helping to drive a wedge between
the two economic superpowers into two polarizing economic spheres engaged in an
economic war.
As
far as China is concerned, the deal they made with the western economic cartel in
the 1970’s, that raised China out of poverty and into a global economic Power
with government approved access to western markets is no longer needed…and so China
pushed back at the western economic cartel with their own global economic
banking structures powered by national central banks and large oil producing
partners to power themselves up with a, “go it our own way attitude”.
So,
we are left with the following to ponder;
1.    
Was
COVID-19, the western economic cartels operation to save face in their
partnership with China in lieu Donald Trumps economic war?
2.    
Was
COVID-19 used to begin the economic decoupling from a China led World Order?
Since
cheap oil is all but, in the past, economic growth cannot continue to rise
exponentially as supply can no longer meet those types of demands, therefore
massive amounts of capital will have to be erased due in most part by the
self-serving economic equation employed by the private banks.
One
thing is for sure, the lock-downs, mask laws and fear peddling on COVID-19 have
put global economic changes into high gear as the destruction of global
economics that functions via the US reserve currency, is now heading for a
major correction and market call, bankruptcies are escalating, all while the
cartel plans for a New World Order via its economic reset plans.
The
Chinese Banks and economy are in a very strong position[08] because they
use four State controlled central banks that create and spend their own money
into existence to power their growth while carrying little to no debt which
includes energy partners that supply them with the oil needed to power their
economic drive. Whereas the US Treasury and the American people are on the hook
for trillions of US dollars loaned to them through the western economic cartels
Federal Reserve, not to mention the hundreds of trillions in derivative debts
that will become very real when major interests cash in, causing panic and a US
stock market crash. The Oil leverage that the United States once had on the
World is also in decline…yet it is not the US as a nation that controlled
global economics through oil but the western economic cartel that controls both
the monetary systems and oil corporations that keeps the economic system in
their control.
China
doesn’t need to do anything right now except sit and wait…
The
western economic cartel’s continued use of their false COVID-19 pandemic [09]
will determine which economic paradigm will emerge from the ashes. As it stands
now, COVID-19 is being used in western nations to force people to wear masks
under penalty of the law, even though the masks don’t work, and on a petered-out
flu virus at that. Most travel, outside ones’ nation, is still forbidden and
there is talk of another lock-down in western countries. These unreasonable laws
are totalitarian and not based on facts. The western mainstream news and
governments do not provide any proof that COVID-19 is worse than the annual flu
and yet the doctors and specialists that are speaking out against the lock-down,
mask wearing and providing statistical facts are being censored by corporate
internet social media platforms and search engines in league with the World
Health Organization and the western economic cartel.
It’s
as if COVID-19 is being used to supress the global economy on purpose which
coincides with the lead up to the November 2020 election. All while the
economic cartel uses every media trick in the book to hamstring Donald Trumps
push for a second term as US President…
The
closer we get to November, the more we see street violence, media deception, corporate
censorship and panic…the stakes are getting higher and the western economic
cartel is extremely determined to get their way. Is this a coincidence?
The
United States is divided into two camps going into their November 2020
election, those in favour of Donald Trump and his nationalist “Make America
Great Again” program and those opposed…most of whom believe whatever fear-porn
or fabrication they are told by mainstream media. However, regardless of who
wins the November 2020 US election, the American people will be bitterly
divided leaving the country on the threshold of oblivion. Division of the
people is how a nation is destroyed while thieves make off with all the
money…this is such a time.
There
is a Better Way for all of us to live on this planet but it requires
transparency and honest governance with an informed and engaged population by
investigative journalism that is not controlled by special interests.
The
world of “Economic Cartels” and totalitarian dictatorships must come to an end.
Economic control must be removed from the hands of the few and returned to the population
within each country…it’s time for a sober discussion on how to move forward
together.
Censorship
and economic dictatorship by an economic cartel does NOT further the
enlightenment of mankind, nor does it bring fairness, honesty or a lasting peace…the
solution and way forward is to end all economic cartels and their corporate /
private banking governing structures. The nations of the world must move
towards a resource-based economy that removes the greedy power structures that control
our societies and destroys our environment. Everyone has a responsibility and part
to play in rebuilding our own communities / countries while bridging our
differences with each other. The truth is, “The needs of the many outweigh the
needs of the few”. Economic dictatorship must be dismantled because it always
leads to war, and “War” is not an option in a nuclear and biological age…nor is
economic deception an option by an economic cartel in a world of peak oil…it’s
time for mankind to evolve…

Leia Também  Acuidade durante a noite, horror de Corona, finalmente morte
cupom com desconto - o melhor site de cupom de desconto cupomcomdesconto.com.br