The Great Reset

King Mob

Deleted User wrote: »

This has been answered to you by many people already.

But it hasn't. Aside from the one guy who stated that it was Satan and God behind it all.

Could you provide an example of where you believe this question has been answered?

King Mob

Deleted User wrote: »

When I said "I don't believe the moon landing is a hoax", that is my instinct. I haven't done a lot of research on it. In fact, I only heard about it as a conspiracy theory quite recently.

But you're kind of avoiding the question now.
You seem to be now deciding that the moon hoax conspiracy might be true to avoid answering a simple question.

Deleted User wrote: »

You're clinging onto this "if you don't believe in one particular conspiracy theory, but Corbett does, then he shouldn't be listened to about anything, should he?" It's a stupid, nonsensical point; let it go.

But that's not my point though.

Dohnjoe

Deleted User wrote: »

This has been answered to you by many people already. You're doing exactly what you've always done and reverted to your "who/what/why"? You either can't read properly, or you're just content wasting years of your life trolling this forum, for who knows what reason. Either way, good luck to ya. I'll be joining others in not replying to either of you again.

I haven't come across any coherent conspiracy in this thread yet, anything that has been presented is generally quite vague and varies wildly from one poster to the next

From your posts you seem to want to question current affairs but you don't want anyone questioning your conspiracy ideas - it goes without saying, that's hypocritical

Likewise, your posts demonstrate you don't like the free speech aspect here, rather you seem to be seeking an echo chamber where no one can challenge your views

Ted_YNWA

eleventh wrote: »

But why have people on the forum who have no interest in the topic?
It would be like me going into say, the Soccer forum, with no interest in it, asking things like, who's playing on the team now, what does the offside rule mean - not once or twice, but over and over. What kind of moderator would allow that?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

People obviously do have an interest in the topic though, the problem for you seems to be that they just refuse to agree with you.

If you post a link from someone that says 9-11 was an inside job and I disagree with you then surely its healthy for me to disagree and we can discuss why I disagree and you think your source is right?

This is it in a nutshell.

This is not an echo chamber where only the pro-CT get a voice.

If you post what you perceive as evidence, it is only right that others can ask for further information or check the validity of the source.

Let's not get bogged down with who can/can't post their views, thread has deviated enough here.

Fodla

Peter Koenig wrote an article a few days ago about The Great Reset and the plan to 'reimagine' the world of work. It sounds absolutely horrifying. The article includes a link to the WEF White Paper in question, so it cannot be dismissed as a 'conspiracy theory'. Unfortunately, as I am a new member, I cannot post a link to the article, but here's a quote from it:

"This 31-page document reads like a blueprint on how to “execute” because an execution it would be – “Covid-19 – The Great Reset” (July 2020), by Klaus Schwab, founder and CEO (since the foundation of the WEF in 1974) and his associate Thierry Malleret. They call “Resetting the Future” a White Paper, meaning it’s not quite a final version. It is a draft of sorts, a trial balloon, to measure people’s reactions. It reads indeed like an executioner’s tale. Many people may not read it, have no awareness of its existence. If they would, they would go up in arms and take up arms to fight this latest Nazi-enterprise offered to the world by the WEF.

It promises a horrifying future to some 80%-plus of the (surviving) population. George Orwell’s “1984” reads like a benign fantasy as compared to what the WEF has in mind for humanity.

The time frame is ten years. By 2030 the UN agenda 2021–2030 should be implemented.

Planned business measures in response to COVID-19:

An acceleration of digitized work processes, leading to 84% of all work processes as digital, or virtual/video conferences.

Some 83% of people are planned to work remotely; i.e., no more interaction between colleagues, absolute social distancing, separation of humanity from the human contact.

About 50% of all tasks are planned to be automated; in other words, human input will be drastically diminished, even while remote working.

Accelerate the digitization of upskilling/reskilling (e.g. education technology providers). 42% of skill upgrading or training for new skills will be digitized, in other words, no human contact, all on computer, Artificial Intelligence (AI), algorithms.

Accelerate the implementation of upskilling/reskilling programs. 35% of skills are planned to be “re-tooled”; i.e., existing skills are planned to be abandoned, declared defunct.

Accelerate ongoing organizational transformations (e.g. restructuring). 34% of current organizational set-ups are planned to be “restructured’, or in other words, existing organizational structures will be declared obsolete to make space for new sets of organizational frameworks, digital structures that provide utmost control over all activities.

Temporarily reassign workers to different tasks. This is expected to touch 30% of the work force. That also means completely different pay-scales, most probably unlivable wages, which would make the also planned “universal basic salary” or “basic income” a wage that allows you barely to survive, an obvious need. But it would make you totally dependent on the system, a digital system, where you have no control whatsoever.

Temporarily reduce workforce. This is projected as affecting 28% of the population. It is an additional unemployment figure, in disguise, as the “temporarily” will never come back to full-time.

Permanently reduce workforce: 13% permanently reduced workforce.

Temporarily increase workforce: 5%. There is no reference to what type of workforce, probably unskilled labor that sooner or later will also be replaced by automation, by AI and robotization of the workplace.

No specific measures implemented: 4%. Does that mean a mere 4% will remain untouched? From the algorithm and AI-directed new work places? As small and insignificant as the figure is, it sounds like “wishful thinking”, never to be accomplished.

Permanently increase workforce. A mere 1% is projected as “permanently increased workforce”. This is, of course, not even cosmetics. It is a joke."

The WEF was recently in the news over a tweet with a link to an article written in 2016 about how by 2030 we will own nothing and be happy.

What do people think about the future 'reimagined' world of work?

For those who'd like to read the article, and the WEF White Paper it discusses, both can be read on dissidentvoice.org.

Dohnjoe

Fodla wrote: »

Peter Koenig wrote an article a few days ago about The Great Reset and the plan to 'reimagine' the world of work. It sounds absolutely horrifying.

You are linking to a blog post on it (one from a well known alarmist website)
https://www.globalresearch.ca/world-economic-forum-step-two-resetting-future-work-agenda-after-great-reset/5729175

I strongly advise to read the actual paper yourself
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_NES_Resetting_FOW_Agenda_2020.pdf

Having paged through it there, it's fairly normal stuff, about how the world will likely move more toward remote-working due to the current crisis, etc.

dissidentvoice.org.

A self-described radical blog. You won't be receiving objective information from these types of sites, just a distorted version of the facts carefully framed to fit an extreme narrative.

Fodla

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You are linking to a blog post on it (one from a well known alarmist website)


I strongly advise to read the actual paper yourself


Having paged through it there, it's fairly normal stuff, about how the world will likely move more toward remote-working due to the current crisis, etc.



A self-described radical blog. You won't be receiving objective information from these types of sites, just a distorted version of the facts carefully framed to fit an extreme narrative.

I read the White Paper and, while my interpretation of it differs somewhat from the author's, it seems to me to be a push to make the world of work a digital one. I'd be wary of that.

They also appear to be pushing this 'new normal'. Indeed, Klaus Schwab has said that the world will not be going back to normal.

And then there's the thing about owning nothing by 2030 and being happy about it. What's that about?

On Peter Koenig, I don't know much about him, but he seems to be a man of some pedigree. He worked for the World Bank and the WHO. Is he well respected as an economist and journalist?

milehip

JJayoo wrote: »

Any dip**** posting a book review that long on amazon has clearly nothing better to do than talk ****r

It's a book itself sure.

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

And then there's the thing about owning nothing by 2030 and being happy about it. What's that about?

Why not explain what you think it means and why it's something to be concerned about?

Fodla

King Mob wrote: »

Why not explain what you think it means and why it's something to be concerned about?

An end to private property. I can't think what else it could mean.

Does that not concern you?

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

An end to private property. I can't think what else it could mean.

Ok. So what does that mean to you?

Fodla wrote: »

Does that not concern you?

Why would it concern me or anyone?

Dohnjoe

Fodla wrote: »

I read the White Paper and, while my interpretation of it differs somewhat from the author's, it seems to me to be a push to make the world of work a digital one. I'd be wary of that.

The world of work is an increasingly digital one now. In the future there will likely be less people working from the office and more people working from home.

That's correct yes? if so what's so "scary" about stating the obvious?

They also appear to be pushing this 'new normal'. Indeed, Klaus Schwab has said that the world will not be going back to normal.

Who are "they"?

Everyone is saying it's unlikely the world will fully go back to normal. It doesn't mean we will turn into some dystopian future, it just means e.g. more people might be working from home

Again, why are you so fearful of someone stating the obvious?

And then there's the thing about owning nothing by 2030 and being happy about it. What's that about?

Quote the full context of the line and I'll explain it

Fodla

King Mob wrote: »

Ok. So what does that mean to you?


Why would it concern me or anyone?

Not being allowed to own your own home shouldn't worry a person?

Fodla

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The world of work is an increasingly digital one now. In the future there will likely be less people working from the office and more people working from home.

That's correct yes? if so what's so "scary" about stating the obvious?



Who are "they"?

Everyone is saying it's unlikely the world will fully go back to normal. It doesn't mean we will turn into some dystopian future, it just means e.g. more people might be working from home

Again, why are you so fearful of someone stating the obvious?



Quote the full context of the line and I'll explain it

But before all of this hardly anyone worked from home. People teleworked, of course, but very few. Why all of a sudden is a digital transformation required?

Re the 2030 prediction, it refers to an article a Danish MP wrote in 2016. It's suspicious that WEF decided to retweet it recently. Especially when one considers the upcoming Great Reset.

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

Not being allowed to own your own home shouldn't worry a person?

Where does it say this in the paper you're refering to?
Specifically quote where it says "you won't be allowed to own your own home."

If you can't quote that from the paper directly, where are you getting that idea from?

And even then, if the paper does say something to that effect, what's the issue? Why would it be a concern that it's just written in some paper? Why does that mean it's going to happen?

Fodla

King Mob wrote: »

Where does it say this in the paper you're refering to?
Specifically quote where it says "you won't be allowed to own your own home."

If you can't quote that from the paper directly, where are you getting that idea from?

And even then, if the paper does say something to that effect, what's the issue? Why would it be a concern that it's just written in some paper? Why does that mean it's going to happen?

From the article in question:

"Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city - or should I say, "our city". I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes.

It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much."

Sounds like communism to me.

It wouldn't be too much of a concern had the WEF, who are behind the Great Reset, not decided to retweet about the article a few weeks ago. Why do you think they decided to tweet about an article written in 2016?

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

From the article in question:

"Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city - or should I say, "our city". I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes.

It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much."

Sounds like communism to me.

Sorry, I asked you to post the quote that stated you would not be allowed to own your house. You posted the wrong passage by mistake.
Please find the one that states that you will not be allowed to own your house.

Fodla wrote: »

It wouldn't be too much of a concern had the WEF, who are behind the Great Reset, not decided to retweet about the article a few weeks ago. Why do you think they decided to tweet about an article written in 2016?

I don't know.
I don't know why it's a concern or why them tweeting something is so concerning.
Please explain why you are so worried about it?

Fodla

It doesn't explicitly say that you won't be allowed to own your own home, but the title of the article, i.e. "you'll own nothing", gives it away.

And the only reasonable explanation, in my opinion, for WEF retweeting it after all these years is because they intend to abolish private property. Why retweet it otherwise?

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

It doesn't explicitly say that you won't be allowed to own your own home, but the title of the article, i.e. "you'll own nothing", gives it away.

Why would it not explicitly say that, but then also give it away at the same time?
That's a contradiction and it doesn't make any sense.

But why do you also claim that they say that we won't be allowed to own houses when they don't actually say that.
That seems like misrepresenting to me.

Fodla wrote: »

And the only reasonable explanation, in my opinion, for WEF retweeting it after all these years is because they intend to abolish private property. Why retweet it otherwise?

Where did they say that they want to abolish private property?
Why would they tweet that if that's what they mean?

Even still, why would you be concerned if these guys did want to abolish private property? Do you believe they secretly control the world?

Dohnjoe

Fodla wrote: »

But before all of this hardly anyone worked from home. People teleworked, of course, but very few. Why all of a sudden is a digital transformation required?

People are working from home because of the pandemic. Many companies will likely have more remote-working because

a) people like it and are generally happier
b) it's cheaper than operating a full time office
c) it's better for the environment

Therefore, it's likely, in a post-Covid world that more people will be working remotely.

Re the 2030 prediction, it refers to an article a Danish MP wrote in 2016. It's suspicious that WEF decided to retweet it recently. Especially when one considers the upcoming Great Reset.

What's "suspicious" and what is the context? please give the full paragraph. Or link to the source.

I am certain it's some random piece by one person that's being completely misunderstood (on purpose) by the conspiracy community.

Fodla

King Mob wrote: »

Why would it not explicitly say that, but then also give it away at the same time?
That's a contradiction and it doesn't make any sense.

But why do you also claim that they say that we won't be allowed to own houses when they don't actually say that.
That seems like misrepresenting to me.


Where did they say that they want to abolish private property?
Why would they tweet that if that's what they mean?

Even still, why would you be concerned if these guys did want to abolish private property? Do you believe they secretly control the world?

Because it's explicitly stated and made clear in the title. If we own nothing then we don't own property. There's no need for the author to restate it in the article.

The timing of the retweet, with the Great Reset, which nobody voted for, by the way, being nigh, suggests that they want to abolish private property and ownership. Why else would they decide to retweet it? For a laugh?

Because the WEF is an extremely powerful organisation and has all of the big global players signed up for the Great Reset.

Fodla

Dohnjoe wrote: »

People are working from home because of the pandemic. Many companies will likely have more remote-working because

a) people like it and are generally happier
b) it's cheaper than operating a full time office
c) it's better for the environment

Therefore, it's likely, in a post-Covid world that more people will be working remotely.



What's "suspicious" and what is the context? please give the full paragraph. Or link to the source.

I am certain it's some random piece by one person that's being completely misunderstood (on purpose) by the conspiracy community.

Unfortunately, I can't link to the article because I can't post links, but the article opens with the following:

"Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city - or should I say, "our city". I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes.

It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much."

It's on WEF's own website. If you google 'Wekcome to 2030, I own nothing ..." you'll find it. It was written by a Danish MP.

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

Because it's explicitly stated and made clear in the title. If we own nothing then we don't own property. There's no need for the author to restate it in the article.

But it's on explicitly stated. You just said it wasn't explicitly stated.

And nowhere do they say anything about abolishing private property.
This seems to be an invention by paranoid conspiracy theorists who are misreading and misrepresenting what they did actually write.

Fodla wrote: »

The timing of the retweet, with the Great Reset, which nobody voted for, by the way, being nigh, suggests that they want to abolish private property and ownership. Why else would they decide to retweet it? For a laugh?

I still don't understand why you believe they tweeted it.
Please explain why they tweeted it in the context of the conspiracy theory you believe.

Fodla wrote: »

Because the WEF is an extremely powerful organisation and has all of the big global players signed up for the Great Reset.

Cool.
Evidence for this?

In what way are the an extremely power organisation? How did they get all governments etc to sign up?

You seem to just be spitting out the usual conspiracy theory tropes we've been hearing for the last while.

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

It's on WEF's own website. If you google 'Wekcome to 2030, I own nothing ..." you'll find it. It was written by a Danish MP.

Why didn't you quote the Author's note?

That seems a touch dishonest to me and looks like you were trying to manipulate the meaning of the quote. This is a tactic I've seen conspiracy theorists use often. It's very shady and very obvious.

Please quote the Author's note in full and explain how it fits into your conspiracy theory.

Dohnjoe

Fodla wrote: »

Unfortunately, I can't link to the article because I can't post links, but the article opens with the following:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/how-life-could-change-2030/

This is the article, it's a blog piece by one person. Their random vision of a future. It's meant to provoke discussion.

Why are you so fearful of it? why didn't you touch on the fact that the person who wrote it gave it context?

King Mob

Also, reading through the article:

My biggest concern is all the people who do not live in our city. Those we lost on the way. Those who decided that it became too much, all this technology. Those who felt obsolete and useless when robots and AI took over big parts of our jobs. Those who got upset with the political system and turned against it. They live different kind of lives outside of the city. Some have formed little self-supplying communities. Others just stayed in the empty and abandoned houses in small 19th century villages.

It explicitly states that you can own property in this imagined future.

Someone was telling lies about this article or they didn't read it beyond what's quoted in conspiracy youtube videos.

Fodla

King Mob wrote: »

But it's on explicitly stated. You just said it wasn't explicitly stated.

And nowhere do they say anything about abolishing private property.
This seems to be an invention by paranoid conspiracy theorists who are misreading and misrepresenting what they did actually write.


I still don't understand why you believe they tweeted it.
Please explain why they tweeted it in the context of the conspiracy theory you believe.


Cool.
Evidence for this?

In what way are the an extremely power organisation? How did they get all governments etc to sign up?

You seem to just be spitting out the usual conspiracy theory tropes we've been hearing for the last while.

I said it's not explicitly stated in the article because it's explicitly stated in the title. There's no need for the author to state again in the article that private property will be no more. She already states it in the title. Granted, she doesn't write "private property will be abolished", but "you will own nothing" includes private property. Otherwise it'd read "you won't own certain things".

I believe they retweeted it to prepare people for the abolition of private property. They've been completely open about the Great Reset since June so it wouldn't be unusual for them to announce their intentions by retweeting the link to that article. Why do you think they, out of the blue, decided to retweet the link to the article?

The Bank of Canada the other day issued a report which included a section entitled 'The Great Reset'. Another coincidence?

All the big players have singed up to the Great Reset. It's all on WEF's website.

bigsuge1

King Mob wrote: »

Why would it not explicitly say that, but then also give it away at the same time?
That's a contradiction and it doesn't make any sense.

But why do you also claim that they say that we won't be allowed to own houses when they don't actually say that.
That seems like misrepresenting to me.


Where did they say that they want to abolish private property?
Why would they tweet that if that's what they mean?

Even still, why would you be concerned if these guys did want to abolish private property? Do you believe they secretly control the world?

Why wouldn’t we be concerned if these people did want to abolish private property?

Let’s say you work hard for 10 years, buy the house you like, pay a sizeable mortgage for the next 20 years thinking you’re securing your future once you retire and then it’s taken away under a new government/worldwide act..

I’m not saying I believe all this Reset stuff but IF it is what some are predicting I can’t see how it benefits any of us. If anyone has any other take on how abolishing private property may work or how it will benefit us I’d like to hear.

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

I said it's not explicitly stated in the article because it's explicitly stated in the title. There's no need for the author to state again in the article that private property will be no more. She already states it in the title. Granted, she doesn't write "private property will be abolished", but "you will own nothing" includes private property. Otherwise it'd read "you won't own certain things".

But as we've seen, you're lying about the article on a few levels.
You claimed that the article outlines their vision for the future when the author's note actually does explicitly state this is not the case.
Secondly we see in the article that the do allow people to own private property.

So why did you leave these parts out of your quotes? Did you not read them or were you deliberately trying to hide them?

Fodla wrote: »

I believe they retweeted it to prepare people for the abolition of private property.

Lol. How is a tweet supposed to accomplish this?

Fodla wrote: »

They've been completely open about the Great Reset since June

Cool. So quote where they explicitly talk about abolishing private property.

Fodla wrote: »

The Bank of Canada the other day issued a report which included a section entitled 'The Great Reset'. Another coincidence?

Yes. You seem very startled and easily scared of coincidences.

King Mob

bigsuge1 wrote: »

Why wouldn’t we be concerned if these people did want to abolish private property?

Because even if they did say that (which they didn't) they have no means to make it happen or enforce it.

That is of course unless the person concerned also believes in all the conspiracy nonsense.

feedmindc19

bigsuge1 wrote: »

Why wouldn’t we be concerned if these people did want to abolish private property?

Let’s say you work hard for 10 years, buy the house you like, pay a sizeable mortgage for the next 20 years thinking you’re securing your future once you retire and then it’s taken away under a new government/worldwide act..

I’m not saying I believe all this Reset stuff but IF it is what some are predicting I can’t see how it benefits any of us. If anyone has any other take on how abolishing private property may work or how it will benefit us I’d like to hear.

Man I'm not all for conspiracys but we are ****ed the best you and everyone else can do is prepare for yourself and your family cos we are ****ed. Be prepared and alll the best.

Dohnjoe

Fodla wrote: »

I believe they retweeted it to prepare people for the abolition of private property. They've been completely open about the Great Reset since June so it wouldn't be unusual for them to announce their intentions by retweeting the link to that article. Why do you think they, out of the blue, decided to retweet the link to the article?

Because someone asked them to retweet a link to the piece. Again, it's a random piece written by someone.

If a random MP decides to write about a future where we might live in space, do you take it literally and start panicking and believing that some "powers-that-be" are going to force us to live in space? or do you realise it's just some fanciful discussion provoking piece on how humans might, at some point in the future, possibly live in space, or not.

The Bank of Canada the other day issued a report which included a section entitled 'The Great Reset'. Another coincidence?

Link to this and what's the conspiracy explanation?

feedmindc19

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Because someone asked them to retweet a link to the piece. Again, it's a random piece written by someone.

If a random MP decides to write about a future where we might live in space, do you take it literally and start panicking and believing that some "powers-that-be" are going to force us to live in space? or do you realise it's just some fanciful discussion provoking piece on how humans might, at some point in the future, possibly live in space, or not.



Link to this and what's the conspiracy explanation?[/QUOTEAre you starting to realize its not a conspiracy ?

Dohnjoe

feedmindc19 wrote: »

Are you starting to realize its not a conspiracy ?

What is the conspiracy? explanation and details please.

And please no vague (lazy) allusions e.g. "there's something fishy going on", "this is all part of the plan", "it's all too much of a coincidence", etc

Fodla

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Because someone asked them to retweet a link to the piece. Again, it's a random piece written by someone.

If a random MP decides to write about a future where we might live in space, do you take it literally and start panicking and believing that some "powers-that-be" are going to force us to live in space? or do you realise it's just some fanciful discussion provoking piece on how humans might, at some point in the future, possibly live in space, or not.



Link to this and what's the conspiracy explanation?

Ask I wrote previously, I wouldn't have paid too much attention to it were it not for the fact that WEF chose to, for reasons unknown, and out of the blue, retweet a link to the article? Why did they decide to retweet a link to an article written in 2016 about people owning nothing by 2030? Is it just a coincidence that Agenda 2030 is to be achieved by 2030? Just a coincidence that Schwab has been talking about massive societal changes and WEF chooses to retweet a link to an article about communism?

I can't post a link, but here's an article from the Toronto Sun:

"Some conspiracy theory. Love it or hate it, the Great Reset is real.

It’s being openly discussed and promoted here in Canada. Including at the Bank of Canada.


Let’s first back track though. Last week, a video of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recorded the other month resurfaced to much controversy.

In it, Trudeau smilingly stated that “this pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems.”

As we wrote about the Great Reset just the other day in this space: “Its goal is a global transformation of national economies and societies because, it argues, the major crises humanity faces today, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and human-induced climate change, do not respect international borders.”

Many Canadians were none too pleased to learn that Trudeau considers these hardships to our health and economy as an “opportunity” for him to foist an agenda upon our nation.

But, Trudeau contends, that argument is based on “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories”. He also denounced the Conservative MPs who took issue with his comments.

One wonders if Trudeau will now likewise denounce the Bank of Canada for being a co-conspirator.

Back in August, Paul Beaudry – Deputy Governor of the Bank – delivered a presentation with the headline “The Great Reset: Supporting the transition to a greener, smarter economy“. It’s still up on their website for all to see.

The presentation says “COVID-19 is a shock and an opportunity” and discusses a “pivot to a greener, smarter economy”.

It discusses “shifting preferences/behaviour” in individual households in Canada.

While we have no problem with the Bank of Canada being ahead of the curve when it comes to the economic challenges our nation will face, the Great Reset is not about how things will be, but about how people want things to be.

It is an agenda. It appears that the Bank of Canada is, at least in part, getting in on that agenda. We’d prefer they stay neutral.

When Trudeau is next asked about the Great Reset, he shouldn’t continue to gaslight Canadians by telling them not to believe what they see right in front of them. Instead, he needs to come clean."

It was actually a presentation, not a report. If you Google 'Bank of Canada The Great Reset' you'll see it's available to view as a PDF document.

pearcider

Fodla wrote: »

Ask I wrote previously, I wouldn't have paid too much attention to it were it not for the fact that WEF chose to, for reasons unknown, and out of the blue, retweet a link to the article? Why did they decide to retweet a link to an article written in 2016 about people owning nothing by 2030? Is it just a coincidence that Agenda 2030 is to be achieved by 2030? Just a coincidence that Schwab has been talking about massive societal changes and WEF chooses to retweet a link to an article about communism?

I can't post a link, but here's an article from the Toronto Sun:

"Some conspiracy theory. Love it or hate it, the Great Reset is real.

It’s being openly discussed and promoted here in Canada. Including at the Bank of Canada.


Let’s first back track though. Last week, a video of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recorded the other month resurfaced to much controversy.

In it, Trudeau smilingly stated that “this pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems.”

As we wrote about the Great Reset just the other day in this space: “Its goal is a global transformation of national economies and societies because, it argues, the major crises humanity faces today, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and human-induced climate change, do not respect international borders.”

Many Canadians were none too pleased to learn that Trudeau considers these hardships to our health and economy as an “opportunity” for him to foist an agenda upon our nation.

But, Trudeau contends, that argument is based on “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories”. He also denounced the Conservative MPs who took issue with his comments.

One wonders if Trudeau will now likewise denounce the Bank of Canada for being a co-conspirator.

Back in August, Paul Beaudry – Deputy Governor of the Bank – delivered a presentation with the headline “The Great Reset: Supporting the transition to a greener, smarter economy“. It’s still up on their website for all to see.

The presentation says “COVID-19 is a shock and an opportunity” and discusses a “pivot to a greener, smarter economy”.

It discusses “shifting preferences/behaviour” in individual households in Canada.

While we have no problem with the Bank of Canada being ahead of the curve when it comes to the economic challenges our nation will face, the Great Reset is not about how things will be, but about how people want things to be.

It is an agenda. It appears that the Bank of Canada is, at least in part, getting in on that agenda. We’d prefer they stay neutral.

When Trudeau is next asked about the Great Reset, he shouldn’t continue to gaslight Canadians by telling them not to believe what they see right in front of them. Instead, he needs to come clean."

It was actually a presentation, not a report. If you Google 'Bank of Canada The Great Reset' you'll see it's available to view as a PDF document.

A major element of the reset will be a reset of the current monetary system as the Breton woods II system is nearing collapse with the mighty dollar finally falling foul of Triffins dilemma after over 80 years as world reserve currency.

The world needs a new global reserve currency so the great reset also refers to this. Key monetary elitist Mark Carney spoke in great detail about this in Jackson Hole last year. The rise of bitcoin is also mirroring this narrative.

In 1998, the worlds banking system came within hours of collapse following the failure of the most sophisticated hedge fund ever conceived, Long Term capital management. All the major world banks were forced by the US government to an unprecedented (at the time) bail out of 3.7 billion in order to prevent the collapse. Of course this only bought more time as the debt based fractional reserve system is dynamically unstable and must inevitably collapse.

In 2008, the worlds financial system was again hours from collapse but was bailed out by the US central bank and the ECB to the tune of 22 trillion.

The next collapse will be an order of magnitude greater again 100 plus trillion and will collapse the central banks themselves leaving only the IMF/BIS to finalise their takeover. This will be the Great Reset which will destroy the dollar and by extension all fiat currencies.

Dohnjoe

Fodla wrote: »

Ask I wrote previously, I wouldn't have paid too much attention to it were it not for the fact that WEF chose to, for reasons unknown, and out of the blue, retweet a link to the article?

Because they decided to retweet it. Perhaps whoever was operating twitter for them that day was told to find random stuff online related to the future for tweeting.

I shouldn't even be writing this because it's so absurd, but do you think a "they" are pushing cartoonishly evil plans to abolish private ownership for 2030 because someone wrote some random piece about futurism and it was retweeted?

If you are going to hint at this stuff be specific, because it's getting real silly real fast

In it, Trudeau smilingly stated that “this pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems.”

It's a global pandemic, it has massively interrupted global economics, so it is a sort of economic reset. Like after the financial crisis in 2008.

Why are you highlighting that sentence? it's like you are reading into everything as if it means something else, what is that something else?

As we wrote about the Great Reset just the other day in this space: “Its goal is a global transformation of national economies and societies because, it argues, the major crises humanity faces today, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and human-induced climate change, do not respect international borders.”

Many Canadians were none too pleased to learn that Trudeau considers these hardships to our health and economy as an “opportunity” for him to foist an agenda upon our nation.

Most Canadians will understand that because it's perfectly understandable. Again, you seem to be reading into stuff.

What is the big "plan" going on here?

A paranoid person who believes they are being followed will see "evidence" of it everywhere, which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Getting those vibes with these posts.

ohnonotgmail

King Mob wrote: »

Yes. You seem very startled and easily scared of coincidences.

does that sound very familiar to anybody else?

ohnonotgmail

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Because they decided to retweet it. Perhaps whoever was operating twitter for them that day was told to find random stuff online related to the future for tweeting.

I shouldn't even be writing this because it's so absurd, but do you think a "they" are pushing cartoonishly evil plans to abolish private ownership for 2030 because someone wrote some random piece about futurism and it was retweeted?

If you are going to hint at this stuff be specific, because it's getting real silly real fast



It's a global pandemic, it has massively interrupted global economics, so it is a sort of economic reset. Like after the financial crisis in 2008.

Why are you highlighting that sentence? it's like you are reading into everything as if it means something else, what is that something else?



Most Canadians will understand that because it's perfectly understandable. Again, you seem to be reading into stuff.

What is the big "plan" going on here?

A paranoid person who believes they are being followed will see "evidence" of it everywhere, which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Getting those vibes with these posts.

yeah but Trudeau was smiling when he said so we all know what that means.

Fodla

bigsuge1 wrote: »

Why wouldn’t we be concerned if these people did want to abolish private property?

Let’s say you work hard for 10 years, buy the house you like, pay a sizeable mortgage for the next 20 years thinking you’re securing your future once you retire and then it’s taken away under a new government/worldwide act..

I’m not saying I believe all this Reset stuff but IF it is what some are predicting I can’t see how it benefits any of us. If anyone has any other take on how abolishing private property may work or how it will benefit us I’d like to hear.

Indeed. I'd find it rather odd for a person not to be be horrified by the idea of their home being taken away from them.

ohnonotgmail

Fodla wrote: »

Indeed. I'd find it rather odd for a person not to be be horrified by the idea of their home being taken away from them.

where does it say that peoples homes will be taken away from them?

Fodla

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Because they decided to retweet it. Perhaps whoever was operating twitter for them that day was told to find random stuff online related to the future for tweeting.

I shouldn't even be writing this because it's so absurd, but do you think a "they" are pushing cartoonishly evil plans to abolish private ownership for 2030 because someone wrote some random piece about futurism and it was retweeted?

If you are going to hint at this stuff be specific, because it's getting real silly real fast



It's a global pandemic, it has massively interrupted global economics, so it is a sort of economic reset. Like after the financial crisis in 2008.

Why are you highlighting that sentence? it's like you are reading into everything as if it means something else, what is that something else?



Most Canadians will understand that because it's perfectly understandable. Again, you seem to be reading into stuff.

What is the big "plan" going on here?

A paranoid person who believes they are being followed will see "evidence" of it everywhere, which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Getting those vibes with these posts.

So the random thing they found just happened to be an article about owning nothing in 2030, which just happens to be the year Agenda 2030 is to be implemented by?

Yes, as horrifying as it sounds, I believe that that is what they are trying to do, hence getting people prepared for it by retweeting a link to that article. If you research Agenda 2030 (and Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset go hand in hand) you'll see that those involved with Agenda 2030 consider private property to be both unsustainable and unjust.

I didn't highlight that sentence. I just copy and pasted the article.

Fodla

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

where does it say that peoples homes will be taken away from them?

In the title of the article it says people will own nothing by 2030. That includes private property.

People are focusing on the article when, in my opinion, they should be focusing on WEF deciding to retweet a link to the article with the Great Reset, which many believe to be a global push for communism (you can call them crazy, but many people do believe that that is what is behind pushed behind the green mask), with the Great Reset on the horizon.

Weepsie

They're not giving themselves a lot of time to get people's private property in 10 years.

Hell even banks have a hell of a job getting people out of private property

Fodla

Weepsie wrote: »

They're not giving themselves a lot of time to get people's private property in 10 years.

Hell even banks have a hell of a job getting people out of private property

Hence WEF, Prince Charles et al referring to 'a narrow window of opportunity'.

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

In the title of the article it says people will own nothing by 2030. That includes private property.

People are focusing on the article

But this isn't true.
You keep neglecting to mention the author's note at the top and bottom of the article.

You also have ignored the passage of the article I pointed out that explicitly states people can and do own property in the scenario he's writing.
Why did you ignore this?

Why do you keep misrepresenting this article?

ohnonotgmail

Fodla wrote: »

In the title of the article it says people will own nothing by 2030. That includes private property.

People are focusing on the article when, in my opinion, they should be focusing on WEF deciding to retweet a link to the article with the Great Reset, which many believe to be a global push for communism (you can call them crazy, but many people do believe that that is what is behind pushed behind the green mask), with the Great Reset on the horizon.

Smart people generally read beyond the title.

Fodla

King Mob wrote: »

But this isn't true.
You keep neglecting to mention the author's note at the top and bottom of the article.

You also have ignored the passage of the article I pointed out that explicitly states people can and do own property in the scenario he's writing.
Why did you ignore this?

Why do you keep misrepresenting this article?

Because I believe the author's note to be irrelevant since I'm focusing on WEF choosing to retweet a link to the article a few months before the Great Reset. It's the timing of the retweet, as well as the subject matter, i.e. communism, that's off. The title of the article refers to the year 2030, which is the year by which Agenda 2030 is to be implemented worldwide.

Re that passage, that makes that article even more dystopian, in my opinion. The idea that people had to flee and live off the grid to escape from communism.

Fodla

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Smart people generally read beyond the title.

I read the article. It describes a communist dystopia, in my opinion.

King Mob

Fodla wrote: »

Because I believe the author's note to be irrelevant

Lol jesus christ.

The author states clearly and directly that what he is writting about is not nessesarily what he wants or believes is a good idea.

You claimed that it was his and the WEF's plan.

You lied.

The author's note where he spells out his meaning is very relevant.

You just dodged and ignored it to support your conspiracy theory.

Fodla wrote: »

Re that passage, that makes that article even more dystopian, in my opinion. The idea that people had to flee and live off the grid to escape from communism.

Nowhere in the article does it say any of that.
That's all your own interpretation, which we have seen is very suspect.

Be honest, did you actually read beyond the title and first paragraph before posting about it?
Or did you only repeat those parts cause they're the only ones the conspiracy theory media is repeating?