Company Contrast: AirBnB & VRBO

Each week 2ndVote takes a look at popular companies that either score well or score poorly  and then try to provide alternatives that either better align with the 2ndVote values or should be avoided to the best of your ability. This series is called The Company Contrast, and the company we will be focusing on this week is AirBnB (1.00) and VRBO (owned by Expedia – 1.97).

With the end of another school year fast approaching and COVID on its steady downward spiral, everyone is starting to prepare for summer vacation. Finding a place to stay has become a modern trend as hotels are no longer the only options available for those looking to get away. Among the top sites for lodging are AirBNB and VRBO – both offering options from tiny homes to full homes available for short term stays. But how do they stack up when comparing them with our set of standards?

AirBnB has progressively become more and more of an opinionated company with it’s increased support for organizations like the Equal Justice Initiative, the Human Rights Campaign, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)  and Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). For 2022, they scored a 100 on the HRC’s Corporate Equality Index and who’s surprised with their continued liberal activism on Religious Liberty, Marriage, and Immigration. In a public statement made on their website, AirBNB also supports abortions and “the reproductive rights of women”.

But is VRBO any better? Owned by Expedia, they also scored a 100 on the HRC’s Corporate Equality Index. They exhibit strong support for the LGBTQ liberal agenda as well as support for the DREAM act, DACA and sanctuary cities with a donation of $1.3 million to the International Rescue Committee. It’s difficult to say which option is better, but we recommend choosing a hotel chain such as Best Western (3.00) or Omni Hotels (3.00) which can provide you with a great stay, without sacrificing your values.

The Biggest Reason Netflix Shares Are Tanking [+video]

The main reason Netflix is hitting headwinds is straightforward: competition.


When asked about the best way to fight monopolies in his documentary series Free to Choose, Milton Friedman had a firm answer: “the free market.” Some of his guests had other positions and argued that government intervention was necessary, but Friedman didn’t buy it.

The Netflix case has proved Friedman right, once again.

On Wednesday, Netflix shares plunged an impressive 36 percent. Conventional press releases blamed the loss of subscribers as the main cause for the crumbling value of the entertainment company. Others blamed Netflix’s ideological story lines, which in recent times have been advocating mainly leftist causes. These factors are undoubtedly part of the reason why its shares in the market crumbled, but the main reason was far more straightforward: competition.

No one can doubt that Netflix’s founders were forerunners. They discovered or created the subscription-based entertainment service, and they, far from selling or renting movies, as Blockbuster did, reinvented the industry. In 2016 an article was published in Business Insider that claimed Hollywood was terrified that Netflix would become a huge monopoly that would displace them. However, as usually happens in any society where there is capital, opportunity, and space for free competition, soon other companies began to copy Netflix’s business model and provide better service: cheaper prices, shared subscriptions with advertising, other productions, among other perks, which gradually began to bring down Netflix’s solitary reign.

Netflix knows it, too. They argue that the emergence of competitors (Disney, HBO, Amazon, among others) is one of the causes of the loss of customers. Of course, there’s also prices, ideology, and programming—there are a number of factors that have caused thousands of people to leave Netflix—but the main thing is that people have the ability to freely choose their entertainment service provider.

Now Netflix will have to adjust its rates, plans, and programming in an attempt to regain lost customers, and will surely backtrack on its intentions to increase subscription prices; in fact, it has been rumored that the company may be considering the possibility of implementing cheaper subscriptions with the inclusion of advertising.

Regardless of which company ends up being the one that consolidates as the most powerful in the entertainment market, we should all be grateful to have a healthy competition that allows us all to have better and cheaper services, because surely without such competition Netflix could unilaterally set the prices they see fit and include the programming that their directors establish without thinking about the consumer. Most likely this setback will make them rethink the editorial line of programming they have adopted in recent times.

Americans should be grateful to have in the country different large companies competing among themselves for customers. That is the essence of capitalism and the free market, and it is the reason why the United States has been such a successful nation. In Venezuela, the country where I was born and spent 27 years of my life, due to the shortage of products because of the enormous state intervention in the economy, I was forced on many occasions to buy soaps, deodorants, food, and other products of very poor quality and at high prices, because we could only buy what the government bureaucrats offered.

Similarly, I spent years of my life having electricity and water cuts that sometimes lasted 48 hours, because the government was the entity that managed the basic service companies, with the supposed intention of making it more accessible to the entire population. As it turns out—thanks to this intervention—no one in the whole country could enjoy smooth electricity service, a problem that remains to this day.

So as we watch Netflix shares fall, let’s be thankful and celebrate the market process, including the large companies and consolidation it creates. Because I assure you that if these big companies commit any irregularity or fail to comply with consumer demands, the market will put them in their place in a timely manner, something that the government will never be able to do.

AUTHOR

Emmanuel Rincón

Emmanuel Rincón is a lawyer, writer, novelist and essayist. He has won several international literary awards. He is Editor-at-large at El American.

RELATED ARTICLE: Mike Tyson Spotted Reading One of the Greatest Economics Books Ever

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

U.S. Economy Shrank 1.4% Marking Worst Quarter in 2-Years

How do President Trump’s tweets look now, America? Under President Trump the American economy was booming in all sectors. It was the envy of the world. Today, under the Biden Administration socialist economic policies, America’s economy is shrinking, and Wall Street is warning of a recession. Once again, the Biden Administration is a dangerous joke.

‘Biden economics.’ The economy should be exploding post COVID lockdowns. It takes serious enemy action (Democrats) to take down the economic engine of America.

“The U.S. economy cooled markedly in the first three months of the year, as snarled supply chains, record-high inflation and labor shortages weighed on growth and slowed the pandemic recovery.”

Americans’ confidence in the economy remains very low, and mentions of economic issues as the most important problem in the U.S. are at their highest point since 2016. Inflation, which registered as the top economic problem last month and continues to be, was previously at this level in 1984 (Gallup). Breitbart: On the eve of the election of Donald Trump in 2016, 31 percent of Americans named an economic issue as the most important facing the country. That number steadily fell throughout the Trump administration, eventually surpassing the previous record low of 13 percent set in 1999 (Breitbart).

US economy shrank 1.4% at beginning of 2022, marking worst quarter in 2 years

By Fox News, April 28, 2022

Gross domestic product, the broadest measure of goods and services produced across the economy, shrank by 1.4% on an annualized basis in the three-month period from January through March, the Commerce Department said in its first reading of the data on Thursday.

Refinitiv economists expected the report to show the economy had expanded by 1.1%.

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden: “Basically, We’re Out Of Money” But Vows Another $33 Billion More For Ukraine

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Washington state Congressional candidate wants $30 an hour minimum wage

Why not $60? Or $100? Or $1,000,000? Make everyone a millionaire, and all our economic troubles will be over, right? Rebecca Parson, and there are many others who think like this “patriotic, Catholic, and queer” candidate, lacks a basic understanding of economics. If you force businesses to pay more in wages, they’ll cut expenses in other ways, often by reducing the number of people employed. So minimum wage hikes often lead to increased unemployment. And when producers know that everyone has that kind of money, they raise prices in order to try to make back some of what they’re paying in increased wages. Minimum wage hikes thus often lead to inflation. They thus more likely increase misery than alleviate it.

$30 An Hour Minimum Wage? This Democratic Candidate Says Yes

by Dillon Burroughs, Daily Wire, April 25, 2022:

A Democratic congressional candidate in Washington State is arguing for a $30 per hour minimum wage, claiming that the $15 minimum wage movement is an outdated number.

Rebecca Parson, a candidate for Washington’s 6th District that includes Tacoma, shared the comment recently in a post on Twitter.

“$15 minimum wage is an antiquated demand. It should be $30 per hour,” she tweeted.

“1 adult supporting 1 kid needs $30 an hour across the country. Rural, urban, suburban: $30 is the floor. As you say your nightly prayers to Saint Elon while you fall asleep tonight, reflect on why you punch down on poor people instead of up at your heavenly billionaire,” she added in another post.

In her campaign video, Parson said, “I and other organizers have occupied empty buildings, demanding housing for our homeless neighbors. I risked arrest because we can’t just wait for the corporate establishment to help.”

Parson also claimed in her video that she will emulate “Congresswoman Cori Bush,” a “Squad” member and progressive Democrat who slept outside in Washington, D.C., to advocate for housing. Parson claims she can identify with the need, as she’s “been homeless, too,” despite holding a master’s degree from Johns Hopkins.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama Ambassador Charged With Illegally Serving Qatar

Florida Man Must Write Essay About Massacre of Gays That Wasn’t About Gays

The Critical Qur’an: The most comprehensive critical edition of the holy book of the Muslims ever published

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

John Deere Goes Woke with Impractical Electric Farm Equip

Things politicians never talk about when they pander to Greenies.

Managing All Electric Farm Equipment

A close friend farms over 10,000 acres of corn in the mid-west. The property is spread out over 3 counties. His operation is a “partnership farm” with John Deere. They use the larger farm operations as demonstration projects for promotion and development of new equipment. He recently received a phone call from his John Deere representative, and they want the farm to go to electric tractors and combines in 2023. He currently has 5 diesel combines that cost $900,000 each that are traded in every 3 years. Also, over 10 really BIG tractors.

John Deere wants him to go all electric and soon.

He said:

Ok, I have some questions. How do I charge these combines when they are 3 counties away from the shop in the middle of a cornfield, in the middle of nowhere? How do I run them 24 hours a day for 10 or 12 days straight when the harvest is ready, and the weather is coming in? How do I get a 50,000+ lb. combine that takes up the width of an entire road back to the shop 20 miles away when the battery goes dead?

There was dead silence on the other end of the phone.

He then asked,

When the corn is ready to harvest, it has to have the proper sugar and moisture content. If it is too wet, it has to be put in giant dryers that burn natural or propane gas, and lots of it. Harvest time is critical because if it degrades in sugar content or quality, it can drop the value of his crop by half a million dollars or more. It is analyzed at time of sale.

It is standard procedure to run these machines 10 to 12 days straight, 24 hours a day at peak harvest time. When they need fuel, a tanker truck delivers it, and the machines keep going.

John Deere’s only answer is “we’re working on it.”

They are being pushed by the lefty Democrats in the government to force these electric machines on the American farmer. These people are out of control.

They are messing with the production of food crops that feed people and livestock, all in the name of their “green dream.”

Look for the cost of your box of cornflakes to triple in the next 24 months.

©Royal A. Brown, III. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: 11 Thing you can do to help stop the Great Reset

Documents Show Biden Agency the National Credit Union Administration Enforcing Critical Race ideology

Judicial Watch announced that it received records from the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) in response to a Freedom of Information Act request which shows the government agency responsible for regulating credit unions required “inclusion and unconscious bias training” for the agency’s employees and contractors and offered advice on how to recognize and address alleged “microaggressions” in the workplace.

The NCUA is, “an independent federal agency that insures deposits at federally insured credit unions, protects the members who own credit unions, and charters and regulates federal credit unions.”

“Americans should be disturbed that the Biden administration is using the agency responsible for regulating credit unions to subject employees and the public to an extremist and discriminatory Critical Race Theory ideology that attacks individuals based on race,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

A February 25, 2021, email from the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion (OMWI) to “All NCUA Staff” with the subject line “Inclusion and unconscious bias training now available,” notes that an attached memo provides information about a “new, required training course” called “Inclusion at Work: Managing Unconscious Bias at the Office.”

The accompanying memo notes that the training unit was required for “All employees and contractors” as part of “required annual diversity and inclusion training.”

The memo states: “The NCUA is committed to building the diversity and inclusion competencies of employees to advance NCUA’s Strategic Objective 3.1 – to attract, engage and retain a highly skilled, diverse workforce, and cultivate an inclusive environment.”

In a February 10, 2022, email to “All NCUA Staff” from the Office of Minority and Women Inclusion (OMWI), all employees are invited to attend a “virtual OMWI Talk” where they will “watch a video and discuss the role our institutions and public policies play in shaping opportunities and one’s ability to accumulate wealth.” It notes that they will watch the film “Race: The House We Live In,” which is the “first film about race to focus not on individual attitudes but on the ways our institutions and policies advantage some groups at the expense of others. Its subject is the ‘unmarked’ race. We see how benefits quietly and often invisibly accrue to [the majority], not necessarily because of hard work, but because of the racialized nature of our laws, courts, customs, and perhaps most pertinently, housing.” The email describes OMWI Talks as a “safe place to have difficult conversations about race, identity, privilege, unconscious bias, cultural appropriation and a host of other thought-provoking topics.”

A July 12, 2021, OMWI email to all staff advises them to “Save the date” for the next OMWI Talk, which is titled “Deconstructing White Privilege.” The talk features a video from Dr. Robin DiAngelo, author of “What Does It Mean to Be White? Developing White Racial Literacy.” The email describes DiAngelo as an “anti-racist educator,” who has “heard justifications of racism by white men and women in her workshops for over two decades.” It continues, “This justification, which she calls ‘white fragility’, is a state in which even a minimal amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves.”

In an internal NCUA newsletter, called VIBE, sent by OMWI to all NCUA staff on March 1, 2021, the new NCUA Chairman, Todd M. Harper, writes a message, noting that “I truly look forward to working with OMWI to VIBE and advance diversity and inclusion not just within the agency, but also in the entities and communities we serve.” He notes: “NCUA’s Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan outlines five additional goals for this work, including one specific to diversity and inclusion in credit unions and another for diversity in our business activities. These are not just OMWI’s goals. They are agency-wide goals.” The newsletter mentions the creation of a new position called Diversity and Inclusion Specialist, and thanks the departing director of OMWI who, it notes, created such programs as “the Credit Union Diversity Self-Assessment,” the “Credit Union Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Summit” and “much more.”

A section of the newsletter titled “Diversity and Inclusion Learning” includes:

  • Take a few minutes to read through these Seven Ways to Be More inclusive in Your Everyday Life.
  • Learn how to Be Inclusive Every Day
  • Got your eye on a promotion or a new position? Use the Inclusion Guide for Interviewees to prepare yourself for diversity and inclusion related questions that may come up in the interview.

In the issue of the VIBE newsletter emailed to all NCUA staff on December 1, 2021, under a section titled “Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging Learning,” employees are told, “A microaggression is defined as an indirect, subtle, or unintentional form of discrimination against members of a marginalized group. But for those who experience them, microaggressions are more than just insults or insensitive jokes – they are painful, powerful, and can inflict lasting harm.” It offers links to three articles, titled: “What is a microaggression? 14 things people think are fine to say at work – but are actually racist, sexist or offensive;” “How to Address Microaggressions in the Workplace;” and “Microaggressions at work: Recognizing & overcoming our biases.”

In the first article, published on March 1, 2021 by Business Insider, types of “microaggressions” include “telling a new female worker that she ‘looks like a student’ to asking a Black colleague about her natural hair,” adding “they can make a workplace feel uncomfortable, unsafe, and toxic.”

The article “Microaggressions at work: Recognizing & overcoming our biases,” published by Culture Amp, states that “microaggressions” can include “Asking a lesbian co-worker, ‘Who’s the man in your relationship,’ ” “Mispronouncing someone’s name because ‘it’s too difficult to say,’ ” “Mistaking a Latinx colleague for a service worker,” and “Naming all the buildings or rooms after White men.”

Judicial Watch obtained the records in response to a February 8, 2022, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for:

  1. Policy documents and training materials produced by, sent to, and/or used by the NCUA Office of the Executive Director (ED) and Deputy Executive Director (DED) containing any of the following key words: a) “whiteness”; b) “unconscious bias”; c) “intersectionality”; d) “white privilege”; e) “Kendi”; f) “Robin DiAngelo”; g) “systemic racism”; h) “structural racism”; i) “close
    hold”; j) “climate justice”; or k) “critical race theory;”
  2. Emails and text messages sent to and from officials in the Office of the ED and DED instructing or suggesting that any individuals or groups of people are fundamentally privileged, oppressive, oppressed, racist, or evil on account of their race; and
  3. Emails and text messages sent to and from officials in the Office of the ED and DED instructing or suggesting that America is a fundamentally racist or evil country.

RELATED ARTICLE:   

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Taxing Their Patience: GOP Fed up with Corporate Wokeism

If you gave 1,000 American voters three tries to guess the top policy proposal of the Republican party, not one would answer “more taxes,” but many might associate the GOP with “lower taxes,” or “pro-business” policy. It might surprise them that a new document released by the Business Roundtable calls for more taxes, practically the opposite of its stated goal, to “promote a thriving U.S. economy and expanded opportunity for all Americans.” The tax they propose, “a price on carbon,” is basically a tax on living, moving, and especially producing. The “tone deaf” proposal is “the last thing we need,” noted House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), “harmful to working families… already struggling from inflation [and] high gas prices.”

The Business Roundtable’s Leftist climate tax proposal is just the latest incident in the ongoing divorce of mega-corporations and the Republican party. “The [U.S.] Chamber [of Commerce] left the [Republican] party a long time ago,” summarized House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), noting it endorsed more Democrats than Republicans in the 2020 election. The problem is “woke corporate CEOs,” diagnosed Scalise, “embracing the Left’s social policy,” even to the point of pressuring “corporations to go against the very things those corporations do.” As just one example, “they’re trying to get the energy companies to be anti-energy.”

Like most of the Leftist ideas, the businesses pushing for higher taxes are the “super large corporations, not your mom-and-pop small businesses,” Scalise explained to me on Washington Watch. Small- and medium-sized businesses create more jobs and generate more productivity. “They don’t want higher tax rates at all because they’re barely struggling to get by. They can’t find workers. They’re competing against the federal government, who’s paying people not to work. They’ve got a mountain of new regulations coming at them,” said Scalise. “If a woke CEO wants to crush his smaller competition… no better way to do it than [with] mountains of regulations…. That’s not what I’m about. I’m about opportunity for everybody.”

As the Woke Disney Corporation is discovering in Florida, big business needs Republicans more than Republicans need big business. Now that Republicans are fed up with corporations constantly poking them in the eye, we’re fast approaching the day when corporations have to beg for tax favors from Elizabeth Warren and other Leftists. And they’ll discover “they hate all of those, big corporations as well as small businesses,” Scalise predicted. “The far Left hates every industry… the energy industry, the banks — you name the industry, they’re going after them.”

Public polling bears this out. Americans’ satisfaction with the “size and influence of major corporations” fell 15 points from 2020 to 2021, down from 41 percent to 26 percent. Among Democrats, it barely budged because it had already hit the floor (from 25 percent to 24 percent), but among Republicans, it cratered (from 57 percent to 31 percent). Basically, Democrats still don’t like big business, and now neither do Republicans. Big business has orchestrated its own, very public, character assassination by, as even the Wall Street Journal put it, “aggressively antagonizing the very Americans it has long relied on to protect it from government control.”

Republicans and conservatives stand for free markets and economic opportunity because we believe markets work better with fewer taxes and less regulation. But it turns out big business — the corporate empires who subsist on the government’s corporate welfare — no longer shares those values, nor the social values of most Americans. They’re too busy squandering their brands and frittering away their social credibility as they push the political agenda of the radical Left. “The Republican Party is still the party of the small business person and competitive free markets,” said Liberty University School of Business Dean Dave Brat, “but we’re turning against the oligarchs.”

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Malicious Plan to Abolish Home Ownership

Who Will Eventually Own Everything, Including You?


STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The vast majority of the world’s assets are owned by just two investment firms — BlackRock and the Vanguard Group. Combined, they have ownership in nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms, and through their investment holdings they secretly wield monopoly control over all industries
  • By now you may be familiar with the World Economic Forum slogan, “By 2030, you will own nothing.” To that end, BlackRock and other investment firms are buying up every single-family home they can find, making cash offers of 20% to 50% above asking price
  • Buying a home has been part of the American dream since the founding of this country. It’s been a significant part of financial success, security and freedom. George Washington declared that “Private Property and freedom are inseparable.” Now, lower to middle class Americans are being intentionally positioned to become permanent renters, which means they cannot build equity
  • This is wealth redistribution from the low- and middle-class to the upper, and it’s in line with plans for societal reorganization described under banners such as The Great Reset, Build Back Better, Agenda 21 and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
  • These agendas all work together toward the same goal, which is a global monopoly on ownership and wealth, with a clear separation of the haves and have nots; the owners and the owned; the rulers and the ruled; the elite and the serfs

The 45-minute video above, “Monopoly — Follow the Money,” provides a comprehensive overview of who really owns the world. As it turns out, the vast majority of the world’s assets are owned by just two investment firms — BlackRock and the Vanguard Group.

Combined, they have ownership in nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms,1 and through their investment holdings they secretly wield monopoly control over all industries. In short, the idea that there is competition in the marketplace is a clever illusion.

BlackRock Is Buying Up Homes

By now you may be familiar with the World Economic Forum slogan, “By 2030, you will own nothing.” To that end, BlackRock and other investment firms are currently buying up every single-family home they can find, making cash offers of 20% to 50% above-asking price.2

Depending on where you live, you may have noticed that homes are selling within hours of being listed, making house hunting nearly impossible. Home buyers in my home state of Florida are certainly experiencing this phenomenon.

Investment firms are also buying up entire neighborhoods. As just one example, a 124-home neighborhood in Conroe, Texas, was bought for $32 million — 20% above listing — by Fundrise LLC, a real estate crowdfunding company, which then turned around and made all the homes into single-family rentals (SFRs).3

According to investment experts, SFRs are “exceptionally attractive investment assets,” and this is one aspect driving the trend. Demographic changes such as millennials starting families and affordability constraints are also said to be driving factors.4 But that really does not fully explain what’s happening.

The War Against Private Property

Buying a home has been part of the American dream since the founding of this country. It’s been a significant part of financial success and security. Now, lower to middle class Americans are being intentionally positioned to become permanent renters, which means they cannot build equity. Their ability to purchase a home, even if they can afford it, is being stripped from them by companies that can outbid them with cash offers.

In a recent episode of “60 Minutes” (above), Lesley Stahl actually did a good job exposing why home prices are going through the roof. It’s not just that these investment companies can snap up homes with the click of a button, but they’re also artificially driving up prices of both homes and rents.

For example, rents in Jacksonville, Florida, rose an average of 31% in 2021, and Austin, Texas, saw rents jump by 40%. The reason appears to be twofold: We’re not building enough housing, and what is being built is being bought by corporate landlords at above-market prices.

Corporate real estate investors don’t even look at the homes they’re bidding on, and typically waive inspections. The home can be in any shape and sell within hours. As Stahl notes, “this puts first-time home buyers at a serious disadvantage,” as they have many hoops to jump through before they can secure a loan and close the deal.

Government estimates we’re currently 4 million homes short, and that shortage continues to grow. One real estate investment firm interviewed by Stahl states that they list, on average, 200 to 300 homes for rent each week, and receive 10,000 leasing inquiries weekly.

Not-So-Hidden Wealth Redistribution

As noted in a tweet by Cultural Husbandry:5

“This is wealth redistribution, and it ain’t rich people’s wealth that is getting redistributed. It’s normal American middle class, salt of the earth wealth heading into the hands of the world’s most powerful entities and individuals. The traditional financial vehicle [is] gone forever.

Home equity is the main financial element that middle class families use to build wealth, and BlackRock, a federal reserve funded financial institution is buying up all the houses to make sure that young families can’t build wealth … This is a fundamental reorganization of society.”

Indeed, and it’s right in line with plans for societal reorganization described under banners such as The Great Reset, Build Back Better, Agenda 21 and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (see videos below).6,7

These agendas all work together toward the same goal, which is a global monopoly on ownership and wealth, with a clear separation of the haves and have nots; the owners and the owned; the rulers and the ruled; the elite and the serfs.

‘Sustainable Development’ Agenda Is a Plan to Enslave You

The war against private property goes back decades. In 1976, during the first United Nations’ Conference on Human Settlements, called Habitat 1,8 the U.N. stated, in Item 10:9

“Land … cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Public control of land use Is therefore indispensable.”

The idea, apparently, is that private investment firms like Vanguard and BlackRock can prevent social injustice by buying up all private property and renting it out. This way, no one (except their investors) can build wealth.

Private Property and freedom are inseparable. ~ George Washington

This is what “equity” is all about, and it has nothing to do with equality. “Social equity” is incredibly unfair, as it strips those with talent and drive of the ability to make something out of themselves.

Private Property and Freedom Are Inseparable

The UN’s Human Settlements agenda, Agenda 21 and the 2030 Sustainable Development agenda are in direct conflict with the U.S. Bill of Rights and the founding principles of this country. George Washington declared, “Private Property and freedom are inseparable.” Similarly, John Adams stated that “Property must be secure, or liberty cannot exist.”

In 1992 at the Earth Summit, under-secretary-general of the Convention on Climate Change and executive director of the UN Environment Program, Maurice Strong, stated that:10

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing, are not sustainable.”

If meat consumption, frozen foods, fossil fuel use, home appliances, air conditioning and single-family homes are “unsustainable,” it stands to reason that the goal of any sustainable development scheme is to eliminate all of those things. This is easier done in some countries than in others. As explained by the Cook Country News Herald back in 2012:11

“Because Congress does not agree to all these United Nations schemes to steal our property and destroy our economy, they are passed by fiat, executive orders, proclamations, directives and generous grants given to local communities …”

In short, the technocratic elite are trying to circumvent the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights through various means, such as the effort to make the United Nations and the World Health Organization into global centers of power, with member states being forced to comply with whatever agendas they set, thereby undermining national sovereignty.

As explained in the Agenda 21 video above, Agenda 21 doesn’t stop at restricting private home and land ownership. It also includes:

Seizure of private property Forbidding human access to land
Relocation of people from rural areas to cities Additional taxation
Water use restrictions Restricting the amount of waste you’re allowed to produce
Forced community involvement Manipulation of transportation patterns and increasing gas prices to restrict travel — all in the name of “saving the earth”

In short, the global elite want you to believe that the only way to save the planet is for you to be their slave. It’s a tragic ultimate outcome for sure. If they are successful, virtually all of your constitutional rights and freedoms will be eliminated.

Who Owns the Farmland and Dictates Food Policy?

Private home ownership isn’t the only thing threatened by the encroaching monopoly of elitists. Bill Gates is now one of the largest private owners of U.S. farmland,12 and he also wields unrivaled power over global food policy,13 as detailed in the AGRA Watch report,14 “The Man Behind the Curtain: The Gates Foundation’s Influence on the UN Food Systems Summit.”

While Gates is just one man, his clout is significantly leveraged and magnified by the fact that he funds such a large number of companies and organizations that they do his bidding on the sly. When you see long lists of groups, you automatically think there are many players in the game when, in fact, Gates is the singular thread running through most or all of them.

In its 2014 report,15 “Three Examples of Problems with Gates Foundation Grants,” AGRA Watch highlights why Gates’ massive investments in global food production have failed to solve any of the very real problems we face. First and foremost, many of the solutions that he backs are “Band-Aid solutions” that in fact worsen the root problems.

Examples include the funding of the development of genetically engineered (GE) foods designed to be higher in certain nutrients. The problem is that these crops then end up replacing local diversity with just a few GE varieties that don’t even take local conditions into account. So, by pushing for “fortified” crop varieties, malnutrition actually deepens, as biodiversity is reduced.

Secondly, “a stubborn focus on yield” is at odds with research showing that low yield or insufficient production is not causing world hunger. “There is ample evidence today that the problem instead is poverty and lack of access, which is deepened by destruction of local food systems and commercialization of food,” AGRA Watch notes, adding:

“Grants by the Gates’ Foundation and AGRA continue to focus on yield, priming Africa for a system suited to the needs of the profit-seeking, yield-oriented commercial farmer rather than the peasant or small farmer producing diverse crops for a local community.”

Additional observations can be found in the AGRA Watch article16 “Philanthrocapitalism: The Gates Foundation’s African Programs Are Not Charity,” published December 2017, in which philanthrocapitalism is described as “an attempt to use market processes to do good,” but which is inherently problematic “as markets are ill-suited to producing socially constructive ends.”

Put another way, Gates’ brand of philanthropy creates several new problems for each one it solves. Gates is also invested in the synthetic beef industry, and not surprisingly, he’s been calling on Western nations to transition to a 100% fake beef diet17 — all in the name of saving the environment. It’s the same argument pushed by Agenda 21 and the rest of the sustainable development schemes.

Media and Medicine Are Completely Controlled

Mainstream media and the pharmaceutical industry are two other important areas that have been taken over by a monopoly-centered “deep state.” Both industries are overwhelmingly owned by BlackRock and Vanguard,18 so to think the mainstream media will report on the truth is foolhardy to say the least, especially as it pertains to health and medicine.19

Allopathic medicine, by the way, has been controlled by those in the grip of greed ever since John D. Rockefeller founded the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in 1901 and campaigned to eliminate naturopathic medicine, which was the norm, in order to replace it with petroleum-based patented drugs.

Anything that couldn’t be patented was abolished and known cures were dismissed as quackery. Rockefeller accomplished this the same way Gates and other technocrats do it today — through control of the media.

WHO Treaty Is COVID Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

The WHO’s pandemic treaty is perhaps the greatest threat we’ve faced so far, and will go a long way toward implementing The Great Reset. As I noted in a March 2022 article,20 the pandemic treaty is a direct threat to a nation’s sovereignty to make decisions for itself and its citizens, and will erode democracy everywhere, if enacted.

May 24, 2021, the European Council announced it supported the establishment of an international Pandemic Treaty, under which the WHO would have the power to replace the constitutions of individual nations with its own constitution under the banner of “pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”21

March 3, 2022, the Council authorized the opening of negotiations for an international agreement. The infographic below, sourced from the European Council’s website,22 summarizes the process.

There’s simply no question that this treaty is part of the globalists’ plan to monopolize health systems worldwide,23 and a way for them to force mandatory vaccinations, vaccine passports and digital identities on the uncooperative masses.

Any pandemic-related decision the WHO makes would supersede national and state laws. Eventually, all health-related decisions could come under the WHO’s jurisdiction, as the stated goals of the treaty include not only future pandemic response but also a stronger framework for health with the WHO as the coordinating authority on global health matters more generally.24

Director-general of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, has also gone on record stating that his “central priority” as director-general of the WHO is to push the world toward universal health coverage.25 As noted by Dr. Peter Breggin,26 referring to Ghebreyesus’ address to the WHO Executive Committee on January 24, 2022, in which he spelled out his global health plan, “The spirit of Communism can be felt throughout the document.”

WEF: ‘World Is Best Managed by Self-Selected Coalition’

The WEF’s 2010 “Global Redesign” report27 argues that the world is best managed by a self-selected coalition of “stakeholders” — multinational corporations, governments, international bodies such as the UN and the WHO, and select civil society organizations — that then make decisions on behalf of the global population.

If you look, you’ll find that all the globalist agendas, regardless of what they’re called, have this aim. They’re all working in lockstep to strip power from the people by making elected officials irrelevant. All the power is to be in the hands of a self-selected, self-nominated elite. If you believe they have any intention of doing what’s best for the people, it’s time to wake up, because you’re clearly dreaming.

For well over 100 years, they’ve done what’s best for them, even though their decisions poisoned our food supply, soils, air and water. Even though it destroyed our environment and resulted in unsafe medicines and toxic foods; even though it led to starvation, disease and death.

They’ve lied, cheated and used every underhanded, immoral and unethical trick in the book. They’ve coerced, bribed and manipulated at will. They’ve slowly but surely infiltrated every area of society with the intention of altering it to serve their own ends.

Technology, which is the foundation upon which technocracy rests, has allowed this self-selected group of megalomaniacs to thrive and build their power structure in the shadows. Only now are they starting to really show their true colors, their desire for absolute power and control.

As noted by New American contributor C. Mitchell Shaw,28 “If you are not paying for the product, then you are the product.” YOU and your personal data are the products of Google, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. These platforms are all selling your personal data for profit. That’s the business they’re in.

Your data are also fed to artificial intelligence, and algorithms are created to profile and manipulate you. Everything you say and do is being used against you. The end goal of these megalomaniacs is always the same: to make money off you, even if it harms or kills you, and to manipulate you into accepting their proposition to rule over you. This all ends when enough people wake up to what they’re doing, and refuse to go along with their program.

Sources and References:

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Disney Has Lost $50 Billion In Value Since Woke War With Florida

UPDATE: New LEAKED Video Shows Disney CEO GROVEL in Front of Employees


Go WOKE, go broke. Trusted by hundreds of millions, Disney’s golden, reverent reputation – build over the last hundred years – destroyed in mere moments. This is a lesson, not just for corporate America, but America herself.

Disney CEO Bob Chapek should be fired for appeasing the Left.

Disney has lost $50 billion in value since war with Florida began

By Washington Examiner, April 23, 2022

Disney’s stock has lost nearly $50 billion in value since the start of March, when it took a political gamble to oppose Florida’s controversial new education law.

Disney’s stock was down more than 2% on Friday and by more than 8.5% over the past few days as Florida lawmakers work to punish the company for wading into the state’s politics. The stock’s market cap has declined by about $46.6 billion since March 1, just days before the company came out against the legislation.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

BREAKING: Twitter Reconsiders Elon Musk’s Takeover Bid After $46.5 Billion In Financing Secured

UPDATE:


The Twitterverse is aflutter. One step closer to freedom. #TeamElon

Funny how the left is all in on Mark Zuckerberg owning a majority of the most significant social media platforms but is somehow aghast at the thought of Musk taking over the reins of Twitter. LOL.

BREAKING: Twitter reconsiders Elon Musk’s takeover bid after $46.5 billion in financing secured

Both sides are reportedly meeting Sunday to discuss Musk’s proposal.

By: Hannah Nightingale,  The Post Millenial, April 24, 2022

Twitter is reportedly re-examining SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $43 billion offer to buy the Big Tech company after he revealed that he has now secured $46.5 billion for the potential buyout. According to The Wall Street Journal, Twitter had been ready to reject the offer, but will take a new look at it after the business magnate revealed his filing with the SEC showing that he has lined up financing for the offer.

The financing includes $22.5 billion which will come from his own equities.

People familiar with the matter told The Wall Street Journal that the revelation makes it more likely for Twitter to seek to negative the offer with Musk. “The situation is fast-moving and it is still far from guaranteed Twitter will do so,” The Wall Street Journal noted. Some of the people said that Twitter is still working on an estimate of its own value, and could also insist on sweeteners for the deal such as Musk covering breakup costs if the deal falls through.

The two sides are reportedly meeting on Sunday to discuss Musk’s offer.

The company is expected to address on the bid when it reports first-quarter earnings Thursday, if not sooner, the people said.

Their response could leave the door open to other bidders, or negotiating with Musk on terms not included in the price.

The people told The Wall Street Journal that Musk remains firm on his offer of $54.20-a-share.

The potential turnaround from Twitter comes as Musk met with several shareholders of the company privately on Friday to talk up his proposal through a series of video calls.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Musk reportedly has a few shareholders behind him following the meetings.

Lauri Brunner, who manages Thrivent Asset Management LLC’s large-cap growth fund, said. “He has an established track record at Tesla,” she said. “He is the catalyst to deliver strong operating performance at Twitter.”

Musk has reportedly said he is considering taking his bid directly to shareholders by launching a tender offer, but even if he was to get significant shareholder support, he would still have to work around the company’s “poison pill.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

BOOM: Exxon Prohibits LGBTQ, BLM Flags Outside Corporate Offices

The proof is the pudding or in this case, the numbers.

Report: Exxon Prohibits LGBTQ, BLM Flags Outside Corporate Offices

By Breitbart News, April 23, 222:

Exxon Mobil Corp. does not intend to fly an LGBTQ flag in front of corporate offices in June during pride month, according to a report.

Bloomberg News reports having seen a new Exxon company policy that prohibits “external position flags,” including the LGBTQ and Black Lives Matters flags, from being flown in front of corporate offices. “Instead, the rule permits a flag representing an LGBTQ employees’ group that does not prominently feature Exxon’s corporate logo,” according to the outlet.

The move has sparked outrage among the company’s PRIDE Houston Chapter, as members of the group are now declining to represent the company in the city’s June pride celebration, according to Bloomberg.

“Corporate leadership took exception to a rainbow flag being flown at our facilities” last year, stated employees in the group in an email. “PRIDE was informed the justification was centered on the need for the corporation to maintain ‘neutrality.’”

Exxon Vice President of Human Resources Tracey Gunnlaugsson provided Bloomberg News with a statement on the matter, which reads in part:

The updated flag protocol is intended to clarify the use of the ExxonMobil branded company flag and not intended to diminish our commitment to diversity and support for employee resource groups. We’re committed to keeping an open, honest, and inclusive workplace for all of our employees, and we’re saddened that any employee would think otherwise.

Of the company’s roughly 63,000 employees around the globe, 3,000 are part of Exxon’s pride employee resource group, according to Bloomberg News.

RELATED ARTICLE: Disney Has Lost $50 Billion In Value Since Woke War With Florida

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Popular Pill Exposed; Was This Intentional Mass Murder?

Another Layer of Corruption in the Opioid Scandal Revealed


STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • In 2021, McKinsey & Company, one of the largest consultants to corporations and governments worldwide, settled a lawsuit brought by 47 state attorneys general over its role in the U.S. opioid crisis
  • A U.S. House investigation reveals McKinsey was advising the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on the safety of opioids, while at the same time advising Purdue how to maximize sales
  • Jeff Smith, a senior McKinsey consultant, worked on a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) for OxyContin while simultaneously advising the FDA about the drug’s safety
  • McKinsey promoted its FDA connections when pitching services to its pharmaceutical clients. The FDA, meanwhile, claims it had no idea McKinsey was working with Purdue
  • Purdue knew the dangers of its drug, covered it up, and hired FDA insiders to advise its sales strategy and how to influence the FDA. They also hired Publicis to manage its marketing. Publicis, the world’s largest PR company, funds and partners with “fact checking” organizations to suppress and censor the truth

In 2021, McKinsey & Company, one of the largest consultants to corporations and governments worldwide, settled a lawsuit brought by 47 state attorneys general over its role in the U.S. opioid crisis. The firm agreed to pay $573 million in fines1 for driving up sales of Purdue Pharma’s OxyContin painkiller, even as Americans were dying in droves.

Between 1999 and 2019, nearly 500,000 Americans died from overdoses involving opioid drugs,2 and false advertising and bribery were at the heart of this tragedy. As reported by The New York Times:3

“McKinsey’s extensive work with Purdue included advising it to focus on selling lucrative high-dose pills, the records show, even after the drugmaker pleaded guilty in 2007 to federal criminal charges that it had misled doctors and regulators about OxyContin’s risks. The firm also told Purdue that it could ‘band together’ with other opioid makers to head off ‘strict treatment’ by the Food and Drug Administration.”

Worse Than We Thought

We now find out that the situation is even more corrupt than we previously thought. A U.S. House investigation4,5,6 into McKinsey, based on materials obtained through the discovery process of this and other lawsuits, has revealed McKinsey was advising the FDA on the safety of opioids, while at the same time advising Purdue how to maximize sales.

In one instance, McKinsey wrote “scripts” for Purdue to use in its meeting with the FDA to discuss the safety of OxyContin in pediatric populations. In another, Jeff Smith, a senior McKinsey consultant, worked on a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) for OxyContin while simultaneously advising the FDA about the drug’s safety.7

As noted by investigative journalist Paul Thacker,8 “Just think about that for a moment — for years McKinsey played both cop and robber.” As reported by The New York Times, April 13, 2022:9

“Since 2010, at least 22 McKinsey consultants have worked for both Purdue and the FDA, some at the same time, according to the committee’s 53-page report …

The firm provided no evidence to the committee that it had disclosed the potential conflicts of interest as required under federal contracting rules — an ‘apparent violation,’ the report said.

McKinsey also allowed employees advising Purdue to help shape materials that were intended for government officials and agencies, including a memo in 2018 prepared for Alex M. Azar II, then the incoming secretary of health and human Services under President Donald J. Trump.

References to the severity of the opioid crisis in a draft version of the memo, the documents show, were cut before it was sent to Mr. Azar.

‘Today’s report shows that at the same time the FDA was relying on McKinsey’s advice to ensure drug safety and protect American lives, the firm was also being paid by the very companies fueling the deadly opioid epidemic to help them avoid tougher regulation of these dangerous drugs,’ Representative Carolyn Maloney, the New York Democrat who chairs the committee, said in a statement 

[ … ]

A bipartisan group of lawmakers last month introduced legislation10 aimed at preventing conflicts of interest in federal contracting, citing McKinsey’s experience with Purdue and the FDA.”

The FDA, in response, has stated that it “relies on its contractors to assess and report potential conflicts of interest,” The New York Times reports.11 In other words, it’s just pointing fingers and refusing to take responsibility for working with advisers that clearly could, and should, be suspected of having ulterior motives, based on their client base.

Isn’t it obvious that McKinsey, working to improve sales for its opioid-making clients, might give the FDA biased advise on behalf of those clients? Remarkably, in October 2021, the FDA wrote12 to senators claiming they had no idea McKinsey was even working for Purdue, and didn’t find out about it until media reported it in early 2021.

It seems beyond irrationally foolish that the press could find out about it, but not the FDA — somewhat like the head of the CDC, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, going on CNN and quoting Pfizer press releases as factual data.

McKinsey Advised FDA on Opioid Safety

The FDA hired McKinsey as an adviser in 2011. The company worked with the FDA office overseeing drug companies plans to monitor safety of risky products such as opioids, and internal documents show that, on multiple occasions, McKinsey promoted its FDA connections when pitching services to its pharmaceutical clients.13

For example, in a 2009 sales pitch, McKinsey wrote that it provided direct support to regulators, “and as such have developed insights into the perspectives of the regulators themselves.”14

In a 2014 email to Purdue’s chief executive, McKinsey consultant Rob Rosiello wrote, “We serve the broadest range of stakeholders that matter for Purdue. One client we can disclose is the FDA, who we have supported for over five years.”15

Evidence also suggests McKinsey took “steps to limit material that could be subpoenaed” once Purdue was sued, The New York Times reports.16 In one instance, printed hardcopies of slide decks were sent to Purdue instead of being emailed because they knew Purdue staff would be deposed and didn’t want their email correspondence to “get sucked into it.”

Did McKinsey Influence FDA Commissioner?

The Interim Majority Staff report17 by the Committee on Oversight and Reform, titled “The Firm and the FDA: McKinsey & Company’s Conflicts of Interest at the Heart of the Opioid Epidemic,” published April 13, 2022, also includes emails in which McKinsey employees claim to have influenced an opioid safety speech by then-FDA commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb.

Gottlieb denies the accusation, but the fact that McKinsey was working so intimately with the FDA means they certainly would have been capable of such influence. Gottlieb also has financial ties to the opioid industry, having received $45,000 in speaker’s fees from companies that manufacture and distribute opioids.18

In 2012, Gottlieb also wrote a Wall Street Journal essay, attacking the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for pursuing the criminal activity of opioid distributors, saying it would burden patients, “including those with legitimate prescriptions who may be profiled at the pharmacy counter and turned away.”19

Intent to Harm

What we have here is a picture of gross conflicts of interest with an apparent intent to harm. Purdue Pharma was as crooked as they come, conducting sham studies and bribing doctors to prescribe its highly addictive opioid, while its consultant, McKinsey advised the FDA on the drug’s safety.

At the same time, Purdue also worked with the Publicis Groupe — the largest PR company in the world as of November 202120 — which funded the startup of NewsGuard, a “fact checking” group that rates websites on criteria of “credibility” and “transparency.” In April 2021, Publicis partnered with NewsGuard specifically “to fight the ‘infodemic’ of misinformation about COVID-19 and its vaccines.”21

NewsGuard’s health-related service, HealthGuard,22 is also partnered with the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) — a progressive U.K.-based cancel-culture leader23 with extensive ties to government and global think tanks that has labeled people questioning the COVID-19 vaccine as “threats to national security.”

At the beginning of May 2021, the Massachusetts attorney general filed a lawsuit24,25 against Publicis Health, accusing the Publicis subsidiary of helping Purdue create the deceptive marketing materials used to mislead doctors into prescribing OxyContin.26,27,28,29

Like Purdue, Publicis also cashed in on the opioid addiction it helped create by pitching its services to organizations working to end addiction. As reported by Forbes,30 the agency “won the account to work on drugfree.org after touting how it’s been ‘immersed in the evolving national opioid medication dialogue going on between pharma companies, the government and FDA, and the public via inside access as a trusted and informed consulting partner.’”

So, to summarize, Purdue knew the dangers of its drug, covered them up, hired FDA insiders to advise its sales strategy and influence the FDA, and is connected with a PR company that had the ability to suppress and censor negative news to manage its marketing. It’s hard to describe this scheme as anything but intentional mass murder.

The Spin Doctors

The reality may even be worse, and much larger, than that, seeing how Publicis is also a partner of the World Economic Forum (WEF),31 which is leading the call for a “reset” of the global economy and a complete overhaul of our way of life.32

As detailed in the featured video, Publicis’ fingerprints can be found throughout the net of censorship and misdirection that is now being cast across the digital landscape. As the No. 1 PR company in the world, Publicis has just the right credentials and influence to pull off a deception of this size.

It’s part of an enormous network that includes international drug companies, fact checkers and credibility raters, Google, Microsoft, public libraries, schools, the banking industry, the U.S. State Department and Department of Defense, the World Health Organization and Disney, just to name a few. As noted by investigative reporter David Marks in “How PR Giant Publicis Promotes Greed, Deception on Behalf of World’s Most Powerful”:33

“The essential skill of these expert spin doctors is their ability to fabricate a favorable interpretation of damaging information or activity or diminish the impact of the truth.

Through tried and true psychological ploys, repetition of false information or casting doubt on factual realities, ad agencies and PR firms target those who need to be influenced on behalf of their clients …

An examination of one of the largest entities neck-deep in managing these mass psychological operations reveals the depth of the dysfunction afflicting the planet. The vast activities of the Publicis Groupe demonstrate how the tentacles of greed, profit and privilege connect the catastrophic agendas of the most powerful enterprises on Earth …

Using sophisticated social psychology and incorporating the cutting edge of artificial intelligence, Publicis PR experts are masters of damage control, the manipulation of words and people, and of selling the unsellable. Publicis is organizing influential activities worldwide, overtly revealing its mission and priorities.

… [Its] website reveals who actually benefits from the company’s services: ‘The entire Publicis Groupe transformation was designed to put clients at the center of all we do. Their needs and objectives drive the solutions we provide in order to help them win and grow’ [ … ]

In considering the range of activities Publicis engages in, the dots are so close there is no need to connect them. The PR giant’s methodology is transparent.

Whether promoting opioids or pushing vaccines, rebranding status quo profiteering as a Great Reset, supporting cigarette sales, disguising the true nature of the fossil fuel industry, increasing soft drink consumption or covering for assassinations — Publicis has all the skills and facilities to create whatever fabrications are needed to sell products and influence how their wealthy collaborators are viewed.

The Publicis Groupe and its allies are at the hub of a worldwide insidious, destructive disinformation campaign, relying on the duplicitous ways of advertising and public relations in the loyal service of clients.”

A Plan to Drug the Useless Eaters?

As a WEF partner and global PR machine for some of the most powerful industries on the planet, it seems reasonable to assume Publicis is helping to coordinate the WEF’s Great Reset agenda. Sadly, that includes not only the management and control of the peoples of the earth, but also the elimination of “undesirables.”

In a 2015 interview (video above), Yuval Noah Harari, a history professor and adviser to WEF founder Klaus Schwab, discussed what Schwab refers to as The Fourth Industrial Revolution (i.e., transhumanism), noting that we’re now learning to “produce bodies and minds” (meaning augmented bodies, and cloud and artificial intelligence-connected minds) and that one of the greatest challenges we face will be what to do with all the people that have become obsolete in the process.

How will unaugmented people find meaning in life when they’re basically “useless, meaningless”? How will they spend their time when there’s no work, no opportunity to move up in some kind of profession? His guess is that the answer will be “a combination of drugs and computer games.”

This raises a disturbing question. Was the opioid crisis the result of an intentional plan — a conspiracy in the literal sense of the word — to hook the masses on an addictive drug? This is purely speculative, of course, but it surely fits in with The Great Reset agenda as a whole.

If people are addicted, the drug and medical industries make money (and they’re without doubt part of The Great Reset network), and if people die, well, that’s in accordance with The Great Reset plan too, as they insist there are too many “useless eaters” on the planet, and they either must be managed or eliminated.

Publicis Is Part of the Global Monopoly

In closing, it’s worth noting that Publicis is partially owned by the Vanguard Group,34 one of the two largest asset management firms in the world. Together with BlackRock, Vanguard has a hidden monopoly on global asset holdings and exerts control through their ownership of some 1,600 American companies.35

Combined, BlackRock and Vanguard own nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms.36 To learn more about how Vanguard and BlackRock own just about everything in the world, and have monopoly control over all industries, check out the 45-minute video above, “Monopoly — Follow the Money.”

In short, the idea that there is competition in the marketplace is a cleverly disguised illusion. In reality, everything is controlled by a small group of asset managers that win no matter what. The end goal is to own and control all the world’s assets, which includes people.

The WEF slogan “You’ll Own Nothing and Be Happy” really summarizes The Great Reset plan for mankind. They will own everything; you will own nothing, not even your own body, and you’ll be too drugged up and lost in a make-believe computer game world to realize you’re a slave. If they can somehow make a profit from your useless existence, they’ll let you live. If they can’t, you’ll be eliminated. That’s really what the plan comes down to.

The plan for global authoritarianism is advancing with each passing day, but all is not lost yet. By informing ourselves and sharing what we know with others, we can reach the critical mass needed to end their plan and take back control.

It’s going to require standing together, unified in favor of freedom and liberty. It’s going to require legal and legislative efforts to weed out the corruption and infiltration that has occurred throughout the corporate world and our governments. It’s going to require honest men and women to step into positions of power that they never wanted. It may take a lot of time and effort, but if we want our descendants to experience freedom, no price can be too great to pay.

Sources and References

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: TRUTHsocial Migrates to Rumble’s Cloud Datacenters to ‘Reopen the Internet’

Trump Media & Technology Group CEO Devin Nunes joins ‘Just The News Not Noise’ to discuss Truth Social’s migration to Rumble’s cloud datacenters and the key role Rumble is playing in reopening the internet on April 22, 2022.

©Dr. Swier. All rights reserved.

Company Contrast: Overstock.com

Each week 2ndVote takes a look at popular companies that either score well or score poorly. We then provide alternatives that either better align with the 2ndVote values, or that should be avoided to the best of your ability. This weekly series is called The Company Contrast, and the company we will be focusing on this week is Overstock.com (3.34).

Overstock.com is an online retailer of home goods and furniture. The company was founded in 1999, primarily liquidating returned and surplus goods from other stores. Today the company sells both closeout and new merchandise. Overstock.com has a good track record of neutrality on most issues with two exceptions. CEO Jonathan Johnson has advocated for school choice as a past Republican gubernatorial candidate. The online store is also full of firearms accessories and gun safes, indicating a general support for the second amendment. Head over to overstock.com next time you need to shop for home goods.

This is a stark contrast to other home good retailers, such as Bed Bath & Beyond (1.21). Founded in 1971, Bed Bath & Beyond has grown to be one of the biggest distributors of domestic merchandise in the United States. They have received the lowest score possible on all issues save basic freedoms due to a one million dollar contribution to the NAACP, which advocates against most conservative values. Due to Bed Bath & Beyond having competitive alternatives, this company is a good candidate for consumers to choose to shop elsewhere.

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘DEFEAT THE SPAM BOTS’: Musk Signals He Has All The Money He Needs To Take Over Twitter

Elon Musk says he has the funds lined up to take over Twitter and is considering taking the offer straight to shareholders, according to multiple reports.

Musk, who is one the largest shareholders of Twitter, secured $46.5 billion to pay for his offer totaling $54.20 per share, according to Securities and Exchange (SEC) filings released on April 20.

“If our twitter bid succeeds, we will defeat the spam bots or die trying!,” Musk tweeted on Thursday. “And authenticate all real humans.”

Musk will finance the offer with the help of multiple banks who will provide him with debt to finance the deal, according to the SEC filings. The Tesla chief executive officer will provide his own $21 billion in cash and receive an additional $25 billion in debt from banks including Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Barclays, The Wall Street Journal reported.

“The Reporting Person is seeking to negotiate a definitive agreement for the acquisition of Twitter by the Reporting Person and is prepared to begin such negotiations immediately,” the filing said.

To secure the bank loans, Musk will issue $62.5 billion, or one third of his ownership, of Tesla shares as collateral, according to the WSJ. In order for Musk to raise the necessary $21 billion in cash, Musk will most likely have to sell a large portion of his stock in his various businesses including SpaceX and Boring. 

The Twitter board is expected to reject Musk’s unsolicited offer after it used the “poison pill” to block Musk’s effort to buy the company, the WSJ reported. The poison pill prohibits Musk from owning over 15% of the company and allows investors to purchase shares at a discounted price, reducing the value in Musk’s ownership.

Tesla and Twitter did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

HARRY WILMERDING

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Is The Twitter Board Required To Accept Elon’s Offer?

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.