Merv's Politically Incorrect Audio Blog

I have no issues with electric cars. They continue to become more affordable, and for most people they are probably suitably practical as well. I hope legacy cars will continue to be allowed. I don't think the world will be improved by banishing them to museums forever.

And yeah, I hope the idea of personal transportation is not lost. It is not hard to see the trend towards always renting and never owning in software and music for instance. Soon we will see how well that translates to physical things, with Uber and such leading the way. I personally like owning actual things, so I plan to have a car in my garage as long as I an physically able to drive.

 

Maybe I'm too optimistic but I don't see personal vehicle ownership going away any time soon. The major caveat is, if autonomous autos become a thing and prove to be less accident-prone, personal auto insurance costs will probably become really high.

 

Wait until they start finding all sorts of BS excuses to revoke your transportation "privileges". Or even worse, people who are too critical of things or too on the ball about how messed up things are all seem to die in "hacks" or "malfunctions" that occur in self-driving / electronically controlled cars.

While I don't agree with these people or condone their beliefs, actions, or behaviors - I would bet it's going to start with people who say and believe politically incorrect things, generally offensive ideas, or refuse to comply with whatever mandates such as vaccines. And while I think the whole anti 5G crowd is protesting it for the wrong reasons... I imagine a network of cars being controlled via 5G tech (see what some countries want) in the name of "environmentalism" and "no traffic" and "safety" is going to be able to single out and stop people who try to work around this too (i.e. don't let this car charge up, etc.)...

Can easily find a way to make operation or ownership prohibitively restrictive to where it's not practical for most, the culture for it dies (the biggest one), etc. See: shooting sports in urban areas or places like CA, NY, MA, etc.




I give all of this the biggest middle finger I can regardless of if I personally agree with the people who could be targeted by this or not. Also, in b4 conspiracy theory - not saying all of this will absolutely happen... but the fact that the framework is all there (and is being deployed in some countries) and b/c we know both American political parties super duper always have the back of us common plebs...

 

You are absolutely right. Also, anything that is introduced, which could ultimately be used to limit the freedom of individuals, will be billed as something that most people would initially be on board with.

An example of this will be CBDC's (central bank digital currencies.) I watched a presentation on this subject from the bank of international settlements the other day. Right now, most of us don't use cash, we tap our card, bank online etc...The thing is, the money we use is still physically based. There is literally no reason to move to an entirely digital currency, apart from control. If everything were to go to hell, we can still go to the grocery store and use a 5 dollar bill.

Imagine if all of the main currencies in the world are what cryptocurrencies are currently, tied to the blockchain, but entirely owned and controlled by the countries central bank. Initially I could see people being on board with this, as it would be incredibly convenient (imagine its connected to your neuralink, etc...) However, imagine they then decide to limit the currency to being used 5 miles, or 10 miles from your home. Or if you are what they deem a threat (which would be billed as a conspiracy theorist or extremist etc...simply for the equivalent of 1984's thought crimes) they could just turn your wallet off. Your vaccine passport isn't up to date with your quarterly booster (and to be clear, I'm fully vaccnated and not an anti vaxxer by any means)? Thats it, no more groceries, or anything for you, and if you try to circumvent it, and have someone buy for you, they will just turn that persons wallet off and so on.

AI, or self driving cars could be programmed to only drive certain routes, to certain areas. Mile limits could also be introduced.

An interesting thought would be the black market, or hacking of these technologies that would arise to get around the central controls policies.

I'm not saying any of this is actually going to happen, Its just something I find interesting to read and ponder about about is all. To be fair, the world economic forum and its "brainstorming ideas" for a 2030 society do include such themes, of course presented in a way that people would be on board with, largely. "you will own nothing, and you will be happy."

 

To be fair, the vast majority of money in the world is already digital and there are already plenty of avenues for governments to cut you off from it. I believe physical currency is less than 10% of money globally.

And assuming everything going to hell is in a societal sense and not an "I'm on the run" sense, your paper money will be just as worthless as your credit card. At least you can use a credit card as a weapon, especially if you have one of those metal ones.

Of course I think it would be fair to be wary of how future centralization efforts can be misused, but the ability of governments to exercise authoritarian control over the population through financial systems is not currently technology limited, everything you mentioned in that regard is possible today if the political will to enact it is there

 

If regular mass school shootings/killings haven't forced any change in gun ownership laws, trivial shit like limits on driving your own car isn't going to happen. I don't know what other countries will do but I just don't see it in the US.

 

Stuff like rent over Venmo or selling personal property for less than you paid for it still won't be taxable income even under the new reporting rules, even if you start getting a 1099-k from PayPal or venmo

 

The reason I feel that way, even though only 10% of the current money used is actually physical, is because the currency is still physically based.

Even though people digitize their money through online banking, paypal, venmo etc....

If someone turns off my online banking account, or my PayPal or whatever, I can still go out into society and use cash for essentials items. An entirely digitally based currency does not allow for this, and if 90% of money is already digitally based (which is absolutely true) then why introduce and entirely digital based currency in its place. There isn't really any reason to beyond the cost of the creation of the physical money, which is relatively tiny.

Of course, I'm also talking in theoretical, worst case scenario type ways. Its unlikely, just a possibility. And yes, there are certainly ways they could limit your use of currency with the current technologies, thats absolutely true too

 

oui, also lol at bold.

 

And connecting a preceding discussion: maybe a digital salmon could be useful...

https://www.timesofisrael.com/just-...ists-train-goldfish-to-steer-car-around-room/

 

The entire financial and banking system is built on trust. This trust is based on a number of assumptions that allow economies to function. The problem with trust is that it is brittle. One broken promise can turn a person into a liar, turn 100% result into 50% result and so on.

In order to safeguard this trust all kinds of rules, mechanisms and deals exist. When the new generations invent new currencies and other payment methods/systems, they risk creating something that cannot be liquidated by the financial and banking system already in place in today's society.

Part of our money as we know it is based on gold reserves. Gold you can liquidate for money. Money you can liquidate for gold. I am very simple: if I were to use this new currency/coin/thingy, well could I buy a bread or house with it?

If the answer is not yes, I have doubts. Doubts can lead to speculation. f**k that, I am not wealthy enough to play with money...

 

The Chemical Brothers have this song called "The Salmon Dance"...

 

Well, up till now I've been a supporter of Fauci and the American government/CDC health bureaucracy. Since the libertarian right, ably represented by Rand Paul, has been wrong factually and philosophically on the most salient aspects of viruses, vaccines, and vectors. They are still wrong.

However, it looks like Fauci/Collins/CDC leadership played the role of "noble liars", lying about what they knew and when they knew it. They consciously covered up lab research in China and U.S. funding of it, thinking it was somehow necessary politically in this country. Elites in this country appear hell bent on undermining what little authority they have left. There is a solidifying 'negative solidarity' among the non-elite, non-masters level and above educated, non-liberal inner city true believers, non Media/University/Church/Hollywood/Government woke thinkers.

Oh well, the leftist elite in this country is going to get Trump v.2 and they are going to deserve every bit of it. Perhaps (probably not) it will not lead to just symbolic "owning the libs", but real policy that starts to wean us off the tit of cheap China.

 

Is it? Britain did away with the gold standard yonks ago. Even the restriction on money created by banks, that it must be no more than a stated multiple of money they hold on deposit, has gone.

Even if money is backed by gold, the value of gold itself is a construct of the markets. It has an intrinsic value as a metal used in industry, electronics, etc, as well a metal to make very beautiful things, but its value, as far as I know, is a financial-market fiction.

 

Yeah, gold standard has been dead for decades. I don't think US currency has been redeemable for gold since the 70s. Countries do still hold gold reserves, but its relationship to official currency doesn't exist as it used to.

Our global financial system is more imaginary than ever, though as you mention even with something like gold that has some intrinsic value, part of that value is ultimately a construct

 

This was known pretty early on, specifically in regards to the Wuhan virology center where this thing originated. I'm not really sure what there is to cover up.

I'd like to know who's being protected though. Is the US military behind the funding? Is it some corporation? "A university" is not really a valid answer - research funding comes from military or private business. Although I suppose in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter. Some research was happening, somebody didn't follow some rule to the "t", some shit got released, here we are.

 

It was known but suppressed as a conspiracy theory by social media and most news organizations. The facts are that the NIAID (Fauci) helped fund the research through a grant to EcoHealth Alliance (Daczak) because it’s illegal to conduct gain of function research in the United States. The problem isn’t Rand Paul grilling Fauci, it’s the senators who aren’t.