Bill and Melinda Gates forecast vaccine

a reply to: Serdgiam

Interesting watch. Thanks for responding and posting!

It is great to see people trying to rethink the system, but depending on the existing rules of the system to achieve implementation, is fraught with pitfalls.

A few points that I see:

• If you have a plan, you have already failed.
  
• What works on paper doesn't work in reality.
  
• If you don't include the "elites", it won't happen.
  
• More complexity is not the answer.
  

The video raises some good points, and outlines a "Plan" to achieve it; but it looks similar to presentations on Smart Cities to me. Too complex, with too much depth (years of it apparently) and detail to ever work. Plus, it's nothing that "Alice the Hairdresser" (or any number of variations of Alice) can ever relate to on a day-to-day basis.

How does it help your grand-mum find the toilet in a shopping mall?

If it's not so dead simple that Alice (once used), continues to use the conceptual framework indefinitely, it will never work. It has to be as simple as greed or compassion.

When I hear terms like "many opinions", and "work towards", I already know it has failed.

We have to have an "all opinions" and "it works now" approach.

a reply to: puzzlesphere

I somewhat agree about the ideas presented in the video.

However, just to argue a bit ( ), the same might have been said about the original founding of this nation. In context, Im sure that it was seen as highly complex and that many said it "wouldnt work."

Ill also say that, social & cultural upheavel aside, I think the premise might be on to something. Even as someone who is traditionally very "left," I cant talk with too many that identify as this modern "left." Many seem to not have any self-awareness of their behavior either. There could be merit in simply allowing them to have their own "city-states" under the same conceptual umbrella that the US was founded upon.

Regardless.. I think the question isnt so much "it works now.." Simply because what exists now doesnt work now. So, it then becomes a question of rapid deployment and how quickly it can enter social discourse and discussion. Does it help in the next five minutes, days, weeks, months, years, decades?While also preventing/ameliorating the current techniques used by the technocrats and providing a foundation that benefits them as much (or more) than the current path.

That very notion is one of the main drivers of my own work for about two decades now (yikes..). The main precept is total decentralized self-sufficiency, using modern technology to achieve it.

The current Plan, as far as folks like Gates go, is to leverage dependency and various routes of subjugation to demoralize the population and funnel us deeper and deeper into centralized, corporate structures. This goes for everything from food to medicine.

The benefits of a self-sufficiency technology suite to the average person should be clear, even if one isnt aware of the tools that exist today. However, it also benefits the technocrats in that it enables much more volume and diversity for actual progress to occur. Its a bit more abstract, but providing the tools for innovation and invention at the household level (rather than it is now; from the top down) would prove its worth at the individual level immediately, and the technocrat level very quickly (months).

The advantage of a lot of modern tech is that it can be self-proliferating. So, deploy a node in a neighborhood and then let it propagate from there. This not only saves time, but immense resources at the centralized/organized level.

I could go into it more, but its something Ive been talking for years and years and years. While working on the actual technology, a surrounding philosophy seemed to arise rather naturally. It makes sense, in retrospect, given the Systems approach inherent to the platform.

Importantly, its a concept that can coexist with, and even complement, many other ideas at various levels. That might be one of its biggest strengths. However, actually precipitating discussion outside the Narrative has been difficult for many years, even moreso now.

Id say the biggest hurdle, for any ideas in this regard, is getting people to stop looking towards media for what they should think and how they should behave on a daily basis (news, facebook, twitter, etc.) Similarly, shift away from looking to national political pop stars for salvation/doom, and start looking to ourselves. Those are very tall orders..

Despite that, I would argue that even without implementation LITERALLY NOW! (which itself might be a tendency borne of the programming), that the gravity of the seeds of ideas themselves can pull things together. Meaning, once enough people start holding on to a different premise (something which can happen with great immediacy), that that itself can stall the death march towards dependency. In 5-10 years, there may be no turning back.. as the system(s) the technofascists are building can end up subjugating them just as much as any of us. Its just the nature of the concepts and technologies they are utilizing. Their cages may be built of gold and silver, but will be cages all the same.

a reply to: Serdgiam

I don't think you can get people to "stop" doing anything. I perceive part of the problem is every system seems to limit at least someone's actions (even if that someone is a criminal in someone else's eyes). It begs the question can any system ever be adequate? I'd argue that it does work now, everyone is just offended at the bits that don't work how they think they should. A pervasively massive problem that will allow emotion to boil beyond reason (conflict of all manner) until we are exhausted by necessity (think the end of a war), and have to let reason take hold again.

That tendency must be short-circuited, by embracing the less altruistic aspect of ourselves openly, in a way that it benefits everyone.

I agree on many levels with what you are suggesting, except maybe in the "implementation".

I'm curious, obviously there is a lot here, and to aim for simple discourse; in a paragraph, can you describe the mechanism you are working towards which allows for ANY individual to achieve seal-sufficiency, regardless of their starting point?

Well here is one continent not going to take it so easily

Protest versus Africa's 1st COVID-19 vaccine test shows fear

Protesters against Africa’s first COVID-19 vaccine trial burned their face masks Wednesday as experts note a worrying level of resistance and misinformation around testing on the continent.

Anti-vaccine sentiment in Africa is “the worst I’ve ever seen,” the CEO of the GAVI vaccine alliance, Seth Berkley, told an African Union vaccine conference last week.

“In general, people in Africa know the diseases and want to protect each other,” he said. “In this case, the rumor mill has been dramatic."

GAVI ???

World leaders have pledged an additional US$ 8.8 billion for Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, far exceeding the target of US$ 7.4 billion.

The funding will help immunise 300 million more children in the world’s poorest countries against diseases like measles, polio and diphtheria by the end of 2025. It will also support health systems to withstand the impact of coronavirus and maintain the infrastructure necessary to roll out a future COVID-19 vaccine on a global scale.

Globalists ..... lol ..... pffffttttt - NOW That is a Disease

a reply to: MetalThunder

I guess the "fear of virus" hasn't been ramped up beyond the "fear of authoritarianism" yet.

We MUST reach a point where everyone willingly accepts a 1:n chance of dying for the good of the world. The narrative that needs to be established for a lottery of death is; the perceived safety of the population matters more than the real risk to myself.

When the needle is about to pierce your skin... that 1:n chance becomes very real.

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: Serdgiam

I don't think you can get people to "stop" doing anything. I perceive part of the problem is every system seems to limit at least someone's actions (even if that someone is a criminal in someone else's eyes). It begs the question can any system ever be adequate?

"Adequate," most certainly. "Perfect?" Probably not. Which is why I think having a system that evolves alongside our tools is a good premise. This was something that began, in its current form, at the foundation of the US. However, it is something we have been working on since the Neolithic Revolution. It will likely always be a work-in-progress, certainly for our lifetimes at least.

I'd argue that it does work now, everyone is just offended at the bits that don't work how they think they should. A pervasively massive problem that will allow emotion to boil beyond reason (conflict of all manner) until we are exhausted by necessity (think the end of a war), and have to let reason take hold again.

Just a bit of constructive criticism, but some of this seems to be semantics rather than pragmatic. So:

That tendency must be short-circuited, by embracing the less altruistic aspect of ourselves openly, in a way that it benefits everyone.

^^This is speaking about stopping one thing, and beginning another because it "doesnt work." Because of the nature of the Plan currently in place, it will also require time to move away from what is very literally an addiction. An addiction to extreme emotions and dopamine that slowly worked its way from the realm of the internet to the "real world" for bigger and bigger hits/highs. This is directed as well, which adds a tricky layer.

I'm curious, obviously there is a lot here, and to aim for simple discourse; in a paragraph, can you describe the mechanism you are working towards which allows for ANY individual to achieve seal-sufficiency, regardless of their starting point?

There is certainly a lot to it.. Its my life's work after all

At its core, its about removing the basic points of leverage on which power structures (small or large) tend to exert their will on individuals in the population. Doing so also has the added benefit of truly utilizing the inherent creativity, innovation, invention, and exploration that exists in (nearly) all of us.

I dont believe this was possible until relatively recently, particularly in terms of ignorance or disability. Its all based in a Systems Approach, which as a concept, has changed dramatically. "Optimization" is a key factor as well, which is (very) briefly explained here.

As an interesting sidenote, an "emergency backup plan" in my project was to deploy self-directed, automated proliferation. That, however was eventually scrapped upon realizing that even in a dire situation.. it would remove individual choice.

ETA: And given that removal of choice is a key factor in the technocratic Monolith, that puts people like me (and perhaps yourself) at a distinct disadvantage.

Why do I think they already have a vaccine?

Those two can take their own vaccines until the cows come home.

In my best tom cruise from tropic thunder voice "GO TO TOWN BABY, GO TO TOWN!"

But for me? Oh thanks but no thanks....Why don't you go make a computer game or something billy.

originally posted by: American-philosopher
I am curious whats Bill Gates medical background that says he is credentialied to be the world authority on health??

I don't think Gates purports to be an expert, or an authority. He just so happens to be very rich and his philanthropy positively impacts people. Gates has donated a vast sum to GAVI for Covid-19 research. Like you he has opinions, except his may be informed by experts.

Who gets the vaccine first may depend on who is first to develop a vaccine, but as supply builds up there will need to be people who “come first”. The initiatives run out of the UK have publically stated that vaccines will be provided free, or at cost. I think this will be the case for all Western nations - not so sure about what China proposes to do if they manage to create a vaccine, although based on some reports I have read China is more focussed on stealing other people’s research.

Have you watched the Corbett Report series on Bill Gates (of hell)? You should arrange for your friends to watch it. See how they feel about all that ridiculous conspiracy stuff after that.

a reply to: myselfaswell

I have seen a little bit of that, but not the whole thing. and My friends wouldnt believe it. I would just open myself up to more jokes more riidicule.

I am just at the point when they gas light me and bring up Bill Gates I just ignore it.

I think I know what's going on with Gates and the vaccine, but I'm actually afraid to point it out.
You guys are missing a few major pieces of the puzzle.
Several different sets of stories are being gently planted around the MSM to set the stage.

a reply to: trollz

any hints Deep Throat?

Why do I think they already have a vaccine?

a reply to: Willtell

thats what I am thinking as well. WHy is it that Bill and Melinda have the same time line as Fauci for a vaccine?

don't think Gates purports to be an expert, or an authority. He just so happens to be very rich and his philanthropy positively impacts people. Gates has donated a vast sum to GAVI for Covid-19 research. Like you he has opinions, except his may be informed by experts.

a reply to: paraphi

SO if any rich billionaier donates money healtcare research they then have rights to be a lead person on healthcare without a medical background??

Thast like saying if you donate to ancient egyptian archeology are you then an expert on ancient egyptian archeology??

Link to the Bill and Melinda interview

C-Span

originally posted by: American-philosopher
SO if any rich billionaier donates money healtcare research they then have rights to be a lead person on healthcare without a medical background??

Ah. Well, if the only people who are allowed an opinion and influence are people with a medical background, or specifically (I assume) people with a specialism in virology or public health then I would agree with you.

The real world is a bit more complicated. You have no clue as to Gates' competence in this field, or who advises him. Nor any idea of the how politicians and public servants are advised when they make policy in this area.

I know people don’t like Gates and his philanthropy, but sometimes the dislike just becomes irrational and knee-jerk. Everyone’s a critic.