Population Reduction. If that's the plan we're likely in it.

a reply to: Stupidsecrets

IF population reduction is the aim then there is no better way than the tried and tested method - war.

Why not just start another global conflict - with conventional arms, none of this nuclear nonsense - and kill off millions upon millions of people whilst generating more money and more control?

I'm sure given current events, human predilection for killing each other and intolerance and the alleged level of control these people are supposed to have it wouldn't be that hard to engineer.

I'm sort of conflicted on whether there is this cabal of elites controlling and manipulating world events.
Sometimes I have no doubts that they do exert a huge level of control and influence....other times I think that they must be so terrible at controlling things that they surely don't exist or at best are just chancers and opportunists seeking to exploit events as they happen....and then I sometimes think they just want to be left alone to do as they wish free from the restraints that govern us mere mortals and operate accepted laws, legal or moral.

reduction is a natural result of re-structuring the economy and the economic System

the elites are too callous to 'see' depopulation,,, the dead served their purpose by spending down their retirement or health insurance...using lawyers to transfer money/wealth/property to heirs after taxes to the State

to the elites they are engineering a 'redistribution-' of investment - reallocating resources and revenue streams as money units (AKA people) are 'sold off'- liquidated= eliminated by death and the resulting change of monied demographics


we are only digital blips on the Great Spreadsheet, ask any Banker...we are carbon footprints not souls

and this, ongoing, faux-panden=mic was the working operation to reset the economy





ETA

~as to accepting CoV-2 or COVID19 or Delta (propaganda items)~

Defy the NWO (read as the Rothschilds) and you lose.
Defy the Satanic communist regime infesting our nation, and you lose.
Refuse to be murdered by the Kill Shot and you lose.

SEE: allnewspipeline.com...


also view 3 videos at end of article, informative

a reply to: St Udio

Hence the national insurance and social security numbers we are all issued when registered at birth.

Human beings are nothing more than a commodity to be bought sold and traded like any other.

At least that how the TPTB see the majority of our respective populations.

If the mysterious "Elite" are trying to reduce the human population then they are about as effective as a single ant is at drinking all the water in the ocean .....

At present more than twice as many people are born each day (month/year) than die (from all causes) and we're now at nearly 8 billion - up from 6 billion at the turn of the century.

Meanwhile, they keep financing new technologies, scientific and medical advancements that prolong life.

They really, really, really don't have a clue, do they!

a reply to: AndyMayhew

End of the day the mysterious elites are doing the same thing they always have been doing.

That being milking our respective populations for as much tax and monies as they can.

Whilst maintaining control and keeping the stasis quo in place.

Fear and class warfare are the tools of their trade in spades.

a reply to: paraphi
Money is a means to an end, not the end itself. The by product of power and control is wealth. Those in power will have wealth whether the population is 10 billion or 550 million.

Look at a few of the most prolific mass murderers of the 20th century. It didn't bother Mao or Stalin to reduce their populations by millions as long as they retained power.

originally posted by: paraphi
Who are the "global elite".

The big companies, whose heads are the richest - Facebook, Amazon, Alibaba, Apple, Alphabet et al all depend on increasing populations. More people = more money. These elites don't want population reduction.

When my iPhone 10 years ago cost something like $199, and today it's over $1000, I don't think these companies need growing population to maintain their profits. Just my 2 cents...

Real population reduction is on it's way. Global warming is set to decimate humanity and those with wealth and power will have set their stall accordingly. These people aren't fools, far from it, they are always one step ahead of the game. Resources, locations, security and probably more than we could imagine will have been put in place long before now.

That's why nothing really matters regards the current state of affairs in the world of politics and finance. They are just illusions to keep us occupied, divided and asleep. The true horror of what's to come must stay hidden for as long as possible.

Math is your friend.
According to one of the popular internet world population counters,
there are 7.9 billion people on the planet.

The great reset claims the need to reduce world population by the year 2030.
Nine years.

If there are 7.9 billion people, and you wish to reduce that by half over 9 years, do the math.
(7.9/2)/9=438 million . . . and that does not take into account reproduction.

There are 140 million births and 60 million deaths each year.

So, every year for the next 9 years, world population must be reduced by 500 million . . . each year.

So, the purveyor of the Global Reset tell you:
A) population must be reduced by 500 million each year
B) the vaccine will reduce deaths
C) Four million total corona deaths to date is the top concern of the Great Reset
(BTW, One Billion is 1000 million)
D) 200 million total corona cases to date is the top concern of the Great Reset
E) 30 percent of the world population has received one dose.

Which would achieve the goal of the Great Reset? 4 million corona deaths or 2.4 billion vaxed?

originally posted by: sraven
If there are 7.9 billion people, and you wish to reduce that by half over 9 years, do the math.

Where is it stated that is the goal?

Which would achieve the goal of the Great Reset? 4 million corona deaths or 2.4 billion vaxed?

Neither.

a reply to: midicon

I agree - to a point. The next big thing on populations is Climate Change. However, I don't think populations will be significantly reduced because people will vacate areas which become unliveable. Climate Change will lead to mass population movements and associated conflict and environmental destruction.

People who think Covid was a way to "reduce population" have lost connection with the scale of the world's population. There will have been no measurable impact on population because of Covid.

Even war and conflict accounts for trivial population loss nowadays. It would need to be one serious war to result in six billion deaths, and that is not going to happen. WW2 accounted for perhaps 100 million deaths. That’s' a lot of people, and a lot of misery and grief, but it would not dent world population today.

What will slow, stop and reverse population growth is prosperity. The richer and freer you are the less likely you are to have large families. This is why in some developed countries birth rates are stagnant.

a reply to: AndyMayhew

That's the point human population growth is exponential' Time is running out on resources, and it's the rich countries where the sucking sound is coming from, the poor countries are living mostly in a balanced state compared to someone on welfare in the West. Virtually most of the West's energy is spent on maintaining nonproducers. They are consuming resources and are now redundant. I doubt whether it can go on much longer. So someone has pulled the plug.

a reply to: anonentity

Actually by the year 2100 the world population is predicted to stabilise at around 11 billion.

Thing there through is that if we have yet to devise a means of meeting our energy requirements and clean water demands by then we will be left on a world of 11 billion souls that can only support 1 billion.

They will tear each other apart over what ever is left standing.

a reply to: paraphi

Mass population movement might be on the cards but once the methane bubble hits the atmosphere there won't be many areas left to populate. I truly think it might be a case of a devastated and decimated humanity trying to survive on a hostile planet. The wealthy and powerful will at least survive for a time with resources and planning for as far ahead as possible. I could be wrong but the future doesn't look bright.

Where does reducing sports mean reducing the population? I guess less teen moms being made under the bleachers?

originally posted by: Stupidsecrets
Globalist Elites see more people> more destruction>.more movement>more consumption>more violence.

Best tools tools to achieve population reduction:

1. Bio weapon
2. Fertility vaccine/weaken immune systems
3. Release dangerous criminals. Let them in.
4. Deplete police / military
5. Reduce consumption (inflation)
6. Reduce entertainment
7. Reduce sports

That’s only a few more billion and yes. The world absolutely can support it. Maybe it means less resources available for other biomass we compete with... but you citing the earth is only able to hold 1 billion souls... how many do we have now again? Stop posting bollocks.

Could you define a soul for us with citations and where earths limit on souls is determined?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: anonentity

Actually by the year 2100 the world population is predicted to stabilise at around 11 billion.

Thing there through is that if we have yet to devise a means of meeting our energy requirements and clean water demands by then we will be left on a world of 11 billion souls that can only support 1 billion.

They will tear each other apart over what ever is left standing.

All populations do reach a critical mass and stabilize. From insects to mice to deer to people.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: AndyMayhew

That's the point human population growth is exponential' Time is running out on resources, and it's the rich countries where the sucking sound is coming from, the poor countries are living mostly in a balanced state compared to someone on welfare in the West. Virtually most of the West's energy is spent on maintaining nonproducers. They are consuming resources and are now redundant. I doubt whether it can go on much longer. So someone has pulled the plug.

a reply to: Neobucket

Learn some manners little bit. x

Without access to electricity and the products we produce that make modern day farming of the land a possibility.

This planet can only feed and sustain around 1 billon souls period.

Before the year 1800 the global population was about 910 million.

If we don't have electricity, we are back to a preindustrial age, and if you don't have access to clean water sources, its game over, quite simple

As to my use of the word soul, its a simple turn of phrase, the implication being people on Earth, which right now is around 7.674 billion.

a reply to: Neobucket

Not only stabilize but reduce...negative feedback loop.

Xn+1=RXn(1-Xn)