Billionaries profitted from corona while small business owners lost their livlihoods.

[LA RAM FAN]

you dem loving trolls going to still say this was not a hoax created so the wealthy could get more wealthy and destroy the livlihoods of the little guy.the small business owner who lives paycheck to paychecK?

The Covid-19 Roadmap: Towards Global Economic Chaos and Societal Destruction - Global Research

The "killer virus" fear campaign coupled with the WHO Director General Dr. Tedros' timely "warnings" of the need to implement a Worldwide pandemic served the interests of Wall Street's institutional speculators and hedge funds. The financial crash led to a major shift in the distribution of...

www.globalresearch.ca

Billionaire Enrichment. The Appropriation and Redistribution of Wealth
Billionaire wealth has increased dramatically since early February. There are three distinct phases, which are directly related to the corona crisis, each of which is marked by major shifts in the distribution of global wealth.

1. The financial crisis initiated on February 20th, was conducive to a dramatic redistribution of money wealth and ownership of financial assets. Foreknowledge, inside information and speculative trade played a key role. Was there foreknowledge of WHO’s Dr. Tedros February 20 Statement?
2. The March 11 lockdown and closing down of the national economies of 190 UN member states, which triggered corporate as well as SME bankruptcies Worldwide. The March 11 event was also marked by the plunge of stock markets worldwide, starting on Black Thursday March 12, 2020.
3. The third stage of billionaire enrichment pertains to the implementation of the so-called “Second Wave” which consists in triggering a renewed wave of bankruptcies.

 

[MarcATL]

Yeah, the wealthy always seem to come up on top when the rest of the nation is in financial peril...

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

And who (BY FAR) holds the most wealth in this nation ?

Hint: Not republicans

 

[candycorn]

Trump fired the IG. It was all downhill from there.

 

[Andylusion]

Well the solution to that, is to not support either lock downs, or bailouts.

The problem that I have with all these discussions, is that people want to make it out like it was designed that way.

There is no evidence anything was "designed" to benefit the wealthy and harm the poor.

The reason that is always the outcome, is simply because that's the nature of government regulations and government bailouts.

It's inherent. It is not possible to design a system, that doesn't end up benefiting the wealthy, and harming the poor.

Except.... to simply not have the system.

Think about lock downs for example.

I worked for a company, that had maybe one or two contracts with health care providers. But it was large company, with hundreds of millions of dollars.

There was another company, much much smaller. They also sold medical equipment, but barely $50,000 to $100,000 a year.

Now both companies come to the government and say they would like a waiver from the lock down to stay open because..... "We serve a critical need in health care".

Which one do you think is going to get the waiver? The company that barely sells $10,000 in medical equipment a month, or the one that had multi-million dollar contracts? OBVIOUSLY... the small company shutting down is not going to harm the health care system. But the big company would.... simply because it's bigger.

Thus the rich guys get the waiver, and small company gets shut down.

That was not intentional. The politicians were not sitting around "Muhahahaha! Let's destroy those small businesses!"

It's simply the nature of how that works. By it's nature, government regulations benefits the rich, and harms the poor. Always has been. Always will be.

Same is true of the bailouts. Do you have thousands of dollars to make the case that your company needs bailed out? Do you? I don't. Most people don't. But big companies do, simply because they are big companies.

You understand how fraud works, right? How would a know-nothing in Washington DC, know if Bubba Joe here, really has a business? Anyone could walk up and say they have a business.

Remember the Horizon Oil spill, when they started handing out money, and then we learned later that people who had never fished in the Gulf in their whole lives, were claiming they had a shrimp business, and collecting the bailout money?

Well to prevent that you have to have all kinds of proof. Big companies, with huge HR departments, have that proof. Small companies of 10 people... Don't. Thus naturally the big companies are going to get more of the money than small ones.

Again, no one intentionally planned that. It is inherent to all government bailouts. Doesn't matter if a Republican or a Democrat wrote the bill. Doesn't matter who is president.

Government by it's very nature, will harm the poor, and benefit the rich. This is why we don't want government imposing lock downs and bailouts.

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[LA RAM FAN]

View attachment 402188

Amen to that.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Well the solution to that, is to not support either lock downs, or bailouts.

The problem that I have with all these discussions, is that people want to make it out like it was designed that way.

There is no evidence anything was "designed" to benefit the wealthy and harm the poor.

The reason that is always the outcome, is simply because that's the nature of government regulations and government bailouts.

It's inherent. It is not possible to design a system, that doesn't end up benefiting the wealthy, and harming the poor.

Except.... to simply not have the system.

Think about lock downs for example.

I worked for a company, that had maybe one or two contracts with health care providers. But it was large company, with hundreds of millions of dollars.

There was another company, much much smaller. They also sold medical equipment, but barely $50,000 to $100,000 a year.

Now both companies come to the government and say they would like a waiver from the lock down to stay open because..... "We serve a critical need in health care".

Which one do you think is going to get the waiver? The company that barely sells $10,000 in medical equipment a month, or the one that had multi-million dollar contracts? OBVIOUSLY... the small company shutting down is not going to harm the health care system. But the big company would.... simply because it's bigger.

Thus the rich guys get the waiver, and small company gets shut down.

That was not intentional. The politicians were not sitting around "Muhahahaha! Let's destroy those small businesses!"

It's simply the nature of how that works. By it's nature, government regulations benefits the rich, and harms the poor. Always has been. Always will be.

Same is true of the bailouts. Do you have thousands of dollars to make the case that your company needs bailed out? Do you? I don't. Most people don't. But big companies do, simply because they are big companies.

You understand how fraud works, right? How would a know-nothing in Washington DC, know if Bubba Joe here, really has a business? Anyone could walk up and say they have a business.

Remember the Horizon Oil spill, when they started handing out money, and then we learned later that people who had never fished in the Gulf in their whole lives, were claiming they had a shrimp business, and collecting the bailout money?

Well to prevent that you have to have all kinds of proof. Big companies, with huge HR departments, have that proof. Small companies of 10 people... Don't. Thus naturally the big companies are going to get more of the money than small ones.

Again, no one intentionally planned that. It is inherent to all government bailouts. Doesn't matter if a Republican or a Democrat wrote the bill. Doesn't matter who is president.

Government by it's very nature, will harm the poor, and benefit the rich. This is why we don't want government imposing lock downs and bailouts.

The proof in the pudding right there that the constitution does not exist sense the government is suppose to be of the people,for the people and by the people ,it’s for the corporations.the government was suppose to serve the people but for decades nowwe have served them instead.

 

[Andylusion]

Well the solution to that, is to not support either lock downs, or bailouts.

The problem that I have with all these discussions, is that people want to make it out like it was designed that way.

There is no evidence anything was "designed" to benefit the wealthy and harm the poor.

The reason that is always the outcome, is simply because that's the nature of government regulations and government bailouts.

It's inherent. It is not possible to design a system, that doesn't end up benefiting the wealthy, and harming the poor.

Except.... to simply not have the system.

Think about lock downs for example.

I worked for a company, that had maybe one or two contracts with health care providers. But it was large company, with hundreds of millions of dollars.

There was another company, much much smaller. They also sold medical equipment, but barely $50,000 to $100,000 a year.

Now both companies come to the government and say they would like a waiver from the lock down to stay open because..... "We serve a critical need in health care".

Which one do you think is going to get the waiver? The company that barely sells $10,000 in medical equipment a month, or the one that had multi-million dollar contracts? OBVIOUSLY... the small company shutting down is not going to harm the health care system. But the big company would.... simply because it's bigger.

Thus the rich guys get the waiver, and small company gets shut down.

That was not intentional. The politicians were not sitting around "Muhahahaha! Let's destroy those small businesses!"

It's simply the nature of how that works. By it's nature, government regulations benefits the rich, and harms the poor. Always has been. Always will be.

Same is true of the bailouts. Do you have thousands of dollars to make the case that your company needs bailed out? Do you? I don't. Most people don't. But big companies do, simply because they are big companies.

You understand how fraud works, right? How would a know-nothing in Washington DC, know if Bubba Joe here, really has a business? Anyone could walk up and say they have a business.

Remember the Horizon Oil spill, when they started handing out money, and then we learned later that people who had never fished in the Gulf in their whole lives, were claiming they had a shrimp business, and collecting the bailout money?

Well to prevent that you have to have all kinds of proof. Big companies, with huge HR departments, have that proof. Small companies of 10 people... Don't. Thus naturally the big companies are going to get more of the money than small ones.

Again, no one intentionally planned that. It is inherent to all government bailouts. Doesn't matter if a Republican or a Democrat wrote the bill. Doesn't matter who is president.

Government by it's very nature, will harm the poor, and benefit the rich. This is why we don't want government imposing lock downs and bailouts.

The proof in the pudding right there that the constitution does not exist sense the government is suppose to be of the people,for the people and by the people ,it’s for the corporations.the government was suppose to serve the people but for decades nowwe have served them instead.

Again, the government is not "serving the corporations". It does serve the people. Usually the people get exactly what they demand.

The problem is, the people don't seem to grasp that when they demand government regulate business, it always results the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer.

Government is not saying "Hehehehe! Now we can enrich the wealthy!". They have no intention of making the wealthy more rich.

It is simply the natural result of regulations. Every single time you hear any Democrat, any left-winger, any socialists anywhere say "let's regulate the corporations!"

You need translate that in your mind to "Rich get richer. Poor get poorer". Because that will be the result no matter what you think those regulations are supposed to do.

The only way you can avoid that, is by nationalizing the companies.

But even then, you still end up with the rich getting richer, and poor getting poorer.... because the rich leave.

Right now the wealthy people of Venezuela, that have moved to Spain and the US... their fine. The poor people in Venezuela... they're dying.

The only way to not cause the rich to get richer and poor to get poorer... is simply not have regulations. Let the free market work.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Well the solution to that, is to not support either lock downs, or bailouts.

The problem that I have with all these discussions, is that people want to make it out like it was designed that way.

There is no evidence anything was "designed" to benefit the wealthy and harm the poor.

The reason that is always the outcome, is simply because that's the nature of government regulations and government bailouts.

It's inherent. It is not possible to design a system, that doesn't end up benefiting the wealthy, and harming the poor.

Except.... to simply not have the system.

Think about lock downs for example.

I worked for a company, that had maybe one or two contracts with health care providers. But it was large company, with hundreds of millions of dollars.

There was another company, much much smaller. They also sold medical equipment, but barely $50,000 to $100,000 a year.

Now both companies come to the government and say they would like a waiver from the lock down to stay open because..... "We serve a critical need in health care".

Which one do you think is going to get the waiver? The company that barely sells $10,000 in medical equipment a month, or the one that had multi-million dollar contracts? OBVIOUSLY... the small company shutting down is not going to harm the health care system. But the big company would.... simply because it's bigger.

Thus the rich guys get the waiver, and small company gets shut down.

That was not intentional. The politicians were not sitting around "Muhahahaha! Let's destroy those small businesses!"

It's simply the nature of how that works. By it's nature, government regulations benefits the rich, and harms the poor. Always has been. Always will be.

Same is true of the bailouts. Do you have thousands of dollars to make the case that your company needs bailed out? Do you? I don't. Most people don't. But big companies do, simply because they are big companies.

You understand how fraud works, right? How would a know-nothing in Washington DC, know if Bubba Joe here, really has a business? Anyone could walk up and say they have a business.

Remember the Horizon Oil spill, when they started handing out money, and then we learned later that people who had never fished in the Gulf in their whole lives, were claiming they had a shrimp business, and collecting the bailout money?

Well to prevent that you have to have all kinds of proof. Big companies, with huge HR departments, have that proof. Small companies of 10 people... Don't. Thus naturally the big companies are going to get more of the money than small ones.

Again, no one intentionally planned that. It is inherent to all government bailouts. Doesn't matter if a Republican or a Democrat wrote the bill. Doesn't matter who is president.

Government by it's very nature, will harm the poor, and benefit the rich. This is why we don't want government imposing lock downs and bailouts.

The proof in the pudding right there that the constitution does not exist sense the government is suppose to be of the people,for the people and by the people ,it’s for the corporations.the government was suppose to serve the people but for decades nowwe have served them instead.

Again, the government is not "serving the corporations". It does serve the people. Usually the people get exactly what they demand.

The problem is, the people don't seem to grasp that when they demand government regulate business, it always results the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer.

Government is not saying "Hehehehe! Now we can enrich the wealthy!". They have no intention of making the wealthy more rich.

It is simply the natural result of regulations. Every single time you hear any Democrat, any left-winger, any socialists anywhere say "let's regulate the corporations!"

You need translate that in your mind to "Rich get richer. Poor get poorer". Because that will be the result no matter what you think those regulations are supposed to do.

The only way you can avoid that, is by nationalizing the companies.

But even then, you still end up with the rich getting richer, and poor getting poorer.... because the rich leave.

Right now the wealthy people of Venezuela, that have moved to Spain and the US... their fine. The poor people in Venezuela... they're dying.

The only way to not cause the rich to get richer and poor to get poorer... is simply not have regulations. Let the free market work.

What most sheep in America don’t get is how much the kennedy assassinaton stiff affects our lives today,the world has never been the same sense then because he was on the verge of returning us to the constitution of the United states where the people had control over the government instead of all these corporations and large businesses that do now,it really is of the corporations,for the corporations and by the corporations instead of the people.Thomas Jefferson feared it would happen and it did,that we serve the government instead of them serving us as they are suppose to as the constitution lays out.