It's not about money. Why?
I dismissed the money motive for holocausts yesterday. Why is the money motive absent in US? I've discussed it before.

= = = = = START REPRINT:

An article by Phil Mullan in Spiked makes a good argument for change but doesn't ask whether the change CAN happen.

It is said that crises provide fertile ground for innovation. This is only partly true. The acute pressures, the falling away of pre-crisis norms and the sidestepping of regulations, liberate individuals and teams of people to come up with great ideas about how to do things differently. This fresh thinking can originate better, more effective and efficient ways of conducting existing productive activity, or it can conceive brand new products or services that improve people’s lives.

We are not just in a period of crisis, but a crisis within an existing state of economic depression. Depression is not simply an extension to recession, in the way it is being discussed today. It is a protracted phase of economic sclerosis that has become self-reinforcing.

Mullan places the blame where it belongs, on debt.

This is what our distinctive shutdown recession is beginning to reveal. It is bringing into the open what hitherto was being camouflaged, not least by all the extra liquidity central banks pumped out ever since the late 1980s, and especially since the 2008/2009 financial crash. ‘Liquidity’ means putting cash into the economy so that there is enough spending going on to maintain a sense of functionality.

This was also true of the 1930s. The 20s had been a period of fast numerical growth with zero change. The 30s had slow numerical growth and fast positive change in both industry and government. When you compare cars or radios from the two decades, the growth is dramatically obvious. 1920 radios and 1930 radios are similar. 1940 radios are an entirely different species in appearance and function. 1920 cars and 1930 cars are indistinguishable. 1940 is a brand new machine in appearance and function. Same with government, except that the 20s were a period of actual decline, not stasis. Harding had tried to innovate and got killed as a reward. Coolidge and Hoover learned the lesson and followed NYC's orders precisely. The Dow sucked out the life and soul from government and business in order to grow exponentially.

Most writers are missing this long-term trend. Wolfstreet has been doing the best job of placing the holocaust in context. The businesses that are failing were ALREADY in prolonged decline. From retailers to universities, all had lost their soul and mission 30 years ago and were losing customers steadily. Many of them were intentionally repelling sane customers to satisfy the crazed monstrous NYC demons who buy shares and donate to endowment funds.

What's the driver of decline? Reliance on debt and Share Value instead of savings and profit.

Real positive change in products or government requires RELIANCE ON PROFIT or RELIANCE ON TAXES.

When business has to sell products for profit, it makes the products better to gain more profit. Business also PAYS WORKERS so they can buy the products. When government has to sell services for tax revenue, it makes the services better to gain more taxes.

The comparison to the 20s works precisely for business. In the 20s corporations were solely seeking Share Value just as they are now. It doesn't work as well for government, because Coolidge and Hoover were not trying to run solely on counterfeit numbers from the central bank. They simply rode the rising tide of tariffs and income tax from the steady numerical growth. They understood that they needed to have businesses and people, so they weren't able to kill everyone. Today's governments don't need anything outside the president's mansions, so they are free to kill everyone.

FDR didn't need to disconnect the central bank from government, so his task was a bit simpler than the task of today's reformers.

Doesn't matter anyway because there aren't any reformers. They've all been Epsteined into total submission.

If big businesses had not ALREADY lost their souls, they would have RESISTED the shutdown actively and effectively. When you have a soul you don't want to be killed. Small businesses want to live, but they're too small and weak to resist effectively. Corporations and universities don't need factories and students and employees, so they WELCOMED the forced shift to virtual abstract operations. This has been their GOAL AND PURPOSE for 30 years. Pure numbers and pure software.

The ONE AND ONLY EXCEPTION proves the point. Elon has been verbally opposing the holocaust from the start. Last week he ACTIVELY AND EFFECTIVELY resisted, reopening his FACTORY to employ REAL WORKERS. Because Elon has both Share Value and Epstein connections, his resistance has BULLYPOWER. Holocauster Newsom surrendered.

= = = = = END REPRINT.
  ¶ 5:47 AM