The joining of state and corporate power is the definition of fascism.
Welcome to reality.
Worth noting here that Net Present Value isn’t the motivation here, it’s the way the system is rigged—it works this way because it has been constructed to work this way. Economics without morals and ethics is total bankruptcy.
The movie "Logan's Run" outlined this idea. Each event is assigned a value. If trying to contain an event exceeds that value it is deemed not worth the effort to pursue. If the profit exceeds paying out for malfeasance it's worthwhile. Human life is naturally less important than profit.
The corporations are not tools of the state, its the other way around. The state, which in Australia IS a corporation itself, is a tool of the ultimate private corporations which shield behind the legal barriers of their controlled and subsidiary corporation pretending to be and acting as the state.
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 23, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
I found the link to "The Corporate State" very interesting indeed. Food for thought. However I totally disagree: transnational corporations (and first the finance industry) have taken over the state. Sure there is no longer any real distinction between the two. The state is now middle management inside the corporate global governance. And the policymakers are the central bankers along with the biggest asset management companies. The state is far below in the chain of command.
At least the Australian Government could have stood by YPLL or Years of Potential Life Lost (e.g. death after ~78 years old) in evaluating the different policy options. They knew that pretty much only old people died from CV19 yet younger people are dying from the Vaccine... of course it was always the plan,
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 23, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
This is Sacklers’ story too. McKinsey exists thanks to NPV… by the way, I think in Fight Club, when Ed Norton meets “Tyler” for the first time (or in an overt monologue), he talks about a similar risk/benefit assessment in the car industry (maybe seat belts, or breaks?).
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 25, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
I said I didn't understand the term. Truth is I have known this for many decades. Union Carbide did it in Bopal India. Chevron did it in Columbia. I always understood it as the cost of doing business. That is if doing business is cheaper by paying a fine. Pay the fine and "Keep Going"
Oct 23, 2022·edited Oct 26, 2022Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed
You know what else the taxpayers are paying? 50 million PR propaganda campaign run by the CDC to convince people to get these shots, hiring the same advertising firm that works for Pfiz. and Mod. So we pay the bill to have someone manipulate us into poisoning our genetic heritage and shortening our lifespans. (Letter from Rand Paul about this on a new post by Mathew Aldred: https://mathewaldred.substack.com/p/rand-paul-to-walensky-state-paying)
The taxpayer also pays for the development of the knowledge and technology -- which is then privatized before becoming profitable. Profitable, being at this point that governments pay millions for stockpiling their product and then forcing people to get it. Which is waved through safety checks because these companies donate some of that (taxpayer) money back to the agencies in charge of checking its safety, and the corporations are able to donate more or manipulate more than the citizens themselves -- meaning that the public agencies are not serving the public. (Nice post by A Midwestern Doctor about this recently: https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/who-owns-the-cdc).
Then the taxpayer pays the bill for all of our fellow people whose lives get derailed by the toxic product. And how about the future bills: disability payments, special education tutors, nurses, any other support profession needed to deal with future brain changes (law enforcement?), whether neurodegenerative or questionably yet-unknown neurodevelopmental complications.
Edit: May I suggest, that the taxpayers be so kind as to bail these companies out if they ever have the misfortune of being financially penalized or risking bankruptcy due to mismanagement and greed?
I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'll repeat myself: there is no difference between this and what happened in the 70 and 80s with a Big Food transnational corporation whose CEO I happened to personally know really well for family reasons. His company was responsible for 1 MILLION babies' death in the Third World every year according to an USAID whistleblower. I knew the guy well enough to assure you that he wasn't I psychopath. Simply the informations coming from Africa and India just bounced back on his brain. The only thing he could see was the RoI and the company's stock, and --eventually-- the bad PR his company got because of the killings. So he was very much bothered with law firms and communication but didn't care about the kids who were killed or disabled. This is how the corporate world functions, it is that simple…
Those compensation schemes are just another con. Their real value lies in using their existence against the "safe" lie. If they are safe, why do we have such schemes? Since don't the makers pay out instead of ourselves? What kind of a compensation is that where our taxes are used to compensate us for being whacked?
One thing is true though: the payouts have been rare, like their lie of "rare" injuries and deaths.
Yellowcake.
Iraq.
Depleted uranium.
Anthrax vaxxxine ptsd.
Libya. Syria. Afghanistan. Russia. Taiwan. nUkraine.
Incubator babies.
Controlled demolition.
Even when they get caught they never get caught
I wonder how much Tiffany Dover’s payoff factored into Pfizer’s Net Present Value?
The joining of state and corporate power is the definition of fascism.
Welcome to reality.
Worth noting here that Net Present Value isn’t the motivation here, it’s the way the system is rigged—it works this way because it has been constructed to work this way. Economics without morals and ethics is total bankruptcy.
The movie "Logan's Run" outlined this idea. Each event is assigned a value. If trying to contain an event exceeds that value it is deemed not worth the effort to pursue. If the profit exceeds paying out for malfeasance it's worthwhile. Human life is naturally less important than profit.
The corporations are not tools of the state, its the other way around. The state, which in Australia IS a corporation itself, is a tool of the ultimate private corporations which shield behind the legal barriers of their controlled and subsidiary corporation pretending to be and acting as the state.
Utilitarianism has turned a bit too ugly to watch...
I found the link to "The Corporate State" very interesting indeed. Food for thought. However I totally disagree: transnational corporations (and first the finance industry) have taken over the state. Sure there is no longer any real distinction between the two. The state is now middle management inside the corporate global governance. And the policymakers are the central bankers along with the biggest asset management companies. The state is far below in the chain of command.
At least the Australian Government could have stood by YPLL or Years of Potential Life Lost (e.g. death after ~78 years old) in evaluating the different policy options. They knew that pretty much only old people died from CV19 yet younger people are dying from the Vaccine... of course it was always the plan,
This is Sacklers’ story too. McKinsey exists thanks to NPV… by the way, I think in Fight Club, when Ed Norton meets “Tyler” for the first time (or in an overt monologue), he talks about a similar risk/benefit assessment in the car industry (maybe seat belts, or breaks?).
I think it was his character's job.
I said I didn't understand the term. Truth is I have known this for many decades. Union Carbide did it in Bopal India. Chevron did it in Columbia. I always understood it as the cost of doing business. That is if doing business is cheaper by paying a fine. Pay the fine and "Keep Going"
You know what else the taxpayers are paying? 50 million PR propaganda campaign run by the CDC to convince people to get these shots, hiring the same advertising firm that works for Pfiz. and Mod. So we pay the bill to have someone manipulate us into poisoning our genetic heritage and shortening our lifespans. (Letter from Rand Paul about this on a new post by Mathew Aldred: https://mathewaldred.substack.com/p/rand-paul-to-walensky-state-paying)
The taxpayer also pays for the development of the knowledge and technology -- which is then privatized before becoming profitable. Profitable, being at this point that governments pay millions for stockpiling their product and then forcing people to get it. Which is waved through safety checks because these companies donate some of that (taxpayer) money back to the agencies in charge of checking its safety, and the corporations are able to donate more or manipulate more than the citizens themselves -- meaning that the public agencies are not serving the public. (Nice post by A Midwestern Doctor about this recently: https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/who-owns-the-cdc).
Then the taxpayer pays the bill for all of our fellow people whose lives get derailed by the toxic product. And how about the future bills: disability payments, special education tutors, nurses, any other support profession needed to deal with future brain changes (law enforcement?), whether neurodegenerative or questionably yet-unknown neurodevelopmental complications.
Edit: May I suggest, that the taxpayers be so kind as to bail these companies out if they ever have the misfortune of being financially penalized or risking bankruptcy due to mismanagement and greed?
I've mentioned this elsewhere but I'll repeat myself: there is no difference between this and what happened in the 70 and 80s with a Big Food transnational corporation whose CEO I happened to personally know really well for family reasons. His company was responsible for 1 MILLION babies' death in the Third World every year according to an USAID whistleblower. I knew the guy well enough to assure you that he wasn't I psychopath. Simply the informations coming from Africa and India just bounced back on his brain. The only thing he could see was the RoI and the company's stock, and --eventually-- the bad PR his company got because of the killings. So he was very much bothered with law firms and communication but didn't care about the kids who were killed or disabled. This is how the corporate world functions, it is that simple…
This is what the public-private partnership - espoused by WEF - looks like.
I cannot imagine any sane society wanting more of this.
Boeing is experimenting with this concept:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/22/business/boeing-737-max-crime-victims/index.html
Simple concept. And true.
Those compensation schemes are just another con. Their real value lies in using their existence against the "safe" lie. If they are safe, why do we have such schemes? Since don't the makers pay out instead of ourselves? What kind of a compensation is that where our taxes are used to compensate us for being whacked?
One thing is true though: the payouts have been rare, like their lie of "rare" injuries and deaths.