Wednesday, August 04, 2021

New Innovations in Freedom

Wed, Aug 4, 2021 7:58 am

New Innovations in Freedom

N.S. A friend found this mini-essay at Reddit. It seems tht Home Depot is now selling tools that must be rendered operational online... until your online controller shuts them off.

You don't need to drive, just Uber. You still wanna drive? Well then you don't get all the features unless you pay monthly for the premium subscription for the software for your car. You wanna drive undisturbed? Fine, but we're gonna use cameras in the car to analyze your facial expressions as you drive by billboards and hear ads on your spotify.

You want to be left alone? We're just going to track your location at all times. You want to wash your clothes? Just pay someone else to use their washing machine or subscribe to shared washing machines.

You want a house? Sure thing, just pay monthly rental fees. Can't afford it? Just "co-live" in a house with 8 other people, bro. Want to have your rented lawn mowed? You know the drill. Did you want dinner? We'll just charge you by the meal, grocery shopping is for boomers.

Why would anyone even want to own anything? Just pay rental fees for everything, instead.


God Bless Reagan, God Bless Thatcher, God Bless the United States of America.


7 comments:

  1. Another reason not to buy a new car. I think I have the last model year not to have traction control and ABS. These things can actually make it harder to get up a slippery hill and take longer to stop--especially on gravel roads when you need to lock up wheels to push a bunch of gravel ahead of you to stop. I suppose the unconstitutional eviction moratorium just enacted by the CDC (who knew that CDC had the lawmaking ability of Congress?) will enable corporations to buy up real estate from the bankrupt owners who can no longer collect rent. Now a friend says replaceable batteries will no longer be a feature of cell phones--when the battery dies you need a new phone--they want you to rent the phone. Personally, I don't own a G-D cell phone--never did and don't intend to ever get one. You don't need to be yapping on the phone (or texting) all the time--looks like a mental disease to me--they are just a way to suck more money out of you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Home Depot is now selling tools that must be rendered operational online"

    Can only be made operational to thwart shop lifting.

    Apple does that with their phones. Those looter stealing the phones cannot use because they do not have the activation code.

    ReplyDelete
  3. And don't forget,if you want to even THINK about leaving your house--forced vaccines.

    --GRA

    ReplyDelete
  4. jerry pdx
    Truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black: https://www.foxnews.com/media/ken-burns-facebook-mark-zuckerberg?utm_source=spotim&utm_medium=spotim_conversation&spot_im_redirect_source=notifications&spot_im_comment_id=sp_ANQXRpqH_urn%243Auri%243Abase64%243Abc009358-c6ff-58c8-8a54-b3fef0937dd3_c_1wGj8VngPCyFiX32RGb1gHtu0wB&spot_im_highlight_immediate=true
    Yes, Ken Burns accuses Zuckerberg of hating America and think he should be in jail, then claims history is being rewritten by those who don't care about facts and truth...seriously? This is the man who made the Central Park 5 "documentary" that completely sidestepped facts and truth in favor of race baiting and as we all know, Burns is a White hating tool who makes globalist propaganda thinly disguised as "historical documentaries".
    Not that he's wrong about Zuckerberg, he's right on the money but he needs to look in the mirror before judging anyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  5. WHO NEEDS A VACCINE?"IVERMECTIN VERY EFFECTIVE AGAINST COVID"--ISRAELI STUDY

    A double-blind Israeli study has concluded that Ivermectin, an inexpensive anti-parasitic widely used since 1981, reduces both the duration and infectiousness of Covid-19, according to the Jerusalem Post.



    The study, conducted by Prof. Eli Schwartz, founder of the Center for Travel Medicine and Tropical Disease at Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer, looked at some 89 eligible volunteers over the age of 18 who had tested positive for coronavirus, and were living in state-run Covid-19 hotels. After being divided into two groups, 50% received ivermectin, and 50% received a placebo. Each patient was given the drug for three days in a row, an hour before eating.


    Hugo Boss back at pre-crisis sales in UK, China
    83% of participants were symptomatic at recruitment. 13.5% of patients had comorbidities of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, hypertension or cancer. The median age of the patients was 35, ranging from 20 to 71-years-old.

    Results
    Treatment was discontinued on the third day, and patients were monitored every two days thereafter. By day six, 72% of those treated with ivermectin tested negative for the virus, vs. 50% of those who received the placebo. Meanwhile, just 13% of ivermectin patients were able to infect others after six days compared to 50% of the placebo group - nearly four times as many.

    Hospitalizations
    Three patients in the placebo group were admitted to hospitals for respiratory symptoms, while one ivermectin patient was hospitalized for shortness of breath the day the study began - only to be discharged a day later and "sent back to the hotel in good condition," according to the study.

    "Our study shows first and foremost that ivermectin has antiviral activity," said Schwartz, adding "It also shows that there is almost a 100% chance that a person will be noninfectious in four to six days, which could lead to shortening isolation time for these people. This could have a huge economic and social impact."

    The study, which appeared on the MedRxiv preprint server and has not yet been peer-reviewed. That said, Schwartz pointed out that similar studies - 'though not all of them conducted to the same double-blind and placebo standards as his' - also showed favorable results for the drug.

    GRA:As always,the question:WHY would "they" push a vaccine,when taking this anecdote will be just as effective--with less possible side effects for the body than the vaxx's possible destructive actions?



    --GRA

    ReplyDelete
  6. That was a ZH article btw.

    --GRA

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why? They can't make billions on ivermectin--it is cheap. And emergency authorization for the killer vax could not occur if there was an alternative treatment--which, of course, meant they had to discredit the alternate treatments and persecute doctors who prescribed them.
    More and more information is leaking out--the vax is not effective--in some countries over 70% of new case were double vaxed. And in the Massachusetts outbreak, 4 of the 5 who ended up in intensive care were "fully vaccinated". Only one of the 5 was unvaxed. They tried to claim that no one died because the vax saved them--but none of the unvaccinated died either. We have been lied to that 99% of those in the hospital were unvaxed--a big fat lie. Look up the symposium being held today, Wednesday, by noted doctors and scientists about the truth about the vax--shocking information--I think the link is on WND.

    ReplyDelete