newswars--2020-04-24--Driver Wearing N95 Mask Passes Out From Lack Of Oxygen, Crashes Into Pole

A driver in Lincoln Park , New Jersey wrecked their car after the N95 mask they were wearing cut off their oxygen supply to the point they passed out and hit a telephone pole .
The driver , who remains unidentified , wore the mask for several hours before the incident and had been breathing in too much carbon dioxide and not enough oxygen , according to a Lincoln Park Police statement on Facebook .
While the department maintained citizens should continue wearing masks when in public , they did admit that “ in most cases , the wearing of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vehicle with no other occupants is unnecessary.
” “ We do know that the driver had been wearing an N95 mask inside the vehicle for several hours and ultimately passed out while operating the vehicle , ” the press release stated .
The department added , “ We also know that nothing was uncovered at the accident scene that would suggest that the driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
” Concluding their statement , the police department told the community , “ Motorists and the public alike are reminded that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ settings to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 , they are not necessary outdoors when social distancing can be maintained , and especially not necessary when driving a vehicle with no additional occupants.
” Describing common issues associated with wearing face masks , independent journalist Akshita Nagpal explains , “ A person wearing any kind of mask faces breathing resistance as air filters through the device , making the wearer work harder to inhale than he would without the mask.
” “ This can have several adverse physiological effects when the mask is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she continues .
“ Moreover , carbon dioxide that is exhaled can get trapped in the chamber of the mask the re-enter the body each time the mask user inhales .
This delivers less oxygen into the body than when the person is not wearing a mask.
” Dr. Dipankar Saha , scientist and additional director at India ’ s Central Pollution Control Board , said , “ It can lead to oxygen shortage , suffocation , respiration trouble , and heart attacks.
” Dr. Saha also pointed out that masks are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , saying , “ The moisture from exhalation inside the mask , when in constant contact with the 37 degrees Celsius warm human body , becomes ideal place for virus and bacteria to thrive .
This could result in the growth of microbes on masks and aid the spread of airborne diseases like influenza.
” During a press conference with the Coronavirus Task Force , a hot mic caught Fox reporter John Roberts commenting on the low death rate of coronavirus .

A driver in Lincoln Park, New Jersey wrecked their car after the N95 mask they were wearing cut off their oxygen supply to the point they passed out and hit a telephone pole.
The driver, who remains unidentified, wore the mask for several hours before the incident and had been breathing in too much carbon dioxide and not enough oxygen, according to a Lincoln Park Police statement on Facebook.
While the department maintained citizens should continue wearing masks when in public, they did admit that “in most cases, the wearing of this type of mask while operating a vehicle with no other occupants is unnecessary.”
“We do know that the driver had been wearing an N95 mask inside the vehicle for several hours and ultimately passed out while operating the vehicle,” the press release stated.
The department added, “We also know that nothing was uncovered at the accident scene that would suggest that the driver was under the influence of drugs or alcohol.”
Concluding their statement, the police department told the community, “Motorists and the public alike are reminded that while masks should be used in public settings to help prevent the spread of COVID-19, they are not necessary outdoors when social distancing can be maintained, and especially not necessary when driving a vehicle with no additional occupants.”
Describing common issues associated with wearing face masks, independent journalist Akshita Nagpal explains, “A person wearing any kind of mask faces breathing resistance as air filters through the device, making the wearer work harder to inhale than he would without the mask.”
“This can have several adverse physiological effects when the mask is worn for long periods of time,” she continues. “Moreover, carbon dioxide that is exhaled can get trapped in the chamber of the mask the re-enter the body each time the mask user inhales. This delivers less oxygen into the body than when the person is not wearing a mask.”
Dr. Dipankar Saha, scientist and additional director at India’s Central Pollution Control Board, said, “It can lead to oxygen shortage, suffocation, respiration trouble, and heart attacks.”
Dr. Saha also pointed out that masks are a often sources of bacteria and viruses, saying, “The moisture from exhalation inside the mask, when in constant contact with the 37 degrees Celsius warm human body, becomes ideal place for virus and bacteria to thrive. This could result in the growth of microbes on masks and aid the spread of airborne diseases like influenza.”
During a press conference with the Coronavirus Task Force, a hot mic caught Fox reporter John Roberts commenting on the low death rate of coronavirus.


newswars--2020-04-24--Mayor in Trouble for Saying Women Take Longer to Shop

Japanese Mayor faces “ public backlash ” for saying women take longer to shop than men !
Erm , how @ @ @ @ @ He ’ s completely correct .
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon @ @ @ @ @ disappeared forever .
It is CRUCIAL that you support me .
Please sign up for @ @ @ @ @ Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a @ @ @ @ @ without the comedown .

Japanese Mayor faces “public backlash” for saying women take longer to shop than men!
Erm, how is this a controversy? He’s completely correct.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


newswars--2020-04-24--Border Patrol Sees Spike in Tractor-Trailer Smuggling Attempts

U.S. Border Patrol agents with El Centro Sector are notifying the public about a disturbing trend of smugglers attempting to use tractor-trailers to smuggle people .
On Monday evening , agents stopped the fourth attempt of this type over the last four months .
The incident occurred at approximately 11:30 p.m. , when agents were conducting surveillance on a white 2012 International Prostar tractor-trailer traveling northbound on Highway 86 .
Subsequently , agents followed the tractor-trailer as it approached the Border Patrol immigration checkpoint on Highway 86 .
During inspection , while Border Patrol agents conducted an immigration check on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ detection team alerted to the cab area of the truck .
Agents referred the tractor-trailer aside for further inspection .
While in the secondary inspection area , Border Patrol agents observed three people jump out of the truck cab , attempting to abscond .
Agents quickly detained the three subjects that included two adult males and one unaccompanied female juvenile who were determined to be undocumented immigrants .
The male driver , a 36-year-old Mexican national , and the three undocumented immigrants from Mexico were placed under arrest .
All four subjects were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The increase in tractor-trailer smuggling continues to illustrate the total disregard that smuggling organizations have for the well-being of the people they are smuggling , ” said Chief Patrol Agent Gregory K. Bovino .
“ Our agents will continue to work tirelessly in protecting the safety and security of all human life.
” In March , El Centro Sector agents discovered 42 smuggled immigrants dangerously packed inside of a utility trailer near the border in Calexico .
Additionally , there were two similar smuggling events that occurred in January and February @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this calendar year , El Centro Sector agents have removed 86 undocumented immigrants from potentially life threatening human smuggling situations .
Scenes from the popular TV series ‘ V ’ reveal eerily similar parallels to the new medically-induced tyranny that is ongoing with the COVID-19 “ plannedemic .
”

U.S. Border Patrol agents with El Centro Sector are notifying the public about a disturbing trend of smugglers attempting to use tractor-trailers to smuggle people.
On Monday evening, agents stopped the fourth attempt of this type over the last four months.
The incident occurred at approximately 11:30 p.m., when agents were conducting surveillance on a white 2012 International Prostar tractor-trailer traveling northbound on Highway 86. Subsequently, agents followed the tractor-trailer as it approached the Border Patrol immigration checkpoint on Highway 86.
During inspection, while Border Patrol agents conducted an immigration check on the driver, a Border Patrol canine detection team alerted to the cab area of the truck. Agents referred the tractor-trailer aside for further inspection.
While in the secondary inspection area, Border Patrol agents observed three people jump out of the truck cab, attempting to abscond. Agents quickly detained the three subjects that included two adult males and one unaccompanied female juvenile who were determined to be undocumented immigrants.
The male driver, a 36-year-old Mexican national, and the three undocumented immigrants from Mexico were placed under arrest. All four subjects were repatriated back to their country of origin.
“The increase in tractor-trailer smuggling continues to illustrate the total disregard that smuggling organizations have for the well-being of the people they are smuggling,” said Chief Patrol Agent Gregory K. Bovino. “Our agents will continue to work tirelessly in protecting the safety and security of all human life.”
In March, El Centro Sector agents discovered 42 smuggled immigrants dangerously packed inside of a utility trailer near the border in Calexico. Additionally, there were two similar smuggling events that occurred in January and February of this year.
Since the start of this calendar year, El Centro Sector agents have removed 86 undocumented immigrants from potentially life threatening human smuggling situations.
Scenes from the popular TV series ‘V’ reveal eerily similar parallels to the new medically-induced tyranny that is ongoing with the COVID-19 “plannedemic.”


newswars--2020-04-24--“Together At Home” Was An Infomercial for the Global Elite and its Agenda

Together At Home was more than a “ virtual concert ” .
It was a show of force .
It was broadcast everywhere , on all TV stations and on all streaming platforms .
That fact alone was a strong indication of the sheer power behind this event .
Furthermore , the list of celebrities and powerful people who appeared during that event was simply staggering with headliners such as Lady Gaga , Billie Eilish , Taylor Swift , and Celine Dion .
However , this event was not only about music .
The music was there to attract people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specific messages coming from powerful places .
Because , let ’ s not kid ourselves here : Lady Gaga was the face of the event , but she was not the engine behind it .
Together At Home was a massive PR campaign from the World Health Organization ( WHO ) and the entire elite system behind it .
Lady Gaga was put at the forefront of this event because her face and her name sell more than the face and the name of Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus , the director-general of the WHO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ celebrities were enlisted to say specific messages because celebrities are the best vehicles to transmit messages from the elite to the masses .
Together At Home was more than a “ virtual concert ” .
It was a show of force .
It was broadcast everywhere , on all TV stations and on all streaming platforms .
That fact alone was a strong indication of the sheer power behind this event .
Furthermore , the list of celebrities and powerful people who appeared during that event was simply staggering with headliners such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Swift , and Celine Dion .
However , this event was not only about music .
The music was there to attract people .
Between the performances , there were specific messages coming from powerful places .
Because , let ’ s not kid ourselves here : Lady Gaga was the face of the event , but she was not the engine behind it .
Together At Home was a massive PR campaign from the World Health Organization ( WHO ) and the entire elite system behind it .
Lady Gaga was put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her face and her name sell more than the face and the name of Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus , the director-general of the WHO .
For the same reasons , countless celebrities were enlisted to say specific messages because celebrities are the best vehicles to transmit messages from the elite to the masses .
The most obvious ( and annoying ) aspect of Together At Home was its celebration of a “ COVID culture ” .
Indeed , in the past weeks , we ’ ve seen media doing its best to normalize a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video conferencing were the new norm .
While social distancing is supposed to be an extreme ( and very temporary ) emergency measure to prevent the spread of a deadly disease , Together At Home appears to be promoting it as a long-term way of life .
And , to prove that “ it is not so bad ” , the usage of video conferencing is constantly promoted for everything .
In the sad world that is presented in Together At Home , all aspects of life – including arts , family , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through video conferencing .
In their new world , human connections depend on an internet connection .
Maybe they want all human communications to be recorded … and monitored .
The entire concept of depriving children of human contact and having them grow up in an environment where anyone can be a potential biohazard is rather terrifying .
While most of us hope that today ’ s children will end up forgetting this insane era we ’ re living in , it seems that “ they ” want them to bask in it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some of the messages directed to children in Together At Home were rather upsetting .
Then , Abby Cadabby showed children how to give themselves a “ self-hug ” by putting their arms around themselves .
This is not comforting .
This is an Orwellian system teaching children to live without human contact .
The musical performances were also about the normalization of life in isolation .
To prove the point that anything can be achieved through video conferencing , some performances combined together separate several webcam feeds .
And the results were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the audiophile in me that is speaking , but there was absolutely no chemistry or synergy in these performances .
There was no soul .
Each individual was completely disconnected from the other .
In some ways , these performances perfectly illustrated how we , as humans , are disconnected from each other due to COVID-related restrictions .
And that is kind of what they want .
To drive this point home , lots of messages from celebrities actually “ glorified ” life in lockdown .
The same exact words were used by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We are grateful ” .
They ’ re trying to put a positive spin on the forced lockdown of the entire world .
Interesting fact : The words “ lockdown ” and “ confinement ” were never used during the broadcast .
Instead , the expression “ sheltered at home ” was used .
Why ?
Because “ confined ” implies coercion from an outside force while “ sheltered ” conveys warmth and protection .
That ’ s how far they ’ re willing to go manipulate minds and perceptions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that millionaires and billionaires are telling hard-working citizens that , at least , they ’ re not homeless .
So why are these celebrities promoting a “ confined at home ” way of life ?
Because those who organized Together At Home are thriving from this situation .
The longer it lasts , the further they can advance their agenda .
The main goal of Together At Home was to put at the center stage powerful elite organizations that work at an international level – beyond national borders – such as the WHO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telling people : “ We ’ re taking charge of this situation ” .
And Together At Home came at a very convenient time for the WHO which was under fire by several governments for its odd handling of the pandemic .
The most damning accusation : The WHO actually lobbied against travel bans from China at the beginning of the outbreak , back when it could have stayed in China .
So , after actually facilitating the spread of the virus outside of China , the WHO is now using Together At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who exactly is WHO ?
Here are its top 10 biggest contributors .
Since the United States recently suspended its payments to the WHO , the organization ’ s biggest contributor is now the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation .
Another major contributor to the WHO is the GAVI Alliance ( formerly the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation ) .
Both of these organizations are also part of ID2020 , an organization that is advocating for the use of vaccines to implement a global digital ID system using tattoos or microchips .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ be in Together At Home .
To present him , host Stephen Colbert said : Colbert then asks Gates , a tech guy who has zero qualifications in public health : In other words : No freedom without a vaccine .
This theme is repeated by several people throughout the broadcast .
In other words , no freedom without a vaccine .
Throughout the event , the messages were so repetitive and carefully worded , that we were probably swimming in neuro-linguistic programming territory .
While most messages began by thanking healthcare workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone can agree on ) , the messages quickly moved to the subtle promotion of a global government through the use of specific phrases .
One world + break down barriers + United Nations = World government .
Other figures from the United Nations had similar messages .
Together At Home also made sure to thoroughly glorify the mega-corporations at the heart of the elite .
Together At Home promoted several mega-corporations that happen to be tightly associated with the global elite .
Disguised as “ thank you for your support ” messages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the most powerful organizations on Earth .
Not only do they completely dominate their respective industries , but they also take part in elite gatherings such as the Bilderberg meetings and the World Economic Forum to shape global policies .
Cisco Systems is a massive multinational conglomerate that shaped the internet and technology as we know them today .
In recent years , Cisco was accused of helping China and India censor the internet while allowing the NSA backdoor access to its firewalls .
Pepsico is a mega-corporation that owns a long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In short , it is one of the few companies that feed the world today … with processed foods .
Here ’ s an infographic .
Johnson & Johnson owns a long list of pharmaceutical and consumer brands including Band-Aid , Tylenol , Johnson ’ s Baby products , Neutrogena , Clean & Clear , and Acuvue .
It is currently developing a vaccine for COVID-19 .
Founded by John D. Rockefeller Sr. , the Rockefeller Foundation shaped the world as we know it .
For over a century , the Foundation funded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Council on Foreign Relations and it helped propel entire fields of study such as social sciences , psychiatry , communications , and eugenics ( yes ) .
An entire book could be written explaining the profound impact of the Rockefeller Foundation on society today .
However , one single quote from David Rockefeller ’ s book Memoirs goes right to the core of it all .
In one skit , Jimmy Kimmel thanked Apple for its generous donation to the WHO .
He also thanked Apple for “ babysitting his children for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was meant as a joke , they really want to raise our children through their screens .
Later , Jimmy Fallon thanked Bloomberg Philanthropies and Mike Bloomberg – the elite billionaire who owns a media conglomerate .
In short , this entire thing was a shameless infomercial for the global elite .
Together At Home brought in audiences using Billie Eilish , Taylor Swift , and Lady Gaga .
But it was much more than a concert .
It was the global elite rearing its ugly head and using its celebrity puppets to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about celebrities telling the masses to embrace their lives confined at home ( sorry , I meant “ sheltered at home ) and to accept a “ new normal ” .
It was also about organizations such as the WHO taking the center stage during this crisis and allowing its contributors such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to gain positions of authority .
What about democratically elected officials ?
Where were they ?
They simply don ’ t have a place in their “ One World ” .
If that makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always give yourself a self-hug .
P.S .
The economic crisis caused by COVID-19 has caused a massive drop in advertising revenues , making it difficult for independent websites such as The Vigilant Citizen to remain afloat .
If you appreciated this article , please consider showing your support through a small monthly donation on Patreon .
If you prefer , you can also make a one-time donation here .
Your support will help this site navigate these difficult times as it continues to provide vital information and analysis on a regular basis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clip reveals the true agenda of Bill Gates .
Full Clip Search Laurie Schwab Zabin ’ 46 Lectures at Vassar College

Together At Home was more than a “virtual concert”. It was a show of force. It was broadcast everywhere, on all TV stations and on all streaming platforms. That fact alone was a strong indication of the sheer power behind this event. Furthermore, the list of celebrities and powerful people who appeared during that event was simply staggering with headliners such as Lady Gaga, Billie Eilish, Taylor Swift, and Celine Dion. However, this event was not only about music. The music was there to attract people. Between the performances, there were specific messages coming from powerful places.
Because, let’s not kid ourselves here: Lady Gaga was the face of the event, but she was not the engine behind it. Together At Home was a massive PR campaign from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the entire elite system behind it. Lady Gaga was put at the forefront of this event because her face and her name sell more than the face and the name of Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the WHO.
For the same reasons, countless celebrities were enlisted to say specific messages because celebrities are the best vehicles to transmit messages from the elite to the masses.
Together At Home was more than a “virtual concert”. It was a show of force. It was broadcast everywhere, on all TV stations and on all streaming platforms. That fact alone was a strong indication of the sheer power behind this event. Furthermore, the list of celebrities and powerful people who appeared during that event was simply staggering with headliners such as Lady Gaga, Billie Eilish, Taylor Swift, and Celine Dion. However, this event was not only about music. The music was there to attract people. Between the performances, there were specific messages coming from powerful places.
Because, let’s not kid ourselves here: Lady Gaga was the face of the event, but she was not the engine behind it. Together At Home was a massive PR campaign from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the entire elite system behind it. Lady Gaga was put at the forefront of this event because her face and her name sell more than the face and the name of Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the WHO.
For the same reasons, countless celebrities were enlisted to say specific messages because celebrities are the best vehicles to transmit messages from the elite to the masses.
Creating a “COVID Culture”
The most obvious (and annoying) aspect of Together At Home was its celebration of a “COVID culture”. Indeed, in the past weeks, we’ve seen media doing its best to normalize a world where confinement, isolation, and video conferencing were the new norm. While social distancing is supposed to be an extreme (and very temporary) emergency measure to prevent the spread of a deadly disease, Together At Home appears to be promoting it as a long-term way of life.
And, to prove that “it is not so bad”, the usage of video conferencing is constantly promoted for everything. In the sad world that is presented in Together At Home, all aspects of life – including arts, family, business and education – can be fulfilled through video conferencing. In their new world, human connections depend on an internet connection. Maybe they want all human communications to be recorded … and monitored.
The entire concept of depriving children of human contact and having them grow up in an environment where anyone can be a potential biohazard is rather terrifying. While most of us hope that today’s children will end up forgetting this insane era we’re living in, it seems that “they” want them to bask in it, to be molded by it.
Some of the messages directed to children in Together At Home were rather upsetting.
The puppet said:
“A lot of us are having some big feelings right now. I know I am. And that’s OK. Because we’re all in this together. When I get big feelings, I can just give myself a big hug. A self-hug”.
Then, Abby Cadabby showed children how to give themselves a “self-hug” by putting their arms around themselves. This is not comforting. This is an Orwellian system teaching children to live without human contact.
The musical performances were also about the normalization of life in isolation. To prove the point that anything can be achieved through video conferencing, some performances combined together separate several webcam feeds. And the results were … terrible.
Maybe it’s the audiophile in me that is speaking, but there was absolutely no chemistry or synergy in these performances. There was no soul. Each individual was completely disconnected from the other. In some ways, these performances perfectly illustrated how we, as humans, are disconnected from each other due to COVID-related restrictions. And that is kind of what they want.
To drive this point home, lots of messages from celebrities actually “glorified” life in lockdown.
David Beckham said:
“If there’s a silver lining to this situation is that we can spend lots of time with our family. And, for that, we are grateful”.
The same exact words were used by other celebrities such as the rapper Common. “We are grateful”. They’re trying to put a positive spin on the forced lockdown of the entire world.
Amy Poehler said:
“While most of us are sheltered at home, imagine if you didn’t have that option”.
Interesting fact: The words “lockdown” and “confinement” were never used during the broadcast. Instead, the expression “sheltered at home” was used. Why? Because “confined” implies coercion from an outside force while “sheltered” conveys warmth and protection. That’s how far they’re willing to go manipulate minds and perceptions. Also, one must love the fact that millionaires and billionaires are telling hard-working citizens that, at least, they’re not homeless.
So why are these celebrities promoting a “confined at home” way of life? Because those who organized Together At Home are thriving from this situation. The longer it lasts, the further they can advance their agenda.
Promoting the Global Elite
The main goal of Together At Home was to put at the center stage powerful elite organizations that work at an international level – beyond national borders – such as the WHO and the UN. They’re telling people: “We’re taking charge of this situation”.
And Together At Home came at a very convenient time for the WHO which was under fire by several governments for its odd handling of the pandemic. The most damning accusation: The WHO actually lobbied against travel bans from China at the beginning of the outbreak, back when it could have stayed in China.
So, after actually facilitating the spread of the virus outside of China, the WHO is now using Together At Home to push its policies.
But who exactly is WHO? Here are its top 10 biggest contributors.
Since the United States recently suspended its payments to the WHO, the organization’s biggest contributor is now the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Another major contributor to the WHO is the GAVI Alliance (formerly the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation). Both of these organizations are also part of ID2020, an organization that is advocating for the use of vaccines to implement a global digital ID system using tattoos or microchips.
Of course, Bill Gates had to be in Together At Home. To present him, host Stephen Colbert said:
“One of the most difficult things about our current ordeal is that we don’t know how long it will last. At times like this, I turn to one of the smarts guys I know, Bill Gates.”
Colbert then asks Gates, a tech guy who has zero qualifications in public health:
“How long will we be dealing with all this?”
Bill Gates’ response was:
“The eventual end will come when we will have a vaccine that protects all of us, not just in the US, but in the entire world. There’s a lot of vaccine candidates that we’re currently backing and I’m optimistic that, by the end of late next year, one will come out. And we need to make sure that it gets out to everyone in the world.”
In other words: No freedom without a vaccine. This theme is repeated by several people throughout the broadcast.
Dr. Ho said:
“I have no doubt that science will come through. But our work will take time. Please buy us that time. The world must act as one now. Let’s stay at home, flatten the curve together and give scientists the time to develop solutions to this pandemic.”
In other words, no freedom without a vaccine.
Throughout the event, the messages were so repetitive and carefully worded, that we were probably swimming in neuro-linguistic programming territory. While most messages began by thanking healthcare workers (they need to start with something everyone can agree on), the messages quickly moved to the subtle promotion of a global government through the use of specific phrases.
Tedros Ghebreyesus said:
“Today, we are together as one. COVID-19 has taken so much from us but it has also given us a unique opportunity to put aside our differences and to break down barriers. I wanted to thank Lady Gaga, the United Nations, my friend Hugh Evans for bringing us together as one world, together at home”.
One world + break down barriers + United Nations = World government. Other figures from the United Nations had similar messages.
Guterres said:
“Togheter we will defeat this virus and rebuild together a fairer world as united global citizens and united nations.”
Global citizens + United nations = World government.
They said:
“Tonight we stand with the people of the world. The coming days will not be easy but this global family of ours is strong”.
Oprah said:
“Tonight, we stand as one world united in our fight to rid the world of this disease”.
One world. United.
Together At Home also made sure to thoroughly glorify the mega-corporations at the heart of the elite.
Promoting Mega-Corporations and Organizations
Together At Home promoted several mega-corporations that happen to be tightly associated with the global elite. Disguised as “thank you for your support” messages, these promotional ads actually glorified some of the most powerful organizations on Earth. Not only do they completely dominate their respective industries, but they also take part in elite gatherings such as the Bilderberg meetings and the World Economic Forum to shape global policies.
Cisco Systems is a massive multinational conglomerate that shaped the internet and technology as we know them today. In recent years, Cisco was accused of helping China and India censor the internet while allowing the NSA backdoor access to its firewalls.
Pepsico is a mega-corporation that owns a long list of brands and restaurant chains. In short, it is one of the few companies that feed the world today … with processed foods. Here’s an infographic.
Johnson & Johnson owns a long list of pharmaceutical and consumer brands including Band-Aid, Tylenol, Johnson’s Baby products, Neutrogena, Clean & Clear, and Acuvue. It is currently developing a vaccine for COVID-19.
Founded by John D. Rockefeller Sr., the Rockefeller Foundation shaped the world as we know it. For over a century, the Foundation funded a number of powerful organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations and it helped propel entire fields of study such as social sciences, psychiatry, communications, and eugenics (yes). An entire book could be written explaining the profound impact of the Rockefeller Foundation on society today. However, one single quote from David Rockefeller’s book Memoirs goes right to the core of it all.
“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure–one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
― David Rockefeller, Memoirs
In one skit, Jimmy Kimmel thanked Apple for its generous donation to the WHO. He also thanked Apple for “babysitting his children for the past month”. While this was meant as a joke, they really want to raise our children through their screens.
Later, Jimmy Fallon thanked Bloomberg Philanthropies and Mike Bloomberg – the elite billionaire who owns a media conglomerate. In short, this entire thing was a shameless infomercial for the global elite.
In Conclusion
Together At Home brought in audiences using Billie Eilish, Taylor Swift, and Lady Gaga. But it was much more than a concert. It was the global elite rearing its ugly head and using its celebrity puppets to sing its praise. It was also about celebrities telling the masses to embrace their lives confined at home (sorry, I meant “sheltered at home) and to accept a “new normal”.
It was also about organizations such as the WHO taking the center stage during this crisis and allowing its contributors such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to gain positions of authority.
What about democratically elected officials? Where were they? They simply don’t have a place in their “One World”. If that makes you upset, remember that you can always give yourself a self-hug.
P.S. The economic crisis caused by COVID-19 has caused a massive drop in advertising revenues, making it difficult for independent websites such as The Vigilant Citizen to remain afloat. If you appreciated this article, please consider showing your support through a small monthly donation on Patreon. If you prefer, you can also make a one-time donation here. Your support will help this site navigate these difficult times as it continues to provide vital information and analysis on a regular basis. Thank you!
This one short clip reveals the true agenda of Bill Gates. Full Clip Search Laurie Schwab Zabin ’46 Lectures at Vassar College


newswars--2020-04-24--‘Gold mines right now are literally GOLD MINES,’ Peter Schiff tells RT’s Boom Bust

Jobless claims continued stockpiling in the US , having topped 26 million over the past five weeks .
The government is working to improve stimulus measures as the pandemic continues to ravage the global economy .
Boom Bust is joined by the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital , Peter Schiff , who says the US Federal Reserve is just doubling down on its failed monetary policy : “ In order to prop up the market , the Fed hastened to destroy the purchasing power of the dollar.
” According to Schiff , investors “ should be buying gold stocks because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ biggest beneficiaries of monetary policy.
” The veteran stockbroker explains that “ precious metals are a monetary alternative to fiat currencies that are being debased the world over , particularly in the United States.
” He says that , when it comes to earnings , “ gold stocks are going to be among the few companies that see a huge boost to their earnings .
In fact , they are benefitting from the reduction in energy prices because energy is a key cost when it comes to operating gold mines.
” “ Gold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mines ’ and I think investors are ignoring the potential .
”

Jobless claims continued stockpiling in the US, having topped 26 million over the past five weeks. The government is working to improve stimulus measures as the pandemic continues to ravage the global economy.
Boom Bust is joined by the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, Peter Schiff, who says the US Federal Reserve is just doubling down on its failed monetary policy: “In order to prop up the market, the Fed hastened to destroy the purchasing power of the dollar.”
According to Schiff, investors “should be buying gold stocks because gold and gold stocks would be the biggest beneficiaries of monetary policy.”
The veteran stockbroker explains that “precious metals are a monetary alternative to fiat currencies that are being debased the world over, particularly in the United States.”
He says that, when it comes to earnings, “gold stocks are going to be among the few companies that see a huge boost to their earnings. In fact, they are benefitting from the reduction in energy prices because energy is a key cost when it comes to operating gold mines.”
“Gold mines right now literally are ‘gold mines’ and I think investors are ignoring the potential.”


newswars--2020-04-24--Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Slams Bill Gates, W.H.O. Over Vaccine That Killed More Children in Africa Than

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Slams Bill Gates, W.H.O. Over Vaccine That Killed More Children in Africa Than the Diseases it Targeted

Anyone defending the Bill Gates/WHO global vaccine program needs to explain this study : Mogensen et al 2017 .
Prior to 2017 , neither HHS nor WHO ever performed the kind of vaccinated/unvaccinated ( or placebo ) study necessary to ascertain if the DTP vaccine actually yields beneficial health outcomes .
The DTP vaccine was discontinued in the US and western nations in the 1990s following thousands of reports of death and brain damage .
But Bill Gates and his surrogates , GAVI and WHO , made DTP a priority for African babies .
The Danish government and Novo Nordisk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the world ’ s leading experts on African vaccination .
The two most prominent names , Drs .
Soren Mogensen and Peter Aaby , are both vocal vaccine supporters .
They were shocked when they examined years of data from a so called “ natural experiment ” in Guinea Bissau where 50 % of children die before age five .
In that west African nation , half the children were vaccinated with the DTP vaccine at three months and the other half at six months .
Dr. Mogenson and his team found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ died at 10 times the rate of unvaccinated kids .
While the vaccinated children were protected from Diphtheria , Tetanus and Pertussis , they were far more susceptible to other deadly diseases than unvaccinated peers .
The vaccine apparently compromised their immune systems .
Thanks to Gates , DTP is the world ’ s most popular vaccine .
For African nations , GAVI and WHO use DTP vaccine uptake to gauge national compliance with vaccine recommendations .
GAVI can financially punish nations that don ’ t fully comply .
The researchers suggested that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the diseases it targets .
It ’ s possible that millions of children are adversely affected .
Although the New York Times and other Gates boosters will accuse me of promoting “ vaccine misinformation ” , this is a peer-reviewed publication in a respected journal by the world ’ s most authoritative vaccine scientists describing catastrophic outcomes .
Shouldn ’ t we be scrutinizing Bill Gates ’ record in Africa before we let him dictate which medicines we need to take ?
By muzzling legitimate criticism as “ anti-vax ” , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies like Mogensen .
This one short clip reveals the true agenda of Bill Gates .

Anyone defending the Bill Gates/WHO global vaccine program needs to explain this study: Mogensen et al 2017.
Prior to 2017, neither HHS nor WHO ever performed the kind of vaccinated/unvaccinated (or placebo) study necessary to ascertain if the DTP vaccine actually yields beneficial health outcomes.
The DTP vaccine was discontinued in the US and western nations in the 1990s following thousands of reports of death and brain damage.
But Bill Gates and his surrogates, GAVI and WHO, made DTP a priority for African babies. The Danish government and Novo Nordisk Foundation commissioned this study by a team of the world’s leading experts on African vaccination.
The two most prominent names, Drs. Soren Mogensen and Peter Aaby, are both vocal vaccine supporters. They were shocked when they examined years of data from a so called “natural experiment” in Guinea Bissau where 50% of children die before age five.
In that west African nation, half the children were vaccinated with the DTP vaccine at three months and the other half at six months. Dr. Mogenson and his team found that girls vaccinated with the DTP vaccine died at 10 times the rate of unvaccinated kids.
While the vaccinated children were protected from Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis, they were far more susceptible to other deadly diseases than unvaccinated peers. The vaccine apparently compromised their immune systems.
Thanks to Gates, DTP is the world’s most popular vaccine.
For African nations, GAVI and WHO use DTP vaccine uptake to gauge national compliance with vaccine recommendations. GAVI can financially punish nations that don’t fully comply.
The researchers suggested that the DTP vaccine is killing more children than the diseases it targets. It’s possible that millions of children are adversely affected. Although the New York Times and other Gates boosters will accuse me of promoting “vaccine misinformation”, this is a peer-reviewed publication in a respected journal by the world’s most authoritative vaccine scientists describing catastrophic outcomes.
Shouldn’t we be scrutinizing Bill Gates’ record in Africa before we let him dictate which medicines we need to take? By muzzling legitimate criticism as “anti-vax”, the media avoids honest debate on many damning studies like Mogensen.
This one short clip reveals the true agenda of Bill Gates.


newswars--2020-04-24--Why the Current Unemployment Is Worse Than the Great Depression

The latest report on new unemployment claims was abysmal , coming in at 4.4 million last week , some 100,000 more than surveyed economists had expected .
The continuous claims came in at just under 16 million , an all-time record .
Mainstream labor economists estimate that , all things considered , the actual unemployment rate now ( which is only officially reported with a lag ) is above 20 percent—a rate not seen since the darkest days of the Great Depression .
Indeed , all of the job gains since the Great Recession have been wiped out in just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s worse , even though the official unemployment rate is probably not quite as high as it was in 1933 ( when it averaged 24.9 percent ) , there are reasons to believe that our labor market is currently in even worse shape economically than it was at the lowest depths of the Great Depression .
Furthermore , once we take into account insights from Austrian capital theory , we can see why Keynesian hopes for a rapid recovery—and calls for longer lockdowns due to health concerns—are misguided .
Why the Current Unemployment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first place , there is a technical reason that the government ’ s official unemployment figures for 1933 are misleading : at that time , people who held “ make work ” jobs funded by government relief efforts were counted as unemployed .
( In my opinion , this was the correct judgment . )
If instead we use adjusted figures ( according to Darby 1976 ) then annual unemployment during the Depression peaked at 22.5 % in 1932 .
In other words , if we count unemployment in the 1930s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arguably the “ official ” rate is already the worst in US history , period .
However , besides this technical issue , there is a much more fundamental difference between unemployment in the early 1930s and today : back then , the people out of work had been laid off .
Yet today , the people out of work are in lockdown .
This is an enormous distinction .
When the economy crashed following the stock market in 1929 , consumers restricted their spending according to their preferences as to what was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ completely—and these were the businesses that were the least important , according to their customers .
At the same time , plenty of other businesses remained afloat , but they cut back their workforces .
Again , businesses laid off the most expendable workers , as judged by the managers/owners .
Intuitively , during the Great Depression ( and any other standard recession , for that matter ) , the economic system sheds those jobs that are the least important , in order to gradually reallocate workers into niches that are more appropriate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the boom phase , the more workers will find themselves in unsustainable outlets when the crash occurs .
But given the fact that X-percent of the jobs need to disappear , the market economy during a normal downturn sheds them in the most economical areas , causing as little disruption to the flow of goods and services as judged by the consumers .
In complete contrast , today the principal criteria for which 20+ percent of current workers have lost their jobs are ( 1 ) they don ’ t work in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home and ( 2 ) they aren ’ t deemed “ essential ” by government officials .
Naturally , these criteria don ’ t come close to approximating what is the most economical way to shed jobs , from the perspective of consumers .
An Analogy with the Household Budget In the previous section , I argued that our current labor market disruption was much more economically significant than what was seen even during the depths of the Great Depression .
Let me use an analogy to drive home the point .
Suppose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending by 25 percent .
( Indeed , this might not be a mere hypothetical for many unfortunate readers right now . )
However , there are two options for achieving this outcome .
Under Option # 1 , the adults in the household get to decide where they will cut their spending , subject to the requirement that they reduce the total by 25 percent .
Under Option # 2 , an outside government official—in consultation with various experts—forces the household not only to cut spending by 25 percent , but also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Which option would be more burdensome ?
The answer is clearly # 2 .
Likewise , given that the economy has to endure an unemployment rate above 20 percent , it ’ s far preferable if consumers and business owners get to effectively pick ( through voluntary market actions ) which workers are laid off .
It is far more devastating to endure our current situation , in which the workers who have lost their jobs have been selected by technological facts ( i.e.
, whether a job can be done remotely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Besides the important distinction between layoffs and lockdowns , there is another reason that Keynesian economists are underestimating the devastation wrought by the current policies : Keynesians typically don ’ t have a long-term “ capital structure ” in their models the way Austrians do .
For example , consider this tweet from Larry Summers : The problem here is that Summers is viewing things through the lens of aggregate demand : following a financial crisis , consumers and businesses try to pay down debt , and this means that only government pump-priming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employment levels ( especially if we ’ re in a liquidity trap ) .
But since that ’ s not the issue here , Summers thinks that once the lockdown ends all of the “ pent up ” consumer demand will return and things should go back to normal .
Why , it will be just like people going back to work on a Monday .
Yet what Summers is leaving out is that there ’ s more to the economy than labor going into a production function in order to spit out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at our respective jobs uses all sorts of intermediate goods produced by other people in the distant or recent past .
The weekend , or tourist season at Cape Cod , is a very predictable event , and we have enough inventories ( in food , refined gasoline , etc . )
to carry us over the hump .
Likewise , if a certain area of the country gets hit with fires , an earthquake , or a tornado , such that workers in that region can ’ t get to their jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s manageable because the rest of the economy can pick up the slack .
But in our current lockdown the entire country has been forcibly prevented from doing business as usual .
The longer this process continues , the more our integrated , complex capital structure is going to break down .
It does no good for the carpenters to go back to work if there are no new nails available for them to use .
Most states are currently poised to begin a phased return to work within the next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can get ahead of the breakdown before it becomes too bad .
But those economists arguing that we should extend the lockdown for many more months , and that we can use government “ relief spending ” to carry us over the hump , are being quite blind to the dangers in such a policy .
As a final note , let me mention that in our household we are being extremely cautious about the coronavirus because of my wife ’ s medical history .
I am not elevating concerns of GDP over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purely self-centered standpoint I want low-risk people to leave their homes so that they can get the virus and ( hopefully ) only suffer mild symptoms , so that its overall prevalence in the community quickly fades away .
This will make it safer for members of my household , if and when we carefully venture out into the world after this initial period of isolation .

The latest report on new unemployment claims was abysmal, coming in at 4.4 million last week, some 100,000 more than surveyed economists had expected.
The continuous claims came in at just under 16 million, an all-time record. Mainstream labor economists estimate that, all things considered, the actual unemployment rate now (which is only officially reported with a lag) is above 20 percent—a rate not seen since the darkest days of the Great Depression. Indeed, all of the job gains since the Great Recession have been wiped out in just a matter of weeks.
What’s worse, even though the official unemployment rate is probably not quite as high as it was in 1933 (when it averaged 24.9 percent), there are reasons to believe that our labor market is currently in even worse shape economically than it was at the lowest depths of the Great Depression. Furthermore, once we take into account insights from Austrian capital theory, we can see why Keynesian hopes for a rapid recovery—and calls for longer lockdowns due to health concerns—are misguided.
Why the Current Unemployment Is Worse Than the Great Depression
In the first place, there is a technical reason that the government’s official unemployment figures for 1933 are misleading: at that time, people who held “make work” jobs funded by government relief efforts were counted as unemployed. (In my opinion, this was the correct judgment.) If instead we use adjusted figures (according to Darby 1976) then annual unemployment during the Depression peaked at 22.5% in 1932. In other words, if we count unemployment in the 1930s the way we count it today, then arguably the “official” rate is already the worst in US history, period.
However, besides this technical issue, there is a much more fundamental difference between unemployment in the early 1930s and today: back then, the people out of work had been laid off. Yet today, the people out of work are in lockdown.
This is an enormous distinction. When the economy crashed following the stock market in 1929, consumers restricted their spending according to their preferences as to what was most expendable. Some businesses went under completely—and these were the businesses that were the least important, according to their customers.
At the same time, plenty of other businesses remained afloat, but they cut back their workforces. Again, businesses laid off the most expendable workers, as judged by the managers/owners.
Intuitively, during the Great Depression (and any other standard recession, for that matter), the economic system sheds those jobs that are the least important, in order to gradually reallocate workers into niches that are more appropriate. The deeper the malinvestments have been during the boom phase, the more workers will find themselves in unsustainable outlets when the crash occurs. But given the fact that X-percent of the jobs need to disappear, the market economy during a normal downturn sheds them in the most economical areas, causing as little disruption to the flow of goods and services as judged by the consumers.
In complete contrast, today the principal criteria for which 20+ percent of current workers have lost their jobs are (1) they don’t work in an occupation that can be done from home and (2) they aren’t deemed “essential” by government officials. Naturally, these criteria don’t come close to approximating what is the most economical way to shed jobs, from the perspective of consumers.
An Analogy with the Household Budget
In the previous section, I argued that our current labor market disruption was much more economically significant than what was seen even during the depths of the Great Depression. Let me use an analogy to drive home the point.
Suppose your household were forced to restrict its spending by 25 percent. (Indeed, this might not be a mere hypothetical for many unfortunate readers right now.) However, there are two options for achieving this outcome. Under Option #1, the adults in the household get to decide where they will cut their spending, subject to the requirement that they reduce the total by 25 percent.
Under Option #2, an outside government official—in consultation with various experts—forces the household not only to cut spending by 25 percent, but also specifies where the spending cuts will occur.
Which option would be more burdensome? The answer is clearly #2.
Likewise, given that the economy has to endure an unemployment rate above 20 percent, it’s far preferable if consumers and business owners get to effectively pick (through voluntary market actions) which workers are laid off. It is far more devastating to endure our current situation, in which the workers who have lost their jobs have been selected by technological facts (i.e., whether a job can be done remotely) or through the political process.
Keynesians Ignore Capital Structure
Besides the important distinction between layoffs and lockdowns, there is another reason that Keynesian economists are underestimating the devastation wrought by the current policies: Keynesians typically don’t have a long-term “capital structure” in their models the way Austrians do.
For example, consider this tweet from Larry Summers:
The problem here is that Summers is viewing things through the lens of aggregate demand: following a financial crisis, consumers and businesses try to pay down debt, and this means that only government pump-priming can boost total spending up to full employment levels (especially if we’re in a liquidity trap).
But since that’s not the issue here, Summers thinks that once the lockdown ends all of the “pent up” consumer demand will return and things should go back to normal. Why, it will be just like people going back to work on a Monday.
Yet what Summers is leaving out is that there’s more to the economy than labor going into a production function in order to spit out goods for purchase. Each of us at our respective jobs uses all sorts of intermediate goods produced by other people in the distant or recent past.
The weekend, or tourist season at Cape Cod, is a very predictable event, and we have enough inventories (in food, refined gasoline, etc.) to carry us over the hump. Likewise, if a certain area of the country gets hit with fires, an earthquake, or a tornado, such that workers in that region can’t get to their jobs even for weeks at a time, it’s manageable because the rest of the economy can pick up the slack.
But in our current lockdown the entire country has been forcibly prevented from doing business as usual. The longer this process continues, the more our integrated, complex capital structure is going to break down. It does no good for the carpenters to go back to work if there are no new nails available for them to use.
Most states are currently poised to begin a phased return to work within the next week or two, so hopefully we can get ahead of the breakdown before it becomes too bad. But those economists arguing that we should extend the lockdown for many more months, and that we can use government “relief spending” to carry us over the hump, are being quite blind to the dangers in such a policy.
Health vs. GDP
As a final note, let me mention that in our household we are being extremely cautious about the coronavirus because of my wife’s medical history. I am not elevating concerns of GDP over health.
In fact, from a purely self-centered standpoint I want low-risk people to leave their homes so that they can get the virus and (hopefully) only suffer mild symptoms, so that its overall prevalence in the community quickly fades away. This will make it safer for members of my household, if and when we carefully venture out into the world after this initial period of isolation.


newswars--2020-04-24--How Markets Price a Pandemic—and How They Lower Risk

In economic terms , war and pandemic are the same without even evoking imagery of the virus as an invisible enemy or of a long struggle interspersed with brief truces .
Both disasters emit massive supply shocks which hit the engines of prosperity .
In principle free markets could play a vital role in mitigating those shocks .
The accompanying social climate of fear , however , strengthens forces which are inimical to freedom .
These adopt as camouflage the banners of social justice and national solidarity while empowering cronyism and monopoly .
None of this is to deny that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ externalities ” in time of war or pandemic and can seize up unless there is careful buttressing of the legal framework within which they function .
In the world of the second best , however , attending to these issues pragmatically promises much better outcomes than market suppression by emergency decree .
Supply shock in war includes dislocation of international trade by risk of enemy action ; sudden scarcity of labor in the civilian economy ( the source of prosperity ) as this shifts into the military sector ( munitions production or actual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capital stock ( or threat of it , for example by enemy bombs ) .
In general , enterprises can no longer offer a wide range of output free from the risk of sudden interruption .
The military sector , including all the wages paid there , is ultimately paid for by taxation of the civilian sector , though the timing of the effective burden is highly variable and may occur far into the subsequent peace , as for example would be the case with a high inflation tax .
It is similar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ range of services ( shopping in store , entertainment , restaurants , bars , public transport , travel ) suddenly find that many consumers regard these services in their present form as now exposing them to risk of infection .
Similarly , many workers conclude that the work environment in many branches of the economy now exposes them to danger of illness .
Many workers would choose to stay at home during the pandemic rather than accept such danger if they could ( 1 ) employ social insurance as a substitute for wages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guaranteeing rehire at the end of the emergency .
Political pressure for such measures will increase .
Simultaneously , many enterprises eliminate jobs at least temporarily due to the enterprise ’ s inability , due to the decline in demand for their present services , to find paths to continued profitable operation at the previous scale .
The need for a flexible economy becomes all the more essential since the bill for social insurance and employment guarantees ( as for the military sector above ) is ultimately paid for out of taxation on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions limiting economic activity , there will be cases where the public perceives there to be higher risk in both employment and consumption due to disease .
This will bring a supply shock , but market forces , if free to operate , can help to bring about a modification of service output and resource input to ameliorate the economic consequences of this shock .
This would tend to push prices higher for this modified output than for the previous ( preshock ) output .
In the absence of monetary inflation , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when the supply shock eases ( at end of war or pandemic ) prices will decline , and this expectation would encourage the postponement of consumption into the future .
Also favoring postponement would be expectation that quality of services would improve ( no more risk of destruction or illness ) .
In consequence , there would be a bulge of savings during the acute phase of the supply shock which would flow into the expanded government deficit .
But unlike in the case of rationing solutions to supply shortage , those individuals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could buy now , limited only by their overall budget .
In the case of pandemic , free markets would create strong market incentives for businesses to reorganize output so as to provide services which were less prone to infection risk and to provide work environments which were similarly modified .
For example , food stores which provided a shopping experience with “ social distancing ” could bolster demand compared to what was out there for now plague-ridden services .
Yes , there would be added costs ; but these could be passed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And they could offer variations such as premium entry tickets , which would mean no waiting in line .
Yes , brick-and-mortar stores would have to consider competition from online distributors , whose services would now be at an advantage as regards exposure to infection risk from the viewpoint of the customer .
But these online merchants in turn depend on warehouse and distribution systems , which often employ labor in now unsafe environments , given crowding and related risk of exposure to infection .
When labor has bargaining power , it can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , meaning substantially higher costs than before for online merchants .
The online merchants could restrain the rise in labor costs by making outlays to improve the work environment .
Still , overall costs would increase , meaning most likely higher prices .
Indeed , the monopolist might lobby in Washington to stave off labor-related regulations or antitrust action—regulations which could mean that producers face substantially higher labor and other costs during the pandemic .
To that purpose it would play along with public perceptions of social fairness by abstaining from any actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Anyhow , keeping prices down might make business sense as a form of predatory action against enfeebled brick-and-mortar competitors .
None of this is to deny an issue of externality .
Suppose there are many consumers who would still rather buy higher-risk unmodified services from the store than turn to the more expensive modified services or online alternatives .
Medical insurance providers might seek to readjust incentives in this case .
After all , insurers might conclude that consumers who prefer lower-cost , but presumably higher-risk , services and goods are raising the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might seek to restrain the more carefree consumer by quoting lower premiums to those who can demonstrate that they are buying only services modified to reduce infection risk .
Finally , there is the thorny issue of public authorities pricing their output during pandemic—most of all mass transit .
They can assume that much of the public would prefer the level of infection risk to be reduced .
But how to do this without economic lockdowns if demand contraction related to general business conditions does not free up sufficient space ?
The answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to normal prices , especially at busy times , would empty out seats and reduce infection risks while also paying for a new hygiene regime .
Premium prices would add to incentives for employers to devise plans for remote work or concentrate fewer days in the workplace with longer hours .
There would be discount schemes of course for “ essential ” workers .
But no ration coupons or equivalents , please !
Cautionary tale : the fantasy short story by Marcel Aymé describing how in wartime Paris the Nazi occupiers rationed intellectuals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week , and could not understand how before long ( thanks to the black market ) some people were living ten days a week !

In economic terms, war and pandemic are the same without even evoking imagery of the virus as an invisible enemy or of a long struggle interspersed with brief truces. Both disasters emit massive supply shocks which hit the engines of prosperity.
In principle free markets could play a vital role in mitigating those shocks. The accompanying social climate of fear, however, strengthens forces which are inimical to freedom. These adopt as camouflage the banners of social justice and national solidarity while empowering cronyism and monopoly.
None of this is to deny that free markets experience frictions described as “externalities” in time of war or pandemic and can seize up unless there is careful buttressing of the legal framework within which they function. In the world of the second best, however, attending to these issues pragmatically promises much better outcomes than market suppression by emergency decree.
Supply shock in war includes dislocation of international trade by risk of enemy action; sudden scarcity of labor in the civilian economy (the source of prosperity) as this shifts into the military sector (munitions production or actual combat); and physical destruction of capital stock (or threat of it, for example by enemy bombs). In general, enterprises can no longer offer a wide range of output free from the risk of sudden interruption. The military sector, including all the wages paid there, is ultimately paid for by taxation of the civilian sector, though the timing of the effective burden is highly variable and may occur far into the subsequent peace, as for example would be the case with a high inflation tax.
It is similar with pandemic. Providers of a whole range of services (shopping in store, entertainment, restaurants, bars, public transport, travel) suddenly find that many consumers regard these services in their present form as now exposing them to risk of infection. Similarly, many workers conclude that the work environment in many branches of the economy now exposes them to danger of illness.
Many workers would choose to stay at home during the pandemic rather than accept such danger if they could (1) employ social insurance as a substitute for wages and (2) seek legal protection guaranteeing rehire at the end of the emergency. Political pressure for such measures will increase. Simultaneously, many enterprises eliminate jobs at least temporarily due to the enterprise’s inability, due to the decline in demand for their present services, to find paths to continued profitable operation at the previous scale.
The need for a flexible economy becomes all the more essential since the bill for social insurance and employment guarantees (as for the military sector above) is ultimately paid for out of taxation on the prosperity-generating economy.
Regardless of state actions limiting economic activity, there will be cases where the public perceives there to be higher risk in both employment and consumption due to disease. This will bring a supply shock, but market forces, if free to operate, can help to bring about a modification of service output and resource input to ameliorate the economic consequences of this shock.
This would tend to push prices higher for this modified output than for the previous (preshock) output. In the absence of monetary inflation, however, the predominant expectation would be that when the supply shock eases (at end of war or pandemic) prices will decline, and this expectation would encourage the postponement of consumption into the future. Also favoring postponement would be expectation that quality of services would improve (no more risk of destruction or illness). In consequence, there would be a bulge of savings during the acute phase of the supply shock which would flow into the expanded government deficit. But unlike in the case of rationing solutions to supply shortage, those individuals with a strong preference for present consumption could buy now, limited only by their overall budget.
In the case of pandemic, free markets would create strong market incentives for businesses to reorganize output so as to provide services which were less prone to infection risk and to provide work environments which were similarly modified. For example, food stores which provided a shopping experience with “social distancing” could bolster demand compared to what was out there for now plague-ridden services.
Yes, there would be added costs; but these could be passed on most likely in higher prices. And they could offer variations such as premium entry tickets, which would mean no waiting in line. Yes, brick-and-mortar stores would have to consider competition from online distributors, whose services would now be at an advantage as regards exposure to infection risk from the viewpoint of the customer. But these online merchants in turn depend on warehouse and distribution systems, which often employ labor in now unsafe environments, given crowding and related risk of exposure to infection.
When labor has bargaining power, it can demand a large premium over normal pay, meaning substantially higher costs than before for online merchants. The online merchants could restrain the rise in labor costs by making outlays to improve the work environment. Still, overall costs would increase, meaning most likely higher prices.
Indeed, the monopolist might lobby in Washington to stave off labor-related regulations or antitrust action—regulations which could mean that producers face substantially higher labor and other costs during the pandemic. To that purpose it would play along with public perceptions of social fairness by abstaining from any actions which have semblance of price gouging. Anyhow, keeping prices down might make business sense as a form of predatory action against enfeebled brick-and-mortar competitors.
None of this is to deny an issue of externality. Suppose there are many consumers who would still rather buy higher-risk unmodified services from the store than turn to the more expensive modified services or online alternatives. Medical insurance providers might seek to readjust incentives in this case. After all, insurers might conclude that consumers who prefer lower-cost, but presumably higher-risk, services and goods are raising the general risk of contagion. Insurers then might seek to restrain the more carefree consumer by quoting lower premiums to those who can demonstrate that they are buying only services modified to reduce infection risk.
Finally, there is the thorny issue of public authorities pricing their output during pandemic—most of all mass transit. They can assume that much of the public would prefer the level of infection risk to be reduced. But how to do this without economic lockdowns if demand contraction related to general business conditions does not free up sufficient space? The answer is premium pricing. A big supplement to normal prices, especially at busy times, would empty out seats and reduce infection risks while also paying for a new hygiene regime. Premium prices would add to incentives for employers to devise plans for remote work or concentrate fewer days in the workplace with longer hours.
There would be discount schemes of course for “essential” workers. But no ration coupons or equivalents, please! Cautionary tale: the fantasy short story by Marcel Aymé describing how in wartime Paris the Nazi occupiers rationed intellectuals to only three days of life a week, and could not understand how before long (thanks to the black market) some people were living ten days a week!


newswars--2020-04-24--UK Mother ‘Named and Shamed’ on Facebook For Not Clapping For the NHS

A mother in the UK was named and shamed on Facebook because she failed to participate in the weekly ‘ clap for the NHS ’ .
Every Tuesday at 8pm in the United Kingdom , people emerge from their homes to applaud health workers for their role in fighting coronavirus .
The event has become a massive nationwide spectacle , with people cheering , banging pots and pans and even setting off fireworks .
However , when one woman was unable to take part , she was accused of “ showing the street up.
” The mother described how she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ son to sleep and fell asleep herself before 8pm .
“ A post went on our community Facebook group actually naming and shaming me .
I was mortified , ” she wrote on Mumsnet .
“ The post said everyone else turned out and I showed the street up and if I can ’ t spend a minute showing my appreciation I don ’ t deserve to use the NHS if I or my family get ill. ” The mother said she tried to ignore the post but that it had upset her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post by defending the mother .
“ Just reply ‘ sorry , didn ’ t think I should leave my vomiting child to clap ’ to shame them back .
Awful .
I ’ m NHS , no-one in my street claps , including me , ” said the health worker .
It ’ s unsurprising that people are now being publicly shamed for failing to display enough enthusiasm for the NHS .
As Theodore Dalrymple notes , the clapping bears the hallmark of how citizens and party members under Communist regimes were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being labeled a dissident .
“ It reminds me a little , in its tendency to get longer and louder and almost more hysterical , of the applause after a speech by Nicolae Ceausescu or other communist despot , in which everyone in the audience had to show himself as enthusiastic and the most enthusiastic applauder , and to continue applauding as long as someone else was applauding , for to be the first to stop might be taken as a sign of disloyalty and dissent from the official line , ” wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clapathon as “ emotionally kitsch , ” opining , “ There is often the implication that if you refrain from making it—and even worse if you actively refuse to make it—you are in some sense an enemy , in this case , of the people , ” writes Dalrymple .
“ Whatever your inner conviction , it is safest to join in .
By doing so you avoid drawing attention to yourself and you are assumed to think and feel like everyone else , which is always safest.
” As we highlighted yesterday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are unable to access treatment because hospitals are devoted to COVID-19 , also expressed their displeasure at health workers for spending time dancing for Tik Tok videos .
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever .
It is CRUCIAL that you support me .
Please sign up for the free newsletter here .
Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown .

A mother in the UK was named and shamed on Facebook because she failed to participate in the weekly ‘clap for the NHS’.
Every Tuesday at 8pm in the United Kingdom, people emerge from their homes to applaud health workers for their role in fighting coronavirus.
The event has become a massive nationwide spectacle, with people cheering, banging pots and pans and even setting off fireworks.
However, when one woman was unable to take part, she was accused of “showing the street up.”
The mother described how she had a difficult time getting her young son to sleep and fell asleep herself before 8pm.
“A post went on our community Facebook group actually naming and shaming me. I was mortified,” she wrote on Mumsnet.
“The post said everyone else turned out and I showed the street up and if I can’t spend a minute showing my appreciation I don’t deserve to use the NHS if I or my family get ill.”
The mother said she tried to ignore the post but that it had upset her.
One NHS worker responded to the post by defending the mother.
“Just reply ‘sorry, didn’t think I should leave my vomiting child to clap’ to shame them back. Awful. I’m NHS, no-one in my street claps, including me,” said the health worker.
It’s unsurprising that people are now being publicly shamed for failing to display enough enthusiasm for the NHS.
As Theodore Dalrymple notes, the clapping bears the hallmark of how citizens and party members under Communist regimes were forced to feverishly applaud despots or face being labeled a dissident.
“It reminds me a little, in its tendency to get longer and louder and almost more hysterical, of the applause after a speech by Nicolae Ceausescu or other communist despot, in which everyone in the audience had to show himself as enthusiastic and the most enthusiastic applauder, and to continue applauding as long as someone else was applauding, for to be the first to stop might be taken as a sign of disloyalty and dissent from the official line,” wrote Dalrymple.
The author described the weekly clapathon as “emotionally kitsch,” opining, “There is often the implication that if you refrain from making it—and even worse if you actively refuse to make it—you are in some sense an enemy, in this case, of the people,” writes Dalrymple. “Whatever your inner conviction, it is safest to join in. By doing so you avoid drawing attention to yourself and you are assumed to think and feel like everyone else, which is always safest.”
As we highlighted yesterday, families of cancer victims, who are unable to access treatment because hospitals are devoted to COVID-19, also expressed their displeasure at health workers for spending time dancing for Tik Tok videos.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


newswars--2020-04-25--Trump Will Try To Delay Election – Biden Claims In Latest “Conspiracy Theory Ramblings”

Joe Biden is floating the mother of all campaign conspiracy theories , saying President Trump is planning to push back the presidential election using COVID-19 as an excuse in order to maintain power and ultimately win another four years in office .
“ Mark my words I think he is gon na try to kick back the election somehow , come up with some rationale why it can ’ t be held , ” the presumptive Democratic nominee said Thursday during an online fundraiser .
“ That ’ s the only way he thinks he can possibly win.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said of Trump ’ s recent behavior and alleged future plans to manipulate the electorate .
“ We have to figure out how we are going to conduct a full and fair and safe election in November and no one should have to risk their lives to cast a ballot , ” Biden added .
As Dr. Anthony Fauci helps President Trump lead the fight against COVID-19 , does the doctor believe himself to be the defacto leader of the United States through his own self-imposed medical tyranny ?
Though various reports from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scenario in the past weeks as the pandemic has grown in the US , there ’ s no evidence Trump as ever discussed delaying the election scheduled for Nov.3 .
Of course it should be added that the executive branch doesn ’ t have the authority to change the date of presidential elections either , but it would be in hands of Congress to decide such a drastic measure .
Biden further dove into the issue of voting by mail , which Trump has lately slammed as ripe with opportunity for fraud : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s “ un-American ” attempts to “ undermine the election , ” specifically his indication that he will not approve federal relief for the U.S .
Postal Service , which has been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic .
“ Imagine threatening not to fund the post office .
Now , what in God ’ s name is that about ?
Other than trying to let the word out that he ’ s going to do all he can to make it very hard for people to vote , ” Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear that the election will happen on November 3rd , ” the Trump campaign statement added .

Joe Biden is floating the mother of all campaign conspiracy theories, saying President Trump is planning to push back the presidential election using COVID-19 as an excuse in order to maintain power and ultimately win another four years in office.
“Mark my words I think he is gonna try to kick back the election somehow, come up with some rationale why it can’t be held,” the presumptive Democratic nominee said Thursday during an online fundraiser. “That’s the only way he thinks he can possibly win.”
“It’s un-American,” Biden said of Trump’s recent behavior and alleged future plans to manipulate the electorate. “We have to figure out how we are going to conduct a full and fair and safe election in November and no one should have to risk their lives to cast a ballot,” Biden added.
As Dr. Anthony Fauci helps President Trump lead the fight against COVID-19, does the doctor believe himself to be the defacto leader of the United States through his own self-imposed medical tyranny?
Though various reports from left-leaning media have speculated over such a scenario in the past weeks as the pandemic has grown in the US, there’s no evidence Trump as ever discussed delaying the election scheduled for Nov.3.
Of course it should be added that the executive branch doesn’t have the authority to change the date of presidential elections either, but it would be in hands of Congress to decide such a drastic measure.
Biden further dove into the issue of voting by mail, which Trump has lately slammed as ripe with opportunity for fraud:
Biden also went on the attack against Trump’s “un-American” attempts to “undermine the election,” specifically his indication that he will not approve federal relief for the U.S. Postal Service, which has been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic. “Imagine threatening not to fund the post office. Now, what in God’s name is that about? Other than trying to let the word out that he’s going to do all he can to make it very hard for people to vote,” Biden said.
Trump’s team pushed back on Friday, slamming Biden’s “incoherent conspiracy theory ramblings”.
“Those are the incoherent, conspiracy theory ramblings of a lost candidate who is out of touch with reality,”communications director for the Trump campaign, Tim Murtagh, fired back in a statement Friday.
“President Trump has been clear that the election will happen on November 3rd,” the Trump campaign statement added.


newswars--2020-04-25--California Bans ‘Gatherings’ On State Properties After Protests Surge Against Newsom’s ‘Stay-At-Home

California Bans ‘Gatherings’ On State Properties After Protests Surge Against Newsom’s ‘Stay-At-Home’ Orders

After Monday ’ s anti-quarantine protests at the California State Capitol building and across many other cities in the state , California ’ s Highway Patrol ( CHP ) will no longer grant permits to demonstrators on state property , reported The Sacramento Bee .
“ Permits are issued to provide safe environments for demonstrators to express their views , ” the CHP said in a statement .
“ In this case , the permit for the convoy was issued with the understanding that the protest would be conducted in a manner consistent with the state ’ s public health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protests on state property was in the public safety and health interests of all Californians , the CHP said , adding that it wasn ’ t pleased with protesters who neglected to follow Governor Gavin Newsom ’ s social distancing rules : Protests in California were held at the capitol building in downtown Sacramento and other cities .
It was a continuation of anti-lockdown demonstrations that first started in Lansing , Michigan , last Thursday , demanding Governor Gretchen Whitmer to reopen the economy .
Thad returns to the War Room !
Join @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1pm as they protest in front of the “ Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation ” in Seattle Washington !
We noted over the weekend that protests in Oregon , Idaho , Minnesota , Michigan , Florida , Virginia , and Maryland , collectively drew thousands of people demanding state governments reopen their economies .
Then on Monday , a military truck with the “ Pennsylvania Militia ” rolled up to the Pennsylvania State Capitol Complex in Harrisburg , Pennsylvania , demanding the state government reopen the economy .
All of these protests , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been dubbed “ Operation Gridlock.
” While some claim the Lansing protest last week were of “ grassroots ” origins , it appears the demonstrations were “ funded in large part by the DeVos family , ” Whitmer said while referring to Betsy DeVos , secretary of the US Department of Education .
Footage from Monday ’ s protest in California shows pro-Trump crowds not abiding by social distancing rules nor wearing protective masks to mitigate the virus spread .
That is what angered CHP : Newsom told residents on Saturday that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in across the state : The Californian ban of protests on state property will certainly outrage Republicans who feel their freedoms have been evaporated under mass quarantines .
All of this is creating an environment for social unrest as warmer weather trends are ahead .

After Monday’s anti-quarantine protests at the California State Capitol building and across many other cities in the state, California’s Highway Patrol (CHP) will no longer grant permits to demonstrators on state property, reported The Sacramento Bee.
“Permits are issued to provide safe environments for demonstrators to express their views,” the CHP said in a statement. “In this case, the permit for the convoy was issued with the understanding that the protest would be conducted in a manner consistent with the state’s public health guidance.”
The decision to ban future protests on state property was in the public safety and health interests of all Californians, the CHP said, adding that it wasn’t pleased with protesters who neglected to follow Governor Gavin Newsom’s social distancing rules:
“…CHP will take this experience into account when considering permits for this or any other group.”
Protests in California were held at the capitol building in downtown Sacramento and other cities. It was a continuation of anti-lockdown demonstrations that first started in Lansing, Michigan, last Thursday, demanding Governor Gretchen Whitmer to reopen the economy.
Thad returns to the War Room! Join him and other patriots this Saturday at 1pm as they protest in front of the “Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation” in Seattle Washington!
We noted over the weekend that protests in Oregon, Idaho, Minnesota, Michigan, Florida, Virginia, and Maryland, collectively drew thousands of people demanding state governments reopen their economies.
Then on Monday, a military truck with the “Pennsylvania Militia” rolled up to the Pennsylvania State Capitol Complex in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, demanding the state government reopen the economy.
All of these protests, including the ones in California, have been dubbed “Operation Gridlock.”
While some claim the Lansing protest last week were of “grassroots” origins, it appears the demonstrations were “funded in large part by the DeVos family,” Whitmer said while referring to Betsy DeVos, secretary of the US Department of Education.
Footage from Monday’s protest in California shows pro-Trump crowds not abiding by social distancing rules nor wearing protective masks to mitigate the virus spread. That is what angered CHP:
San Diego protest of California lockdown orders across the state. https://t.co/vPvEtNpxOA — Alex Salvi (@alexsalvinews) April 18, 2020
PROTEST UNDERWAY: Massive crowd gathers at California’s state capitol to protest Gov. Newsom’s stay-at-home order. Updates: https://t.co/SecupsQgvb pic.twitter.com/uoZpVKuAGk — KRON4 News (@kron4news) April 20, 2020
Scenes from the recent Southern California protest against government efforts to stop the spread of the deadly coronavirus. Much of what we saw — no social distancing, lack of face covering, congregating with strangers — runs counter to current guidance by public health experts. pic.twitter.com/g4F2sUIGCr — Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) April 19, 2020
NOW: Protest at California State Capitol against #COVID19 #StayHome order. CHP permit to organize is for 500 people @kcranews pic.twitter.com/8WgXUDeEKc — Vicki Gonzalez (@VickiGonzaleztv) April 20, 2020
Newsom told residents on Saturday that he won’t be swayed by protests in across the state:
“We are going to do the right thing, not judge by politics, not judge by protests, but by science,” Newsom told the Los Angeles Times.
The Californian ban of protests on state property will certainly outrage Republicans who feel their freedoms have been evaporated under mass quarantines. All of this is creating an environment for social unrest as warmer weather trends are ahead.


newswars--2020-04-25--Sweden sees record number of coronavirus infections for second day in a row

Sweden has reported a record number of new coronavirus infections for the second day in a row – just as the country threatens to close bars and restaurants that do not follow social distancing measures .
Sweden posted a record 812 new Covid-19 cases today , adding 61 to the record 751 tally it reached the day before .
Major Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet declared ‘ the corona curve is going in the wrong direction ’ after the numbers were announced .
The country also saw an additional 131 new deaths , leaping from 84 on Thursday .
Sweden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rise on the previous day , and a 6.5 percent rise in new fatalities .
It began in China but US company is taking it to new heights ( or is it lows ) The grim statistic comes as Sweden vows to close down bars and restaurants caught flouting social distancing recommendations .
This , as the country ’ s top disease expert Anders Tegnell admitted a lockdown might not have saved lives because half of Sweden ’ s coronavirus deaths are in care homes where visits are already banned .
Sweden has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 2,152 deaths .
State epidemiologist Tegnell said during a daily press briefing there are three forces driving Sweden ’ s new cases increase : more medical staff being tested , with between half to a third thought to be behind the rise ; greater numbers of care home residents also being tested ; and a nationwide rise of hospital admittance with Covid-19 .
Speaking to the closure of Sweden ’ s bar and restaurant industry , Interior Minister Mikael Damberg told a news conference : ‘ We see worrying reports about full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be extremely clear .
I don ’ t want to see any crowded outdoor restaurants in Stockholm .
’

Sweden has reported a record number of new coronavirus infections for the second day in a row – just as the country threatens to close bars and restaurants that do not follow social distancing measures.
Sweden posted a record 812 new Covid-19 cases today, adding 61 to the record 751 tally it reached the day before.
Major Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet declared ‘the corona curve is going in the wrong direction’ after the numbers were announced.
The country also saw an additional 131 new deaths, leaping from 84 on Thursday. Sweden’s new infections record represents a 4.8 percent rise on the previous day, and a 6.5 percent rise in new fatalities.
It began in China but US company is taking it to new heights (or is it lows)
The grim statistic comes as Sweden vows to close down bars and restaurants caught flouting social distancing recommendations.
This, as the country’s top disease expert Anders Tegnell admitted a lockdown might not have saved lives because half of Sweden’s coronavirus deaths are in care homes where visits are already banned.
Sweden has to date recorded 17,567 cases of coronavirus and 2,152 deaths.
State epidemiologist Tegnell said during a daily press briefing there are three forces driving Sweden’s new cases increase: more medical staff being tested, with between half to a third thought to be behind the rise; greater numbers of care home residents also being tested; and a nationwide rise of hospital admittance with Covid-19.
Speaking to the closure of Sweden’s bar and restaurant industry, Interior Minister Mikael Damberg told a news conference: ‘We see worrying reports about full outdoor dining and crowding. Let me be extremely clear. I don’t want to see any crowded outdoor restaurants in Stockholm.’
Read more