I've met numerous people with very rosy economic models which do not explain major market forces in action in the 90's and 00's. I'd like to very finely detail what I believe is happening.


We see a standing operation of a ring of all major companies, any that employs 500 people or more with annual incomes of 5 million or more, all interinvested and held chiefly by perhaps 500,000-5 million very wealthy global investors.

These companies are chugging along in the global economy. They face certain scenarios that they might deal with in numerous ways.

1 intercorporate competition negotiated by interinvestment and ownership
2 Market conditions unfavorable to just one company or owner-family which is interinvested but which has made unique and poor or abusive or disruptive choices.
3 Government interactivity resulting from a populist movement that would disrupt markets or corporate conditions
4 Technological advancement of various kinds

I am most interested presently in the last, #4.

We can speculate that corporate laboratories starting in the 1930's and 1940's became acquainted with ways to produce energy very massively. In the modern era we are experiencing the accumulation of this kind of technology. Imagine that this company family discovers through alchemy a way to get 100mpg carburetors, or how to get energy from water.

What would they do? They could release the technology to the general public or through their company to be distributed to the public. What would this look like in the market?

The technology would be developed and distributed. The simple and high output technology would allow roughly anyone to produce any amount of power in their own home or small business without spending money on oil resources or refineries. These refineries would be devalued to their metal components, or become specialty items. The world's refining capacity which is to 90 million barrels daily of fuel oil currently would be replaced promptly by water engine demand. Too promptly for the companies to profitably restructure their industries or even wash. They would lose that investment to the populace.

The energy market would shift:

Before: GE and friends currently represent roughly 30% of the energy market. They take perhaps $1.5 trillion annually in energy profits, and hold perhaps $15 trillion in infrastructure. They own nuclear and coal power plants, fuel refineries, oil fields and coal deposits developed by contracting agencies. They also own lots of power lines and energy grids. These are all '110%' profitable, making 10% of their infrastructure value each year in money.

After: GE and friends power plants are replaced by all businesses and homes soon switching to water fuel or local water installations, as the technology is cheap enough for $30,000 companies to replace $300 million power plants. GE loses these nuclear power plants and they close. They lose 60-80% of their grids and wires. 30% of homes and industries and businesses buy or are built when new with their own water generators or buy from local plants.

GE could be an active agent in this switch, but selling their power plants and other equipment to generate the capital to do that will reduce their fortune from ~$15 trillion in holdings to only perhaps $6 trillion in liquidity, or will take years and give them $8-12T, during which time a suitable midlevel investment must be made to hold the money/charge for the switch. Immediate introduction would cause $trillions to disappear. [But now we see millions of lives lost.]

What can they do to switch to this technology except foment it? But then fomenting it will crush their fortunes and their market shares and eventually, without massive infrastructure, their fortunes will dissolve back into the populace and they will level off with a fortune of perhaps $500B-$1T after ~15 years, although the utility from the technology will allow that sum to buy them about as much as $15T did before.

They really gain almost nothing from the switch, except the technology advancement rate enhances. If they have secret laboratories or healthcare they would gain truthfully nothing except expanded technological base. If aliens exist and share tech with them they are capos and would gain truly nothing, while losing their social rarity.

So it seems that the technology transmission is a guarded event, and stressful as sex. This probably is a simulation of sex to God or aliens, and maybe a process of sperm selection in other senses.

The GE's interested in keeping their secrecy or cowardly about the revolution purchase their technological competitors and their technologies and make deals with one another not to use or mention this technology. They own media corporations so even the publicized mention of these articles is restricted. They work with governments who have a history of warfare and large militaries. If the enemy got this technology and went to war on us we could quite lose, but for the bomb, which would be a nightmare. So the secrets are again closely guarded and privately developed.

The state wants to keep a watch on this kind of activity and maintain intelligence and control systems. Eventually mankind's population and economic realities become too large for non-freedom technologies and the bubble must be burst. Keeping a lid on populations and these freedom secrets in shortening wars for remaining resource efficiencies such as Iraq, Iran, become less well explained and supported. 9/11 and the war on terror is used as a motivator to keep tabs on humans and to motivate these opportunity wars. They will be unraveled, freedom technologies will escape or be developed or leaked by a big company, the military will break into war or riot when the fake is discovered, the state will crack itself or revolution, poverty and war will break out when the big companies themselves finally fail and become hedged empires and walled cities. 2014, should be over. Nuclear war of these empires is one popular way out. They could be educated instead by companies and the revolution-state.

Chemtrails, knowledge-crapping foods and techniques, supercompetition to focus on the $ not the possibilities.

Barack Obama is the continuation of status quo in the new form. You can see how quickly status quo and the 'backpedal' changing.

Ron Paul would be the exit path out with a dark patch of failed to discuss which is primarily the military, which libertarians fail to address properly. I don't fail to.

Those on the ground [0-$400k] would gain worlds. They have nothing at all to lose from the most rapid dispersion of technology except a global economic collapse from the GE's of the world no longer providing their infrastructure items of electric power and foods.

Intermediating those foods and supplies is a big boon if you can produce it.

#1-3 to be produced soon.