fox files

We’re waiting to see how the Supreme Court will rule regarding what’s happening in Mississippi. If the states suddenly have the ability to decide whether abortion will be legal or not, California is already preparing to be the liberal savior.

Medical tourism is already a booming industry – particularly in countries where medical costs are considerably lower than in the U.S. It allows people to take a vacation and have a medical procedure done. In many instances, these trips are cheap because a person gets to have a specific medical procedure done for a fraction of what it would cost in the U.S. And, the best part is that they don’t have to convince their doctors that they need it because there are fewer medical standards in place in other countries, such as Thailand, Brazil, and elsewhere.

California is thinking about how they can cash in on abortions in a very similar manner. They’ll start up an abortion tourism industry where they can invite women from all over the country to get their abortions in the glitz and glamour of California.

The billboards that are sure to pop up will advertise such things as “Conservatives preventing you from aborting an unwanted fetus? Book your abortion appointment in Sunny California…”

It’s really quite disgusting when you think about it.

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, California is already dreaming about the revenue streams. They’ve already established a 45-part proposal to expand abortion accessibility, which means that this was likely in the works long before Mississippi’s abortion issue made it to the Supreme Court.

The Associated Press tweeted a piece of breaking news to say that the proposal “would include paying for travel, lodging and procedures for people from other states who want to have an abortion.”

Imagine going through all of this just to commit murder. This is no longer about a woman who feels as though she has no other options and runs into a clinic to “fix” the situation. This is about a woman planning a vacation so that she can kill the fetus growing inside of her without feeling any guilt. She can be pampered before and after the procedure so that it is easier to accept the murderous act.

Amy Coney Barrett has been quick to point out that abortion isn’t the only option, especially against the argument of “I can’t afford to raise a child.” That’s what the safe haven laws are for – mothers can carry the child to term and place the baby on the doorstep of any fire station in the nation without any questions being asked.

Still, it’s easier to simply commit murder. And California has been quick to say that they don’t really focus on the “viability” of the fetus. 12 weeks, 20 weeks, 36 weeks…as long as they can make some money off of it, they don’t really care what age the fetus is.

Newsom told ABC News that “we’ll be a sanctuary.” Ahh, well, there’s a big surprise. The state is already a sanctuary to all of the illegal aliens who cross into the country illegally and commit crimes upon entering. Of course they’d want to be a sanctuary to all of the women who think it would be a great idea to simply murder their unborn children rather than focusing on a) birth control or b) carrying the child to term.

This isn’t about the women. This is about profit. And as Prudence Robertson, a spokesperson for the Susan B. Anthony list explained, “Extreme pro-abortion leaders in California are marching in lockstep with the profit-driven abortion lobby, working to convince women that they need access to abortion to succeed.”

The fact of the matter is that many so-called Republicans are really democrats in disguise while NO democrats are EVER Republicans. Another fact is that while many problems are not solved by Republicans, all of the problems are created by democrats. And it’s important to never forget that while Republicans believe dems are just people with bad ideas, democrats believe that Republicans are just bad people.

Period. End of story. Full stop.

Adoption of a Chinese-style social credit score across the West seems more like a matter of “when” rather than “if” at this point. The pandemic has accelerated this tendency, with people in many parts of the United States having become accustomed to presenting their vaccination papers in order to sit down in a restaurant or enter a movie theater. Other countries are further along the curve, with QR-coded cell phone passports required for travel, shopping, work, and public life in general. 

But the effort to aggregate personal data into a usable form of social control is taking place on multiple fronts. Credit cards—ubiquitous, trusted, and pre-linked to essential data sources— are an obvious platform upon which to build the new system. We see it happening all around us, but it’s all being rolled out slowly so as not to frighten the prey. 

Doconomy is a Swedish tech company that uses its proprietary “Åland Index” to allow consumers to track their individual environmental harm based on various lifestyle factors, including travel and consumption. The company partnered with MasterCard to produce the DO card, which “enables the cardholder to track and measure its carbon footprint for each purchase and to compensate for its impact day by day.” As opposed to standard green-branded credit cards, however, which use a few pennies per purchase to buy carbon offsets, or contribute to enviro-oriented non-profits, the DO Black card tallies the carbon footprint of one’s every purchase and cuts you off when you have hit your limit.  

“In other words,” boasts the company, “it’s the first credit card ever to stop you from overspending based on the level of CO2 emissions generated by your consumption.” The card sets a “carbon spending limit” based on Paris Climate Accord targets and issues a “Transaction Denied!” warning when you try to overspend. 

Much like the Paris Accord itself, of course, the limit is arbitrary and voluntary, and doubtlessly can be overridden. The type of well-heeled consumers who would carry the DO card—which is composed of biodegradable Poly Lactic Acid instead of plastic—surely aren’t counting on its credit limit to buy their staples; carbon frugality is a luxury only the rich can enjoy. The DO card doesn’t seem to have caught on in a big way yet, but a hard carbon spending limit tied to personal consumption certainly sounds like something that the Regime would be happy to impose. Look for it soon. 

Credit card companies track debt and payment levels to generate credit scores, which banks and other lenders use to determine how much to charge consumers to borrow money in the form of interest rates. FICO scores—the industry standard—can also be consulted by employers and landlords to determine, as a kind of shorthand, how reliable their potential workers or tenants are. These scores thus already serve as a kind of social credit index, except they are still largely voluntary. No one has to maintain lines of consumer debt in order to build up one’s score; it just makes it harder to finance large purchases if you don’t. 

In our age of racial obsession, the disparate impact of bad FICO scores has attracted the attention of the equity and diversity mob. Blacks and Latinos, it appears, tend to have worse credit, for a variety of reasons, some of which are said to be rooted in racism. In an effort to remedy this problem, advocates aren’t demanding that credit scores be less central to evaluating credit-worthiness; rather, they want an expansion of amount and kind of data that is fed into the algorithms to determine the scores.  

The Biden Administration backs the creation of a Public Credit Registry (PCR) under the aegis of the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to replace the private credit reporting agencies that currently control the market. According to a report from Demos, the leftist policy group with ties to the Democratic Party, “the public credit registry will develop new algorithms for predicting creditworthiness with a goal of minimizing disparate racial impact.” The PCR will include rental history and utility payments, among other data sources, “when these data have been shown to be predictive and to minimize racial disparities.” 

Moving consumer credit reporting onto a federal-run platform sounds worrisome even if you aren’t a hard-core conspiracist, so couching it in the language of minimizing racial disparities is a good way to baffle surveillance concerns. But it’s hard to escape the nefarious implications to privacy that the Public Credit Registry represents. 

Society is so awash in personal data that it must drive planners and experts crazy that so much of it is going to waste. That’s why we discover from the New York Times that “a study analyzing medical records and consumer credit reports for more than 80,000 Medicare beneficiaries showed that seniors who eventually received a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease were significantly more likely to have delinquent credit card payments than those who were demographically similar but never received such diagnoses. They also were more likely to have subprime credit scores.” Who’d have thought that credit scores would be such an important indicator of an unrelated health risk? Let’s start churning through all that data immediately, in the interests of public health, of course. 

None of this proves that we are heading toward a Chinese-style system in the next calendar year. But taken together it certainly indicates that we’re going that way sooner or later.