Category archive

Free Market


in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Poor Pratt's Almanack

Think about the percentage of GDP wasted to support parasitic political free riders of all stripes whose income at least partially depends directly or indirectly on the corrupt cronyism-riddled political process that produces absolutely nothing other than wars, economic dependency, elite authority versus free market producer societies, and a multitude of degrees of misery and slavery.

Yep, get elected, be part of the political process, delude yourself with artificial power peer approval, and reap the perks that go with power like hot dogs and beer go with baseball.

Do you think that is not a very thoughtful approach to achieving freedom? and freedom from what? Well, maybe freedom from the need to embrace the rigors of the free market while diluting freedoms for the rest of us?

Now, who is fooling whom? The political process and politicians are explicitly the problem, not the solution, which will come first and foremost from the free market.

Boy Did We Sell The Voters a Bill of Freedom Goods!

The sole redeeming values of the political process are education, planting seeds of freedom, and possibly a mop-up role to dismantle Big Brother, but only after the free market does the heavy lifting. Look to the free market for freedom from political parasites.

Is the LP well on its way to becoming the lesser of three evils third leg of a terrible triopoly? If so, what should we change to get the LP pointed back to the vision and mission of the healthy, growing, and maturing broader Libertarian movement: Freedom, Nothing More, Nothing Less, For All People IN OUR LIFETIMES?

Now, the burning question is: How will Libertarian politicians respond? Stay tuned and take notes before you decide whether to vote NOTA as a way to stop enabling cronyism-prone corruptible politicians.

Giddy About Freedom As We Do About Politics?


D. Pratt Tseramed, July 6, 2020, 402-493-0873


in Activism/Free Market/Information/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack

Link to the Facebook group ‘LP Free Market Caucus’ (LPFMC):

Link to the accompanying Facebook group ‘Free Market Action – Individual Rights’:

Ready to rock and roll in the free market? Welcome! Here’s the plan. Our group will be laser-focused on the three following types of free market projects:

1. Build a better product or service that will provide real benefits to people and improve their lives today or in the future

2. Provide a free market networking service to connect people with projects

3. Collaborate on free market advocacy, education, and outreach projects

Before we spell out the immediate caucus agenda, here are a few comments on our vision, mission, and strategy:

We are not about building an empire. We recognize that our efforts will have political impact, hence our connection to the Libertarian Party as a caucus. Our goal is to support the free market by fostering projects regardless of whether the projects are directly or indirectly associated with our caucus or spun off and totally independent.

We are all self-funded individual volunteers focused on projects that may have political impact, but we leave the politics to those so inclined. Since all projects will be self-funded internally and/or externally, we will have no caucus membership fee.

Our project focus extends to the infrastructure of the caucus. All infrastructure efforts will involve projects. Leadership by example will suffice to keep the caucus running smoothly. If you are looking for a title or someone to tell you what to do, you have come to the wrong place.

Infrastructure project example: Setting up a networking caucus infrastructure service will be a project unto itself and self-funded through internal and/or external fund-raising as necessary. If networking is your forte, volunteer and negotiate with other like-minded volunteers on how to run and accomplish the mission of the networking project.

We encourage the same approach to all projects, internal, external, or independent. However, how projects are run is entirely up to those who have volunteered for the projects.

Now, let’s get down to our immediate agenda. We expect to hold our first project brainstorming session(s) within the next two or three weeks.

We will provide facilitators and moderator for the first iteration of session(s). We anticipate the brainstorming sessions will range from 60 to 90 minutes. Come prepared so we can make effective use of the time. Handout material is not required but may facilitate the process.

We are working on an initial topic list and brainstorming session format. We will have fun learning as we go. Please come with your own topics and brainstorming format suggestions. Most important, come with an idea of what problem or project you personally want to address immediately. Let us know what project is burning a hole in your pocket.

The general session strategy is to brainstorm a list of projects, poll attendees for project priorities. poll attendees on which project they want to work on, provide networking suggestions, and help schedule follow-up project-specific meetings for those who volunteer for specific projects.

The first task is to schedule what days of the week or dates and times work for you for our initial caucus-centered brainstorming sessions. Please reply with your suggestions. We anticipate this will require several sessions each iteration that will lead to several repeating caucus-centered session cycles. This means we will be looking for volunteers for session and project facilitators and moderators.

How does this sound to you?

Please provide your preferred dates and times for the initial caucus-centered project brainstorming sessions.

Let’s do it!


D.Pratt Tseramed, June 26, 2020

Criminal Justice at a Crossroads: Defund The Police or Privatization?

in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics
Criminal Justice at a Crossroads: Defund The Police or Privatization?

For many years the United States has struggled with the dilemma of both efficiently and fairly providing for public safety. We have tried to do so through the failed government program we call the police department. Whether those failures are the result of innate flaws in our government system or evidence of our nation’s long history of state-sponsored racism seem to be a side-show debate the media circus has used to distract us from the truth.  The communities targeted certainly seem disproportionate. They are the poor and the minority, both vulnerable populations without the means to fight back. They’re always a popular goat of our failed tyrannical system. But in the light of tragedies and injustices like that of George Floyd, the real question should be what the solutions are. How can we prevent tragedies like this from happening the future?

There is no doubt that our criminal justice system is in need of dire reforms, but is #defundthepolice the answer? Are there other reforms to be considered, and is any of it enough? Finally, what about the benefits of privatization? Can community-based and free market solutions fill the gap where public law enforcement has failed?

If one is too squeamish for full privatization, a great deal of research has been conducted on the benefits of a blended system, but it does show the potential improvements we could see from something more privatized.

First Thing’s First: Qualified Immunity

George Floyd is certainly not the first public figure to spark protests, popular political movements, and even violent riots across the country. The flaws with our criminal justice system have been evident since the days of Rodney King, and frankly even long before that. It hasn’t really stopped, but it’s hard to say whether it’s gotten worse or we’re just seeing it for the first time because of technology. So with the ability to publicly share such obvious and incriminating evidence, why does it require so much civil unrest and public outrage to ensure any justice in police brutality cases? Much of that can be largely placed on the shoulders of qualified immunity.

All the public safety reforms in the world will mean little as long as the officers who enforce them are immune to accountability on the job. Many “defund the police” efforts have called for safety “community groups” sometimes armed or sometimes not, trained in “de-escalation” and dispute mediation” techniques, but what authority do they have and how will they use it? Let’s not forget that George Zimmerman, killer of Trayvon Martin was not a cop, but such a “community group member”

Qualified immunity for those acting on “behalf of the law” is not only unjust.  It is a danger to our communities, and if unaddressed the current “defund the police efforts” may simply lead to mob rule by a new evil taking place of the old.

Justin Amash’s Tri-Partisan bill would address this issue swiftly, but unfortunately will require immense support since Trump has made it clear he won’t support it.

Is America Ready to Disband the Police?

While hopes look high for the #defundthepolice efforts with the Minneapolis City Council approving unanimously,  the results of this program remain to be seen. First, there are a few pitfalls this movement may not be considering. For instance, have they considered the fact that pension funding for police officers, is a large chunk of the budget and is virtually untouchable? Or what about the fact that in some cases a department may run as much as nearly 1/3 of its budget on collected fines on minor public violations? Unless they also decriminalize victimless offenses, officers may turn to more aggressive techniques that result in more police violence and harassment of citizens to cover the difference. They will also need to address the existence of victimless crimes to rid their communities of  dangerous, black market elements that will still exist even if the the police aren’t confronting them.

Furthermore, is the general American public ready to support such a measure? Initial polling would seem to indicate otherwise with only 16% of the American public in support of “Defund the Police” efforts. On the other hand earlier surveys have shown 75% of Americans do support an overhaul of our evidently broken criminal justice system. Is there a logical compromise accompanied by sensible reforms that mainstream American can agree too?

Defunding Through Privatization

 One of the stated goals of #defundthepolice is to transfer police funding to other “more beneficial” public initiatives, as well as to re-prioritize the efforts of police in focusing on serious and violent crimes. Police privatization may be the best way to do just that. We’ve already discussed some of the pitfalls above, and why these initiatives might not go as planned. But there’s more…

First let’s consider that employees working for private security companies on average make about 47% less than unionized public police officers. Let’s also consider that private police companies working with limited capital will be forced to manage their priorities. According to Police Chief Magazine, privatization may actually soon be coming to you. Why? Mostly because of budget constraints. At least one county saved over $1 million switching to a privatized system.

Not only are budgets becoming a problem but recruitment has also been down for years. This trend may not be the end of the world according to the Marshall Project whose research showed that violent crime at the same time has been down. Correlation is not causation, but this does show that numbers don’t tell the whole story. If departments are forced to do so, they may better manage their resources. ‘

Private companies exist to do just that.  

What About Government Protections For Citizens? ‘

One of the most common fears surrounding privatization of the police is that it would lead to a rampant violation of citizens rights. The fear is that private security officers would not be subject to the same restrictions a publicly funded police force would. This can be true with security officers patrolling private property, for example, a mall security guard may search a suspected shoplifted without consent or probable cause. However, they cannot make an arrest.

Despite this pitfall, this would not be the case for a privatized municipal police force due to a groundbreaking civil rights case known as Marsh v. Alabama. The ruling indicated that officers performing duties of law enforcement in a community that was “open to the public” were subject to the same standards and regulations as public police officers. In other words if they were playing the function of law enforcement in a public space, they were just as bound as police officers to respect our constitutional rights. This and other case law would lead to the doctrine of “State Action” since the officers were seen as “State Actors” or acting on behalf of the government. 

A Police Force that Serves the Community

One of the greatest benefits of a privatized police force essentially boils down to motivation. Private sector security companies are motivated by the mission of creating an environment of public safety and order for their clients. Law enforcement agencies are designed simply to enforce existing laws and statutes. Their funding is either guaranteed through taxation and they thus have no motivation to earn it, or it’s otherwise derived through the harassment of its citizenry.

Private companies and organizations will also not only be more likely to face public scrutiny and legal troubles if they perform poorly, but often their members are motivated by more philanthropic ventures. Consider the example of Dale Brown, the owner and founder of the Detroit Threat Management Center.

His organization began as he says with him “A rifle, and a dog” and his goal was to make his community safe in the face of frequent robberies and home invasion where he worked in his Detroit community. His low-cost body guard program has been provided for free to society’s most vulnerable members, including domestic violence victims. He is proud to say that in 20 years of his program none of his officers or clients have ever been injured on the job, and officers regularly use nonviolent and de-escalation approaches in lieu of deadly force.

His service has resulted in companies worth millions of dollars in crime-ridden neighborhoods going from red to black in the first time in years, as well as renewing and revitalizing Detroit communities the police had given up on.

Dale Brown has often said the key to his success has been motivation and putting the citizen first.

“The cornerstone for protection is love, not violence, not guns, not laws, but love. You cannot and will not truly protect anything that you don’t love.”

Whatever your opinions on law enforcement and criminal justice reform, it’s hard to argue with that. Perhaps men in the private sector like Dale Brown should be more often listened to.

Dave Beaver, June 19, 2020


in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack

Budding politicians and political junkies, here is a pithy commentary, with minor wordsmithing for clarity, excerpted from a lively ‘LP 2020 Delegates – Uncensored, Unmoderated‘ Facebook page discussion with D. Frank Robinson of Oklahoma, a ground-floor Libertarian who helped David Nolan with the documentation of our original Libertarian Party Statement of Principles (SoP):

David Pratt Demarest to D Frank Robinson :

You too noticed that politics “does tend [to] employ every logical fallacy known”. Frank, that is the understatement of the twenty first century!

My approach, unforgivable as it may be, is to figure out why what you say is true using what von Mises called Praxeology. Mises Praxeology is the science of human action and decision making and the broader definition of Economics beyond mere finance. In other words, studying not just what people do but also why they choose to do it, their motivation for choosing a particular course of action.

For example, why do people choose to be Libertarians when it would be easier to go with the flow? Why do people gravitate toward politics instead of just building better mouse traps or other products and services that actually benefit people?

I hear people going on endlessly about the best strategy to get elected, providing lip-service but no action plan to achieve freedom, and never, never mentioning the free market, the real source of benefits and our Libertarian home turf. Consequently, I am understandably skeptical of the motives of many if not most politicians, including many Libertarian politicians.

Unfortunately, despite lip-service to freedom, the political motivations I see are pretty ugly in terms of Libertarian thought. To be fair and give credit where credit is due, a comparatively disproportionate number of Libertarians politicians truly are in it to further freedom. And, of course, there are many political gradients.




Those folks do the freedom cause a disservice and are part of the problem, not the solution. We know they dominate the duopoly. The question is how dominant they are in the LP.

In my opinion, whether or not they include the free market in their platform, and come with action plans to solve problems leveraging the benefits of the free market, tells me what I need to know about the sincerity of their freedom agenda, as opposed politics as usual for personal aggrandizement. Another tell-tale sign is whether they stoop to the level of using political correctness, i.e., lying to achieve a political purpose like getting elected.

My conclusions are not flattering to most politicians. Unfortunately, that includes many Libertarian politicians. When you take off the political ‘arrested paradigm’ blinders, it is pretty easy to spot the “I wanna get elected” gleam in their eyes, disingenuous political correctness, and insincere freedom advocacy that totally ignores the free market.


D. Pratt Tseramed, June 13, 2020, 402-493-0873


in Activism/Free Market/Information/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack

Quote from my post in ‘LNC – Business Discuss’ [with minor wordsmithing for clarity] in response to comments by Marc Montoni (LPRC 3rd iteration Co-founder ) and others regarding the chart showing LP committee staffing and appointment details/responsibilities posted by Nicholas Sarwark, LP Chair.

Three points:

1. Chair model:

Regardless of the strengths or shortcomings of strong or weak chair models, both models exist in an elective top-down political structure with all its democratic blessings and cronyism-prone faults. Hmmm. Top-down institutional authoritarian structure has not worked well for our tyranny of the majority government in the long run. Perhaps we need to look beyond the chair model and examine the underlying structure to determine faults and solutions.

2. Stepping back from emotions:

Many of us had the unfortunate opportunity to watch all of the LNC meetings, practice sessions, and the virtual convention. I believe the LNC meetings and the virtual convention were recorded. Personally, I am certainly glad that the more vocal LNC members and the rampaging, er, wise and professional majority of delegates stepped back from their emotions and made well considered thoughtful decisions (facetiously speaking).

Obviously, observations about who exhibited emotional behavior are subjective. However, my stomach is not up to watching the embarrassing replays. Once was enough. The evidence I saw was pretty clear and reminiscent of the stripper disruption during the 2016 LP national convention in Orlando. The same evidence was witnessed by many if not most of the delegates. They may want to watch the recordings again to refresh their memories.

3. Role of emotions:

Emotions are a critical part of our makeup. Emotions, appropriately used, are an effective early warning system to alert the brain about incoming information that may require engaging the brain and our self-aware rational capacity to perform objective analysis and design and implement solutions to address, mitigate, or build on the objective conclusions. Despite occasional emergency snap decisions that can be prepared for in advance, substituting emotions for the rational brain process rarely works well.

Emotions also play a critical feedback role to celebrate successes of our rational brain processes and actions. Unfortunately, ConventionGate provides little opportunity for celebration but presents ample opportunities to learn from mistakes. We shall see on the latter. The future of the LP may depend on it.


Personally, I think the chair model and bylaws/RONR debates are the least of our problems. Obviously, Covid-19 was a significant contributor to our ConventionGate debacle. The LP had and may still have an opportunity to lead by example in comparison to our duopoly political neighbors during the Covid-19 pandemic.

We are stuck with our top-down elective structure for the time being. Are we capable of rising above our structural faults? ConventionGate was not a good start. How will we conclude this ugly LP chapter? Time will tell.

My personal emotional and objective reactions to ConventionGate:

My, how politics brings out the best in us. Well, that’s not very honest, is it? Let me rephrase. My, how top-down emotionally driven politics brings out the worst in us [insert “upchuck”].

My objective and emotional response concerns include how potential LP candidates and members will react to this sorry spectacle.

Of even more concern to me is the reaction of existing members. Some may react by excluding or expelling various factions they disagree with using a skewed non-hybrid second sitting in a fit of un-Libertarian-like opportunism or spite. Others may give up the ghost of liberty in this current snapshot of the LP and move on to more freedom friendly homes focused on our free market home turf.

My gosh, how did the words “Liberty”, “Freedom”, and “Free Market” creep into this political discussion?


D. Pratt Tseramed, June 11, 2020, 402-493-0873

Jury Nullification First Localization Secession-lite Baby Step To Undermine Big Brother’s Achilles Heel – Theft of Taxation?

in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Jury Nullification First Localization Secession-lite Baby Step To Undermine Big Brother's Achilles Heel - Theft of Taxation?

The defense attorney in the following 3-minute enlightening video explains that even if a defendant is ‘guilty’ of violating the law as defined by the court, a juror can find the defendant not guilty because the juror believes that the law is unfair and therefore not legitimate.

“Jurors in most US states will never hear about their nullification powers in the courtroom”. Why is that? And why is this important to Libertarians?

Jury nullification is a secession-lite indirect localization baby step on the path to undermining the theft of taxation.

There is nothing like the threat of secession that would undermine their taxation revenue source to get the attention of Big Brother. Their racket is all about power and the revenue it takes to support their power system.

If you pull the taxation revenue leg out from under them, their extortion racket would collapse like a house of cards.

We must attempt to use the political process to undermine the cult of the omnipotent state even though it will be less effective that two other strategies.

To be realistic, the political process is the problem, not the solution. A political solution on its own merits may be a long time coming.

A more effective strategy is entrepreneurs out-competing government social service monopolies and returning them to the free market where they belong. Occupational licensing reform will help jump start the entrepreneur out-competition strategy.

In spite of the significant merits of the entrepreneur strategy, which we must attempt, it too may take longer than we have to save our economy and way of life.

Undermining taxation with the threat of secession shows considerable promise to speed up the process. The time is ripe to start the taxation undermining process with baby steps like jury/regulation nullification.

Strategies in priority order:

1. Undermine taxation starting with secession-lite baby steps like local jury/regulation nullification and peaceful civil disobedience leading up to the ultimate threat of secession

2. Entrepreneurs out-compete government social service monopolies and return them to the free market

3. Build the Libertarian farm team from the bottom up to keep the pressure on authorities and distract them from entrepreneur social service competition initiatives and efforts to undermine taxation with nullification and the ultimate threat of secession

It will take all three strategies in the priority order indicated above to overcome the legal or illegal obstacles created by institutional authoritarians. They will defend their taxation revenue and social service monopolies power base to the death, namely your death.

The above three prioritized steps will insure a peaceful transition from NON-COMPETITIVE cronyism-riddled tyranny of the majority to COMPETITIVE voluntary governance.


D. Pratt Tseramed – May 7, 2020
Home Office: 402-493-0873
Mobile Backup: 402-981-6469

$128 Million U.S. Celebrity Fundraiser for World Health Organization (W.H.O.) Headed By Communist Tedros Adhanom WHO (Pun Intended) Is In Bed With Chinese Communists

in Activism/Free Market/Information/Media/News/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Do you still admire and trust U.S. Celebrities after $128 million fundraiser for World Health Organization (W.H.O.) in bed with Chinese Communists?

Are you shocked by $128 million celebrity fundraiser for World Health Organization (W.H.O.) openly in bed with Chinese Communists while Covid-19 deaths continue to mount as a result of W.H.O. and Chinese Communist lack of transparency and disinformation?

If you are considering using economic and social ostracism to counter advocacy of Chinese Communist agenda by celebrities and other WHO apologists like Bill Gates and Dr. Fauci, see some of the contact names below.

Quote from Axios website:

“The star-studded Lady Gaga-curated fundraising event “One World: Together at Home” raised $127.9 million for the COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund for WHO and $72.8 million for local and regional responders, organizer Global Citizen said in a statement early Sunday.

Saturday’s online event honoring and celebrating those on the front lines of the fight against the novel coronavirus was broadcast worldwide and billed as the biggest concert since the 1985’s Live Aid, watched by 1.9 billion people.

Former first ladies Laura Bush and Michelle Obama were among more than 70 artists and celebrities to take part from their homes.

The event was broadcast live on TV from 8 p.m. ET and most leading streaming services, including YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Twitch, Twitter, Apple and Amazon Prime Video.

Other big names included Taylor Swift, Elton John, Lizzo, Billie Eilish, Celine Dion and The Rolling Stones. Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon were hosting the virtual event.”

Google Search:

“Global Citizen is a movement of engaged citizens who are using their collective voice to end extreme poverty by 2030. Through our mix of content and events, grassroots organizing, and our action platform, we are building a movement to end poverty.”

My question: Is the Global Citizen agenda to end poverty or make poverty much worse via smoke and mirrors advocacy for the W.H.O. and Chinese Communist agenda?

This event raised $128 million for WHO’s Chinese Communist advocacy and $73 for “local and regional responders”.

I leave it to your judgement as to what is really going on and the obvious threat to our economy, principles, and freedoms.


D. Pratt Tseramed, April 20, 2020

What Do You Think Is The Primary Purpose Of The Libertarian Party And Movement?

in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
What do you think is the primary purpose of the Libertarian Party and movement?

In the midst of the challenging Covid-19 pandemic on top of a hectic presidential election season, have you stopped to smell the roses?

On the other hand, have you stepped back recently to reflect on the purpose of the Libertarian Party and movement?

This post started with a Facebook discussion initiated by Tom Arnold, our ‘Libertarian Santa Claus’ with a magnificent white beard that I am trying to emulate during our extended quarantine.

Tom’s post struck a chord and prompted a number of thoughtful responses. Rob Stratton’s contribution caught my attention. Rob suggested that the primary purpose of the LP is education.

Rob’s education purpose suggestion was particularly timely in tandem with tonight’s LPTV town hall topic of homeschooling during the pandemic.

LNC Chair Nicholas J. Sarwark’s guests were Lauren Daugherty, former LNC Interim Executive Director, and Kerry McDonald, Cato alternative education adjunct scholar.


Click the following link to watch a replay of tonight’s stimulating LPTV town hall on homeschooling challenges during the Covid-19 pandemic.

I agree with Rob Stratton’s suggestion that education is the primary purpose of the Libertarian Party and movement, but with the following caveats.

Education can take many forms, including classroom, on the job training, self-education, online, homeschooling, working on collaborative projects, school of hard knocks, and brainstorming like we are doing right now.

Disregarding the topic at hand for a moment, step back and think about your favorite form(s) of learning. What comes to mind?

For many Libertarians, the education tool of choice is leading by example and making and keeping commitments that reflect our principles as they tackle ambitious projects like voluntary free market governance and steadily moving the needle toward freedom.

We are all in this together. We can help each other achieve our personal and shared Libertarian goals by offering our personal precise definition of the purpose of the Libertarian Party.

Don’t be bashful. Take the plunge and enlighten us with your suggestions on the purpose of the Libertarian Party and movement. All of us, both party members and movement activists, will benefit from your thoughtful suggestions.


D. Pratt Tseramed, April 17, 2020

Trump Cancels U.S. Funding For WHO – Gates Says Defunding WHO “Is Crazy” – WHO In Bed With Chinese Communists

in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Who do you trust, Trump or WHO, Bill Gates, Dr. Fauci, and Tedros Adhanom on Trump's decision to remove U.S. funding for WHO?

World Health Organization (WHO) calls for extended world economy lockdown except for China.

WHO infers by omission and commission that China has handled the pandemic marvelously and is safe to unleash their economy before the rest of the world.

Is WHO believable, or, more precisely, are the Chinese Communists believable?

Trump cites WHO pandemic mismanagement and cuts U.S. financial support for WHO.

Bill Gates actively supports WHO and says that that Trump’s action “is crazy”.

Who do you believe, Trump or WHO and Gates?

Do you think WHO is in bed with the Chinese Communists? Do you think the evidence is conclusive? Can you tell us why? What would you do in Trump’s shoes?


Update after reviewing the following video:

While this video is clearly more emotional than objective, some basic facts emerge.

1. Quote from Wikipedia:

“Tedros Adhanom is an Ethiopian microbiologist and internationally recognized malaria researcher, who has served since 2017 as Director-General of the World Health Organization.

Tedros is the first non-physician and first African in the role.

He has held two high-level positions in the government of Ethiopia: Minister of Health from 2005 to 2012 and Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2012 to 2016.”

2. Tedros Adhanom was a card-carrying high-ranking member of the Communist Party of Ethiopia.

The U.S. has designated that organization as a terrorist organization.

During his term as head of the Ethiopian health organization, that organization was accused of misrepresenting epidemics and near-genocidal mishandling of famines among minorities.

3. Tedros Adhanom, as a card-carrying Communist, is the current Director General of WHO.

As Director General of WHO, Adhanom has been complicit in parroting the Chinese Communist line with highly dubious statistics on severity.

WHO delayed reporting the Chinese outbreak for 6 critical days.

WHO praised the Chinese handling of the pandemic.

WHO representative caught on national TV refusing to acknowledge existence of Taiwan.

WHO recommends that rest of the world economies remain in extended lockdown, very possibly intended to allow China to get a head start on recovery.

4. Bill Gates says that Trump’s defunding of WHO “is crazy”.

Bill Gates is pushing a vaccine development and vaccine tracking system.

We shall see if that program recommends mandatory vaccinations or relies on the tracking system to ensure compliance in order to get jobs, travel, and other privacy concerns.

5. Dr. Fauci praises Communist Director General of WHO Tedros Adhanom on national TV for the “wonderful work” he is doing with WHO.

Dr. Fauci, in the same breath, refuses to answer reporter questions about the connection between Communist Tedros Adhanon and the Chinese Communists.

I am dubious about most conspiracy theories. However, there are several moving parts in this story that, at a minimum, smell like some level of collusion.

The verifiable facts in this story, at a minimum, destroy the credibility of WHO and bring into question the moral credibility of Bill Gates and Dr. Fauci.

Going beyond U.S. government mismanagement of the pandemic and loss of credibility due to disinformation, and given the facts and inferences provided in the video, what conclusions do you come to about the advisability of trusting any of the leaders in this chaotic debacle, including Trump, World Health Organization, Communist WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom, Chinese Communist officials, Bill Gates, and Dr. Fauci?


D. Pratt Tseramed, April 16, 2020

Is Dr. Fauci Right? Vaccine Panacea For Covid-19 Or Just Another Smoke And Mirrors Big Bucks Boondoggle For Big Pharma And Big Brother?

in Activism/Free Market/Opinion/Politics/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Vaccine Panacea For Covid-19 Or Big Pharma and Big Brother Boondoggle?

Will Covid-19 Coronavirus vaccines be any better than flu vaccines with their 10-20% efficacy and high death rates?

Why are there no vaccines for other Corona viruses like the common cold?

Vulnerable people die from Corona common cold-induced pneumonia all the time. Not enough bucks for Big Pharma to take the risk in light of flu vaccine death rate failures?

Who is Dr. Fauci fooling? Will Covid-19 vaccines be any better than flu vaccines or will the big beneficiary be Big Pharma?

You can bet there is some high-level big bucks skulduggery going on within the FDA and CDC as Big Pharma players, lobbyists, and bureaucrats with approval authority go for the spoils with little regard for protecting our health.

What if a Covid-19 vaccine is not the panacea? Perhaps a wiser strategy would focus on TREATMENT and PREVENTATIVE health care.


Health care professionals will be heavily involved in developing treatments and thus will be an effective check and balance on government and Big Pharma in treatment research.

Preventive medicine is estimated at only 7% of very expensive ACA Obamacare insurance-based ALLOPATHIC health care.

Preventative medicine is estimated at 70% of cash-basis health care with better outcomes at a fraction of the cost.

Who would you rather have calling the shots on treatment development:

1. Health care professionals?

2. Big Pharma?

3. Big Brother?

Let’s say you are aware of a possible or likely pandemic frequency uptick in the future. You realize that you will have to take charge of your health, particularly if you are vulnerable with preventable underlying conditions.

What preventive health care choices will you have and which will you choose that will allow you to take charge of your health instead of relying on government, with all its corruption, cronyism, and health care mismanagement and disinformation, to cover for you on managing your health?

1. Cash-basis health care with 70% preventive medicine with better outcomes at a fraction of the cost?

2. ACA Obamacare insurance-based allopathic health care with only 7% preventive medicine at outrageous economy and budget-busting expense?

Doesn’t sound like rocket science to me. How about you?


D. Pratt Tseramed, April 13, 2020

Go to Top