No, it was written by Ida Auken, a Danish Social Democrat MP. It seems to be her own projection of a future data-driven cybertopia, and may or may not be desirable. Some of it seems to be exaggeration or reduction to absurdity; no policy I’ve ever seen would allow other people to hold meetings in your living room when you weren’t using it.
Maybe in a distant-future perfect Culture-like post-scarcity AI-topia then everybody will just live wherever they want to, as if the world was one big hotel with robot servants; but that certainly won’t happen by 2030.
Now that we have seen what “research” the right did with that “quote” I have to mention that just a simple search shows what Reuters found then about that missatributed quote:
A video repeating misinformation about the World Economic Forum (WEF) has been shared widely on Facebook.
The three-minute clip, which has 862 likes and 1,100 shares at the time of writing, is captioned “Let’s talk about the World Economic Forum’s stated goals for 2030” with the title: “How we can stop them from stealing everything from us” (here).
The WEF does not have a ‘stated goal’ to remove everyone’s private property by 2030. As addressed in previous Reuters fact checks, these claims likely originated from a WEF social media video from 2016 that stated eight predictions about the world in 2030, including: “You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy. What you want you’ll rent, and it’ll be delivered by drone.” (here)
Danish politician Ida Auken, who wrote the prediction in question (here), said it was not a “utopia or dream of the future” but “a scenario showing where we could be heading - for better and for worse.”
VERDICT
False. The World Economic Forum does not have a stated goal to have people ‘own nothing and be happy’ by 2030. Its Agenda 2030 framework outlines an aim to ensure all people have access to ownership and control over land and other forms of property.
It’s my understanding (no cite, sorry) that this was written for a WEF conference and was intended to be a start to the conversation, presented in something other than mind-numbing bullet points.
Did you read my explanation of the phrase? I agreed it’s not some call to dictatorship, but a description of trends like renting products and buying services instead of buying goods themselves. Basically the software as a service model applied to everything.
There are lots of dumb takes on that phrase. Mine isn’t one of them. I know exactly how it is used and meant. It was part of ‘The Great Reset’ set of ideas, which also includied things like a heavy emphasis on ‘stakeholder’ capitalism, ESG investing to push the flow of capital to the ‘right’ things, etc.
Allowing capitalism to operate so long as it does the things the leaders want is not socialism. It’s closer to fascism. Or techno-authoritarianism in the Chinese model, which is also closer to fascism than socialism.
But once again, as I said early in this thread, the WEF is a strange amalgam of planning organization and TED-style idea factory. It’s also a grift. Anyone who can pony up $80,000 can give a talk, and many do.
But the mix of crazy talks and serious panels opens the door to a lot of confusion about what the WEF is really about. For example, a serious panel on Covid vaccines is followed by a talk about how we could embed chips in people with syringes to track their carbon consumption, so naturally the covid vaccine is putting chips in people, right?
A video shared over 27,100 times on Facebook implies that the COVID-19 vaccine will contain a tracking microchip that will be injected in the individuals that receive the COVID-19 vaccine once it is ready. This is false.
The 3:49-minute video visible here (archived version archive.vn/CNhct ) is a compilation of out of context or manipulated footage, that includes news reports and commentary from Bill and Melinda Gates and Jack Ma that have been selectively combined.
I think what this shows is that one should not trust what the unhinged right wing sources of “information” are peddling.
It’s been well established now that Klaus Schwab himself said no such thing at any time. There is no such quote.
In fact, the words came from an article by a different person, who very clearly indicated that these were not WEF policy, and were in fact said in order to create a dialog. In other words - is this the world we want to see in the future, with software companies renting their product, and private homes bought and taken over by corporations?
However, the usual right-wing media took these words and lied about them, twisting them to make it seem like this was actually WEF policy. Then the credulous and those with strong pre-conceived notions were suckered into believing this false narrative that was being peddled.
Now, a person who was suckered in by this false narrative peddled by assholes might feel remorse, and admit they were wrong, and maybe even pledge to do a better job in future by not automatically believing these asshole sources. We live in hope.
ArriveCAN was certainly a failure, at least from a financial standpoint.
I see plenty of documentation for Canada participating in a WEF-proposed blockchain (!!!) system called KTDI (Known traveler digital identity) starting in 2018. But the link between ArriveCAN and KTDI is not entirely clear, most of the proof seems to be on sites that claim that the WEF wants access to your medical records, etc.
This is the real answer. Take a look at the history of social development, and basically every positive change has been opposed by people saying, “We can’t do THAT! That’s SOCIALISM!!!” It’s the go-to bugbear for people who don’t want something, but can’t articulate why they don’t want it in a manner that doesn’t make them sound stupid, racist or greedy.
The claim wasn’t ‘specific’, it was an example of a situation. I explained that in the pit thread. The general concept is that they mix speculative panels with serious ones, and it gives their enemies the ability to blend them together into crazy-sounding proposals.
If you want a cite for any panel offering up ideas for things like embedded chips, drugs with chips, global digital currencies and other far-out subjects, I’ll provide one. That’s all it takes to prove my claim that they do both, and that their enemies conflate them. Because you already know people do that. I’m not even aure what a cite is supposed to prove, other than that the WEF hosts such talks and panels.
If I understand you are claiming the world economic forum wants to end private ownership of housing and people will have to rent the house and car in the future? How are they going to do this and why? How will this help them and why?
That the World Economic Forum hosts a talk or a panel offering a view or opinion or whatever does not demonstrate that the World Economic Forum supports such views or opinions. To offer an example closer to home, the SDMB hosts threads or topics that offer views or opinions. Does the SDMB support them? All of them? Even the contradictory ones?
I never said anything like that! I explicitly said that the “you will own nothing, have no privacy and like it” is a statement about current trends and where they are going, and the belief that more and more things are heading for a service/rental model rather than outright purchase. The WEF seems to think this is a good thing, but they aren’t planning it, or pushing it on anyone. It’s not a WEF ‘plan’, it’s one of many subjects that people write about and publish on the WEF blog, or a presenter pays to give a talk about.
My point is that it can be hard to tell the difference, because some WEF panels DO result in policy proposals that are taken quite seriously, while others are pure speculation and almost science fiction, It can be hard to tell them apart, especially when presented as carefully culled clips by opponents.
None of these statements should be controversial on this board.