>>4137

I agree with this. My observation is that the dotcom bubble coincided with Y2K. Another manufactured, fear-based crisis that caused the MAJORITY of businesses to update their systems in unison. Think about that. Significant infrastructure expenditures across the Fortune 500 coordinated around a common date.

Not only did this cause spending to be routed to certain "cool" startups to upgrade old legacy based software to new Internet architectures, it also caused synchronicity across companies within each sector making collusion and price fixing easier.

When the bubble burst, everyone blamed the insane multiples assigned to companies with no revenue, but they never tied it to Y2K which was the initial fuel.

>>4112

>Who let it happen? Who caused the Dot Com bubble? Who profited from it (financially)? More significantly, who gained control of information flows as a result? Who planned the takeover of worldwide media?

Just saw this post.

I think we know the "who" – the elite compromised insiders that manipulate mankind for power and personal gain. +++, ++, +, Yale grads, Harvard grads, Wall Street, politicians, CFR, etc.

Y2K was the fuel for Silicon Valley creating disruption and transferring billions/trillions of dollars from established businesses to tech companies.

The 2008 financial meltdown was another liquidity event that allowed "the players" to move the chess pieces around the board. Lehman Brothers was demolished and Jamie Dimon scooped everything up. (((They))) created the subprime mortgage crisis in order to have a liquidity event. Robber barron playbook.