[Cog]

Howdy Cog ... I was thinking of using a shipping container for storage ... get a decent one and maybe use a pond liner over it for extra protection from moisture ... then cover it over with a lot of earth to insulate and protect the contents from temperature extremes ... then fill it up with the most common stuff ... a forty footer filled would be a lot of barter when things come unglued ... thankfully where I am at here in Kanab UT there is very little problem with the "other tribes" issue ... there is only one tribe out here and it makes life a lot easier ... this is a hard target area ... I think it would take artillery to take this town !

curlyq3

A pole barn with concrete slab would be a whole lot useful to you. Both if the world does not crash and post-crash. Most things you are thinking about storing are not going to be bothered by extremes in temp.

[SeaGypsy]

I don't expect the welfare state to last any more than I expect infinite growth on a finite planet. But this 'radical idea' is only radical to poor countries & America, everywhere else a version of it is normal & has been for decades. Americans have been hoodwinked into multi million dollar salaries for CEO's are cool & something to strive for, while people on minimum have to keep applying for food stamps. There is something wrong with this picture.

I don't work to prove I am good. I like working & I like having more than a welfare check to live on. I don't begrudge either those who can't work or those who don't want to, because I know all they are doing is survival- no holidays, no car, no travel, not much beyond keeping alive. & they are not in my face begging like they are in cities in the USA.

[curlyq3]

Howdy to SeaGypsy and Gasmon ... I believe the surest way to survive a war is to not be in it ! ... I do not necessarily mean a so called "sanctioned conflict" between nation states but any form of violent conflict ... it is very difficult to isolate one's self on a planet with 7 plus billion people ... I am haunted by what I have seen in my mind's eye ... I assure you that I am a sober person and do not use any form of hallucinogenic substances ! ... it is disturbing to think of the forced migrations of millions of people due to the destruction of their local environments ... the east coast of the USA is such a disaster waiting to happen due to the concentration of nuclear power plants ... these facilities are old and falling apart with fuel pools jammed to the maximum ... anyone of them losing their primary heat sink will send millions on the road ... the north eastern area is the worst due to their proximity to each other and the major population centers ... these are doomsday machines ... when the core temperature exceeds it's functional level it can no longer be cooled as is the same for the fuel pools ... when the fuel begins to melt it is going to leave containment ... and even the nuclear profiteers and apologists know that when this stuff is outside of containment it can not be recovered ... forgive me for the long explanation for my rationale for my isolation ... where I am in southern Utah, the closest nuclear facility is west of Phoenix AZ about 30 miles ... it is over 300 miles south of my location ... it is the only nuclear power plant in the world that was not constructed next to a body of water ... it relies on recovered water from the sewage treatment of the surrounding metropolitan area for it's primary heat sink ... the people that control this industry are not wrapped very tight if you need my opinion ... anyway, being in Britain and Australia is good because you have a lot of water around you to slow down the migrants !

Howdy Cog ... I think your right , I just need whatever is the least expensive option for storage ... thanks

curlyq3

[KaiserJeep]

There are far more ideas about how to spend money than there is money to spend.

I don't know if this idea is good or bad. I know we cannot afford to do this, we are already over-committed and the budget is awash in red ink.

The only things a government should be allowed to do is to guarantee the individual human freedoms and rights. That is the sole purpose for which it exists.

Everything else is up to the individual to achieve on their own. Competition works, and Darwin thought well of it.

[GHung]

KJ said; "Competition works..."

For the winners. What do you propose we do with everyone else?

[Outcast_Searcher]

Typical example from the far left, bereft of practicality.

If implemented on a wide scale, if the idea were to get rid of all the overhead of administration and controls to ensure only "the right" people get it -- then EVERYONE could get it.

(First of all, how do you ensure people don't get paid twice or twenty times if you have no controls or checking? So much for the idea of removing ALL the administration or overhead. So SOME administration/oversight is clearly required).

Round numbers, the $30,000 a year figure I saw bandied about, since it's above the $24,000+ poverty rate for a family of four: 50,000,000 family units is $1.5 TRILLION, or 40% of an Obama left wing "all you can spend" US budget. Add to that perhaps 100,000,000 "small" family units of average size 1.x at $20,000 (another cool $ TWO TRILLION) and you are spending roughly the ENTIRE US BUDGET, just on the "free money for doing nothing" program.

Even if my round number figures are off by a bit, it should be obvious to even the most innumerate person that giving everyone who wants one a "slightly controlled to avoid duplicate payments" something for nothing income won't work in the current system -- unless you are willing to:

1). Keep everyone doing the same work they're doing, to keep the economy producing the same stuff, including taxes.

2). Shut down ALL aspects of the rest of the government. (Something which I'm confident 99%+ of the citizens with functioning brains won't go for, once their government services all shut down -- including things like keeping the water, heat, lights, roads, etc. functioning and safe).

Next?

Or do we just pretend like this will "work", even though it never has been shown to work on a large scale, and given that it has to be paid for, the money in the current system simply doesn't exist to pay for it on top of everything ELSE the voters demand?

[Cog]

KJ said; "Competition works..."

For the winners. What do you propose we do with everyone else?

People often confuse the role of government and the role of mommy as somewhat equivalent.

[GHung]

Nice you avoided the question, KJ. Competition, as you prefer, implies winners and losers. Losers generally don't react well. Plenty of historical examples of that, especially in societies where there was increasing competition for a shrinking pie.

[dohboi]

An easy way to accomplish most of the first part is just get rid of all the land-over-lords and the banksters imposing the fraud of mortgages.

For food, I actually think most people should be more involved in providing their own food. Urban gardens, people going out to farms to help out, especially at planing and harvest times...

This is actually not so much a 'worry' rather than a basic and basically enjoyable activity. If we can maintain healthier ecosystem, a number of those so inclined could also hunt and fish for some of their sustenance, again, for many, rather enjoyable activities.

The 'worry' for people living in houses should mostly be about maintaining the house or building. Again, that can be seen as an essentially enjoyable occasional application of skills (skill trading is also possible here and elsewhere).

And, as you might have guessed, I'm with SG and not (mostly) with Paulo--it's the millionaires and billionaires who far outdo anyone else by many orders of magnitude as 'takers.'

Of course, in an ideal world, those freed of excessive 'worry' about food and habitat would have time and energy to turn toward 'higher' pursuits--art, music, philosophy, blogging in PO ... '-)

Unfortunately, other distractions tend to dominate in many cases.

[Outcast_Searcher]

An easy way to accomplish most of the first part is just get rid of all the land-over-lords and the banksters imposing the fraud of mortgages.

Really?

So in your world, how does property work?

1). Is it free? If so, then which "overlord" decides who gets what? You have only changed the overlord if you give any practical answer, including the government. i.e. EPIC FAIL.

2). If it's not free or forced to be arbitrarily cheap, then pray tell, how do ordinary folks AFFORD property without a mortgage? Hint: credit is one of the primary requirements of capitalism and its success.

If only pie in the sky programs like this, which don't take into account little things like facts in the real world would work, wouldn't everything be just peachy? Same as it ever was, including Karl Marx.

[dohboi]

Land redistribution. It happens all the time. Most people who 'own' land stole it or stole the money they 'bought' it with anyway.

Meanwhile, these folks seem to be about to follow in Utrecht's lead:

http://www.thelocal.ch/20160127/swiss-t ... me-for-all

Swiss to vote on guaranteed income for all

[Paulo1]

Fuck you, Doh,

I own land paid for by years of hard work and saving. Nothing stolen and no funds stolen. Anyone takes my land will suffer the consequences. And yes, I am heavily armed.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Land redistribution. It happens all the time. Most people who 'own' land stole it or stole the money they 'bought' it with anyway.

Fabulous. (NOT!!)

So it's fine for the arbitrary redistributionist to steal the land. However, if it is earned by someone who honestly pays for it, then the left wing criminal says the money used is "stolen".

And no wonder such an arbitrary system produces such garbage for an economy in the real world -- zero incentive to produce anything.

Do you figure if you steal things fast enough that people won't be able to figure it out?

I echo Paulo's sentiment, by the way -- I just don't like to use that language on a public forum.

[Cog]

This is the problem with people like dohboi. They see absolutely nothing wrong with the theft of your property if it results is some "good" they wish to achieve. Oh they won't be the ones redistributing your property. That would involve risk to them. They will send the government to do it. If you resist you will be killed and in dohboi's brain rightfully so because you aren't supporting the common good.

[ennui2]

I own land paid for by years of hard work and saving. Nothing stolen and no funds stolen. Anyone takes my land will suffer the consequences. And yes, I am heavily armed.

Rest assured, the zombie horde will one day make you put your money where your mouth is.

[dohboi]

I love you, too, Paulo.

Did you miss the part where I said "most"?

If the government decides to take your land, there's no amount of armaments that are going to stop them in the long run. Fun hobby playing with lethal weapons, though, I'm sure!

[Simon_R]

Forced land distribution, is a recipe for economic success and happiness, just checkout Zimbabwe

if everyone has a guaranteed income, who would be a turkey cock masturbator.

[KaiserJeep]

dohboi, remember my definition of Fascist: Those who would use the powers of government to force others to behave differently than they otherwise would.

Your professed opinions about this topic among others make me nominate you as the most prominent Fascist at PO.com.

Publish your picture, so the other Fascists can salute you:

[Cog]

A perception exists among the more socialistic doomers here, that if we just took everything away from everyone and redistributed it so it would be fair, then we could all spend our days doing poetry, painting, and smoking dope.

Nothing is stopping them from acquiring their own land and setting up whatever communal arrangement they would desire. But apparently that involves too much work and not enough government use of force.