MONEY TO BANKERS
I know what is going to
happen here. As soon as the slightest whiff of the grape is shot
over the multitudes heads, as soon as the economy is unmistakably
imploding, readership here will grow. And they will all want to know
the same thing. How do we quickly prepare. And then I'll point them
to my early book on the $500 Survivalist ( which would be more along
the lines of $750-$1,000 now but the concept stays the same ) and
then I'll have lost all the gains I had in readers. Because people
are pussies.
*
People want Rawlesian
Prepping, how to use the credit card to “not only survive but
THRIVE” ( the stupidest crapping motto I've ever heard in my entire
life, to eclipse modern SJW's “diversity hires can build bridges
and defend the nation”. We have already passed the point of
thriving, dumb ass, as our carbon fuels supplies contract. It is
ONLY about surviving, if you are lucky, and IF you pull your head out
of your ass. The only way you thrive in an apocalypse is to do so
over a pile of dead bodies ).
*
You cannot take Oil Age
middle class luxuries with you into the collapse. I mean, you can,
but that is only because my definition of luxuries is different than
yours. To you, you must have a pimping SUV ride, central heat and
air, designer military uniforms and machine guns at the turrets of
your concrete castle atop a mountain. To me, luxuries are machine
sown and harvested grains and enough ammunition to last you past your
enemies stockpile so it isn't you facing a smokeless powder rifle
with a spear. Even a rimfire will out distance most arrows ( except
from specialty troops ).
*
Cars are even now a
luxury. To me, they have been my whole life ( when I first started
driving, motorcycles were still an extreme low cost option for
transportation. This upset everyone collecting taxes, so they filled
the roads with illegals driving cars. Their licenses were obtained
from Cracker Jack boxes sold in Tijuana. It was not safe to drive on
two wheels around them ). You grew up thinking a car was a
necessity. Which meant that for your entire life you needed to earn
at least twenty percent more. Which enriched others. You are
mistaken.
*
Even survivalists-and
by survivalist I mean “end of civilization” dudes, not pussy pony
preppers only concerned with hurricanes, even if I do use the terms
interchangeably- cannot distinguish between needs and luxuries. Let
me try to make this clear. A NEED is something that keeps you alive
and makes you a functioning adult in a tribe. You may not NEED a
wife, but spawning is considered kind of normal for the species to
survive, and hence could be construed as a need rather than a want.
On the other hand, if you won't get married unless they look like Bo
Derek, then you are seeking a luxury.
*
You NEED a firearm to
reasonably defend yourself ( unless you are a really well practiced
Stone Age ninja ), but you don't NEED a fancy plastic semi-auto
battle rifle. Being able to use it as needed ( the will ), and being
reasonably skilled are more important than what type it is. The only
way I'd feel I was armed better than a convicted murderer with a
knife was if I had several magazines for my poodle shooter, AND I
could see him coming from a hundred yards away, AND I had a back-up
shooter. His willingness, experience and ruthlessness trumped my
equipment, unless I cheated.
*
Now, don't get me
wrong. There is nothing wrong with luxuries. As long as they aren't
all you have ( unless you have the means to comfortable acquire them
in quantity ) and as long as you understand that they are nice but
not necessary. As long as you have practice with discomfort, luxury
is okay. I will just add that this comes with a caveat. Many
triumphing armies now ruling then softer civilizations have found
themselves defeated after they themselves tasted too much luxury and
lost their hard edge.
*
Americans have very
little experience with hardship. Even those of us who have, if we
remain OF this civilization rather than WITHIN ( in other words,
requiring its benefits rather than realizing they are temporary ),
are still too soft and gooey. We constantly confuse need with want,
necessities with luxuries. We MUST have cars only because we thought
we needed suburban homes and well paying jobs. It never occurs to
any of us to ditch all three. Yes, that is a blanket statement and
yes, I understand there are many gray areas. I'm making a
generalization.
*
The ONLY reason any of
this prepping crap is difficult is because we think we need luxuries
to survive. When in fact there are very few necessities that they
need, and they are not at all beyond the budget of anyone. If you'll
recall not too long ago I did an article on a bare bones prepping
plan that was, basically, a homeless guy on Food Stamps stocking
flour in salvaged two liter soda bottles arming himself with spears
made from thrift store kitchen knives. I received a lot of hate over
that one.
*
Even my Frugal
Survivalists have a bare minimum of luxuries they need to survive,
and that bar was way above bare ass savagery. Hell, that bar is
ABOVE world war surplus guns ( even though you can spend all day butt
stroking enemy troops with them, then amuse yourself hitting them
with a hammer using them as a set of drums for after combat
entertainment, and they still work the next day. Today's plastic
Mattel Guns do not have that kind of robustness ). Now, if you have
the means to stockpile lots of plastic guns, because there will be
replacement issues, and butt ton loads of ammunition, be my guest.
But is it REALLY a “need”?
*
Let me explain the
fundamental difference between the two rifles ( because we've already
paid for this viewing platform, extra pixels are essentially free-and
I love to hear myself talk ). One was overbuilt. WAY overbuilt.
The ammunition had far more range than practical and more knock down
power than was needed, and more robustness than needed to survive the
abuses of conscripted peasants. That was how bridges and cars and
guns were built back then. Even by empires in decline. Then,
someone got it into their head that overbuilt was over bought.
*
The bean counters took
over. The German last ditch desperation to survive as the Soviets
were at the gates of Berlin showed up in stamped receivers and
plastic stocks and intermediate rounds. And they were fine, for what
they were. Bare minimum Better Than Nothing. All robustness was
removed. It was cheaper to build a disposable gun, and two of its replacement parts kits, than one heavy duty built like a tank gun.
Essentially what it boils down to is eliminating redundancy.
*
The designers and
manufactures took precedence over the end user. I grant you that
yes, the end user needs to meet the needs of the logistics that are
available. It is all a balancing act. But where it ultimately ended
up was that the end user got shafted. And what is worse is that the
end user ended up celebrating poor features as benefits! You have AR
fanboys celebrating its light weight as if that virtue is all that
matters. Yet, how was that achieved? By using cheaper to use
material that was not as robust. I'm not discounted the AR-they are
very accurate when used with a proper barrel and ammunition. They
can double as a decent submachinegun.
*
I'm merely stating that
to get that, what was sacrificed was field longevity and robustness.
One cannot bayonet or buttstroke without ruining the gun. No, I
don't want to be that close, and neither do I want to run out of
ammunition. But those things seem to happen regularly out in the
field, don't they? To get to the point you don't have to endanger
the gun, you have to carry a punishing amount of weight in
ammunition. It isn't a problem to eliminate using the gun as a
bludgeon, but that is merely indicative of the guns design faults.
*
It was made to be made
cheaply, or at least in a decentralized manner. Which isn't wrong.
The Soviets went TOO centralized, which is a vulnerability. To get
their cheaply built gun to be more robust, they had to make them in
giant factories. The M-16 doesn't have that vulnerability, but
robustness was sacrificed. Everything is a trade-off. It isn't a
bad thing to have mom and pops churning out militia rifles so that
tens of millions of folks can have a basic issue rifle. The
popularity of the AR means there are enough guns in enough hands that
the Second Amendment has a better set of sharp teeth than ever
before.
*
As much as it pains me,
the AR might actually win the coming civil war, for all its warts.
All those cheap VHS machines ( although inferior to the BetaMax by
most metrics ) changed the entire movie business. That itself was a
war in one sense. Cheap and everywhere is a dynamic all its own.
Hell, I even wonder if the AR has surpassed the AK in raw numbers.
Not the M-16. Only about ten million of those were ever produced,
from Vietnam to today ( a lot less tip o the spear guys now in the
volunteer army ). But the AR's? It seems a lot of numbers
manipulations of small arms in civilian hands has been undertaken.
*
No way there are “only”
three hundred million rifles out there in America. No way is the
official number of gun owners “only” 100 million. Remember, that
300 number was only from about twenty years of official numbers, and
the system of reporting was voluntary. Throw in all the eight zero
percent receivers and the “non-firearm” parts kits, and I would
hazard to guess that the AR might be challenging the official AK
production numbers of 70-80 million carbines. That kind of
production makes up for a LOT of design flaws.
*
I really flew off the
rails on sticking to the subject of frugal prepping. I'll continue
tomorrow.
( .Y. )
( today's related Amazon link click HERE )
*
Please
support Bison by buying through the Amazon links here ( or from
http://bisonprepper.com/2.html
or www.bisonbulk.blogspot.com
). Or PayPal www.paypal.me/jimd303
***
Unless you are in extreme poverty, spend a buck a month here, by the
above donation methods ( I get 4% of the Amazon sale, so you need to
buy $25 worth for me to get my $1 ) or mail me some cash/check/money
order or buy a book ( web site for free books, Amazon to pay just as
a donation vehicle ).
*** My e-mail is:
jimd303@reagan.com My
address is: James M Dakin, 181 W Bullion Rd #12, Elko NV 89801-4184
***E-Mail me if you want your name added to the weekly e-newsletter
subscriber list.
***
Pay your author-no one works for free. I’m nice enough to publish
for barely above Mere Book Money, so do your part.*** junk
land under a grand
* Lord
Bison*
my
bio & biblio* my web site is www.bisonprepper.com
*** Wal-Mart
wheat***Amazon
Author Page
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there
I dunno, the LOL certainly compared to Bo Derick when I first met her at thirty years old. Now that she is seventy-two , I'd say she even looks finer in my eyes anyway. Not all the Bo D's out there are gold diggers. I certainly chose wisely IMO...
ReplyDeleteIn comparison, my mini fourteen is built like a tank when alongside an AR. Not as accurate , but you could butt stroke an infidel with it and still carry on
Buttstroking infidels is important, just wish Bill hadn't been giving the other Bill a rimjob and took off the bayonet lug. I know, and I want it cheaper, too. Never satisfied :)
DeleteOther than my wife, I haven't seen another human being in over a week. If you don't want people then you HAVE to have a ride. I have long passed the notion of people, I simply don't want them. Any of them. This requires me to live at long distances from people. This then requires me to drive long distances to buy things I need. The trade off is small, throwing some money at the ride now and then, for the huge benefit of not having to put holes in retarded assholes then getting caged, gang raped, and die all pus filled sore inflicted in a year.
ReplyDeleteJust depends on what your values are and what you are willing to put up with.
Okay, you got me there. I'll admit, no people is worth having a car. You find my one exception :)
DeleteI wish Carlos Hathcock was still alive. He'd be a millionaire.
ReplyDeleteWould he be coherent enough to spend it?
DeleteIsn't he a porn star?
DeleteDamn, there's a bit of humor again. Been awful grumpy lately.I'm sure if I was in your shoes... not judging. Just glad to see it.
DeletePorn star? You tell me. He looks like a genuine stud to me. Were the stories fake?
DeleteAs to the comment regarding the pistol with the 30 round magazine, it was the best that I could do when the article talking about the inability to buttstroke with the AR. A term I had to look up.
Who needs to buttstroke if you have a sidearm at close range? I'm sure you'll tell me.
Okay, you must not have been around on my tirades against humping weight in the field. The Army thinks light infantry means carrying 100 pounds instead of 150. No, light infantry means carrying 10-20 lbs plus weapon and clothes, and 20 is pushing it. When you are going light, you don't get to have a pistol. Which is why I'm gay over bayonets. It is your back-up weapon. Buttstroking is just a bonus. I should mention that the military is run by morons, and at most of our ages, Light is our only option anyway.
DeleteGod bless you, Jim, but I'd still want to put that sucker on my hip with the one 30 round mag in my cargo pocket...somewhere, LOL. I give you credit for your ideas and for your depth of thought envisioning the scenario better than I, which is why I read and think. Still, my age plus my total lack of preparation puts me at a disadvantage. Now I can only think back to a time long ago when people were preparing for this before seeing the actual danger in real time.
DeleteWhat did the other guy mean about Hathcock? I just discovered the man the last 30 days in my retirement boredom/planning. Maybe he'll answer.
Nothing wrong with wanting a pistol-as long as you want to pay the weight price. Me? I already did the boonie humping and it sucked at 18 years old. Now that I have to worry about actually puking up a lung...
DeleteGlock 19 with plenty of 30 round magazines?????
ReplyDeleteWhat were we talking about?
Delete"Today's plastic Mattel Guns do not have that kind of robustness."
ReplyDelete==========
Has anybody butt stroked anyone in the last, say, 50 years?
Nor has anyone lanced anyone, or indian leg wrestled anyone else in the last 50 years. It's a different era now and different tools must be used. Try to maneuver around in your house at night with that century old surplus gun that may be great for butt stroking but poor in modern day tactics. Compare that to a current race gun that, collapsed, can be 30" long and fit easily through hallways or doors and with it's steel core buffer tube still butt stroke up close and personal. Rest assured facial bones will collapse long before that Magpul plastic stock breaks. Remember, .303 is only better than 5.56 IF it hits what it's supposed to.
Bayonets, a 14th century weapon of death, were only to be used if military supplies were slack. I have a couple but don't intend to ever use them as such - that's what my other weapons are for.
Actually, there was a bayonet fight over in the Sandbox not too long ago. Well, one side had one anyway. Brit soldier. And I agree, the 303 WAS intended as a volley gun and yes, I'm aware of its shortcomings in that regard. Which worried me highly and did play a part in my decision to add the AR. Side note, just got the armorer block for pins today in the mail ( ordering odds and ends as cash comes in-also got the Palmetto sale on aluminum mags $9 each w/free shipping ) and can now install the gas block with shut off to go boltie. I'm also thinking about experimenting with the front sight, see if I can pour the cavity with lead to make a much cheaper gas shut off. Obviously, I want to be extra cautious on this one since my face is right behind it.
DeleteAre you talking about the triangle shaped A4 sight?
DeleteShould have just went with the std adj gas block and use flip ups, much easier. My shooter friend has an AR with the A4 and I find it distracting when I peer through the scope. Doesn't bother him. To each his own. shrug
Yes, on the front site. Yes, the adjustable block is much better and yes, I'm going with a flip up. But I'm working with the assumption I might need to improvise with what I have if funding dried up, or I'm getting battlefield weapons in the future.
DeleteBut, Lord Bison, what will you use for hairspray on your glorious flowing locks of man-hair? Wheat gluten paste? And does having a Ural with a sidecar count as roughing it? I promise to dress just like Humongous.
ReplyDeleteI don't have full faith in the AR-15 to have a long life when subjected to a lifetime of field use. I'm guessing modern parts, designed for easy replacement when worn, will fail and then you are up the creek.
ReplyDeleteOld bolt rifle as a backup. Be very nice if it were chambered in same round as the modern rifle, but 5.56 NATO isn't nearly old enough for that.
The AR fragility problem will somewhat be solved by their universal availability ( at least in the lower 48 ). And the average Joe can work on them, unlike the old timey bolts we both love. You can still get Mausers in converter 308, but the question is what price you are willing to pay.
DeleteI remember an incredible 7.62x51 Pattern Five Enfield.
DeleteIt was for sale on a table at the Seven Feathers casino gun-show in Canyonville, Oregon a decade ago.
Satin finish, burled walnut Schnable, 18".
'One-finger' smooooooth action.
It was a joy to see and a joy to hold.
A 'family-heirloom' heritage piece.
I think the asking price was around us$300 (three hundred Federal Reserve Promissory Notes).
No bayonet lug.
But it was engraved 'Australian Club', so there is that.
Don't get me started on sweet Enfields at unbelievably low prices I stupidly passed on. :)
Delete