RIGHT SIDE 2*
note: well, don't I feel like a complete dumbass. After twelve years using blogger, I just now notice the "spam" section in the comments pending. Some perfectly normal comments in there. Not a lot, like five comments so far this year got hijacked over to Spam. I'll check it regularly from now on, and my sincere apologies.
If the Soviet nuclear threat was blown out of proportion for the elites own ends in this country, and that once the Russians ceded control of large swaths of the former USSR to the natives for self rule so as to be done with the burden of colonialization while still enjoying the benefits of buffer states, one could reasonably conclude that the Russian Empire was no longer a threat as it was contracting rather than expanding, how can you conclude that a nuclear war with that state is still even a remote possibility? Baring US offensive operations, the Russians would be more than happy keeping their chunk of ice for themselves and minding their own damn business. Unlike the US who is so busy sticking its nose in everyone else’s. Which wouldn’t be a bad thing if we could actually get some benefits from intruding, rather than just treasure and blood expenditure. But, when all is said and done, the myth of nuclear fallout from Commie Bear missiles hitting our ICBM bases seems to persist. Just like the dangers of communism are still being branded about even as our system goes Full Fascist as if that alternative is oh so much better.
Oh, golly gee whiz! The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming, look at the EVIL socialist Venezuela and how bad and evil and unjust socialism is! We could be, like, all SOCIALIST and such and what not! Well, crap, I wonder why Venezuela being socialist all those many years ago wasn’t such a bad thing? If you are full on retard centralized control, why does that rule twenty years prior work out okay but not now, suddenly? Perhaps something else is going on? I don’t know, perhaps the fact that Fake Fuel isn’t as great as the Fracking Faggots make it out to be, and Venezuela has a whole bunch of the stuff, which it can’t sell because you can buy REAL oil for the same price ( there being a current glut globally due to manufacturing demand crashes )? Could some of that have ANYTHING to do with the economic collapse over there? Sure, government interference never helps out overly much, but we do that here just as much. Ever hear about the food safety laws keeping small farmer dairy off the market?
Anyway, when fears of fallout aren’t being flogged as the dead horse it is, then the next card to be played is the Evil Hordes Descend Upon The Righteous Christian Folk, Their Tatooed Skin And Propensity Towards Pre-Marital Sex The Mark Of The Beast! Oh boy, we can’t be having that, now can we? I guess there isn’t any other way to sell the barren dry ass deserts of eastern Oregon as a prepper paradise, because that area has about zero appeal. Between needing irrigation and the actual nuclear threat of Washington’s testing and waste facility, and their California style governments, I’m at a lose how these areas were ever a good choice for relocation. Not to mention, if we are still on the Russian Nuclear Target List thing, the fallout from the naval facilities. And the ports for container unloading. Yet, don’t include Nevada, with its identical climate yet far more conservative and lower tax government, plus far better hidden inaccessible backcountry with much cheaper land.
My guess? Nevada allows whores and around the clock drinking, plus gambling machines which are somehow more evil than state lottery gaming. So, obviously, we are morally reprehensible compared to the gays and PC Army over in the “allowed” two half desert states. Nevada must be more dangerous than an area with a super volcano ready to blow! It has Ladies Of The Night! Obviously, please, stay the hump away from Nevada. I don’t particularly want any more people moving in. You’ll just crowd all the Californians. My point is only that large gaping holes in logic are employed in the blog version of Strategic Relocation and might be a flawed model to be followed. The West, as survival retreat, has its moments. I love the lack of people. But since I’m not a Fracking Fag, I also see the danger of living here, once irrigation is no longer powered, the dams are silted up to uselessness, the 1,000 year droughts becoming the five year droughts persist and far too many people relocate here not because of the threat of nuclear war but because all of us here are fleeing danger but actually jumping from the frying pan into the fire. Absent petroleum, the arid American West is not habitable except for a few herders and nomads ( so why, again, are we including the deserts of Washington, Oregon and south Idaho? ).
Because the East is full of people, and was once a target of nuclear fallout, it is preferable to relocate to some place with no water? If you are planning on being a raider, a sheep herder, that is all fine and dandy. But Yuppie Scum survivalists are only allowed to be farmers. It is a doctrinal necessity. They are not allowed to even consider offensive operations. They must be lambs and await the evil doers to meet them on their own turf. Okay, fine with me. I like an enemy that can’t pull his head out of his ass. But if you follow the dictates of said guru’s, you are borrowing trouble. What you need to realize is that all this advice was meant for the rich survivalists. Not the less well to do masses ( who nonetheless support the sites through purchasing the advertised items ). The less well off cannot afford northern Idaho property. They are the ones stuck out in the desert. So the farming utopia you are urged to move to is not so wonderful once the oil stops being imported from Saudi Arabia. The water stops being pumped, if you don’t lose your mortgage because the unemployment rate just skyrocketed.
Western farming and ranching is going to revert to a very few families controlling the water sources ( outside a few acceptable rainfall locations such as northern Idaho which combine high taxes, high real estate prices and about zero jobs ). Your Yuppie ranchette is likely a future casualty of consolidation. If you want to farm, and are of lesser means, you must move East. To the Right Side of the continent.*
RIGHT SIDE 3
I don’t much care for Back East. The South is a great place to live, kind of, but the north is all Yankeeland. I’m sure that there are a few nice Yankees out there ( the NOL is one of them, but she is of French descent rather than English so she’s not a bad egg ), but if their little slice of paradise is so great, why do they all move down south to retire? It’s not JUST because of the weather. Retirees in Florida hibernate in their air conditioning, not so different than staying in your warm house in winter up north. Mostly, living there has got to be like living on the Wrong Side, in California. Mein Gott Im Hemmel, that place is the crappiest crap hole in all the universe of crapholes. Move back to Cali, while adding wet windy winters? That’s got to be what YankeeLand is like. I’d like nothing to do with it, thank you very much. BUT! And there is always a “but” and it usually smells like butt, if I was going to be a farmer I sure as hell would be a Eastern one long before I became a Western one, irregardless of population.
Population long ago became overpopulation, here in the United States. In Australia, they have the decency to pack everyone in the cities and then leave the rural areas the hell alone. In the US, we packed the cities with immigrants, both Mexican and African, and now Muslim, and so everyone with gas money and the credit for a house ( pre-2008 ) moved out to the rural areas. You can’t move to the country and really be alone unless you have income coming in from outside, which is rare enough ( self employed in a poor rural area is not the most brilliant move, unless you are getting money coming in from outside that area ). Far too many areas are suburbia, and for good reason. Who the hell wants to live in the ghetto, with their kids forcibly bussed to a Black school? Anyone with half a brain moves away from that crap. The ones with no brains do not. They bleat with PC indignation how we shouldn’t be prejudiced. Hell, call me prejudiced as long as I don’t get beat down by a flash mob, car jacked or die in a drive by. You have zero excuse for living near a ghetto. If you are poor you pack a duffle bag, buy a Greyhound ticket and get a minimum wage job while paying for a roommate position. No excuse, there.
So, given our infrastructure of car dependency, and our inclination to get away from the racial problems our elites of yesteryear created ( the Yankee slave traders ), or are creating ( the Yankee ivy school asswhores encouraging the flood of Mexicans to suppress wages-but by all means, agitate for eliminating that minimum wage since it isn’t a “free market solution” ), it is understandable that even most rural areas are overpopulated. I don’t think the ideal answer is to avoid a specific state or region, but to avoid each areas worst population densities. Not just the urban proper but the suburban sprawl, to as large of a degree as possible. Utah is a great place to live for some ( I would NEVER advise it, the government hates poor gentiles ), as long as you avoid the Salt Lake area Ogden-to-Provo mega-city. If you live in Reno or Las Vegas, you gain zero advantages of the state of Nevada. If you must live in California, outside the greater L.A. to San Diego or Bay Area Uber-Urban areas there is plenty of rural destinations.
And the East, outside the DC to Boston corridor, avoiding the worst concentrations of Black Ghetto urban cores elsewhere, while rather too crowded for comfort you will still find plenty of rural land that should be to your liking. All over the West, wherever there is a job to be had, there is suburban sprawl. Just like back East. Too many folks for comfort. But in the West, most areas devoid of crowds have zero water. Any empty space is usually bone dry. All the crowds are crowding the water. But back east, any uncrowded area still gets an abundance of rainfall. And even the rocky poor soil beats most of the dirt in the West ( with the exception of a few areas like northern Idaho, the playground of the rich wanna-be survivalists. Yes, IH, I know there are always exceptions. They prove the rule, eh? ). Hardscrabble farming in the East is more than likely a better bet than arid/irrigation farming in the West. The rain will always fall back East, but wells will eventually stop pumping out West. Not that the East doesn’t have its unique problems.
Obammy was a great President. For the Elites ( so is Trump, so the Republican/Democrat labels are more worthless than ever ). He stirred up an unbelievable amount of crap to start the newest race wars. Living in the South right now could be rather dangerous. As is living anywhere near the urban cores anywhere in the US. Blacks are fired up and ready to rumble, and while I sympathize with their historical injustices I don’t wish to be a sacrifice in their backlash. But that doesn’t mean they will be roaming the countryside looking for crackers to kill. If you are outside their areas of control, in the redneck countryside, they are far less of a menace. So, what is your preference? Farming in the country, with an outside chance of racial warfare, or trying to farm in the desert without water because the Black and Latino gangs control it ( some cities in the West have no water supply but wells. Those are the now closed ghost towns which mined, or the newest suburbs. The historical towns still viable only built on a water supply )?
If you are a mountain dweller, using valley’s with fertile soil and rainfall, or even hardscrabble hillside, you are relatively safe even if back East. You’ll avoid becoming a serf and most likely shall remain an independent living in a village community, a farmer militiaman. If you live in the West, relying on a centralized water supply, you WILL be a serf soon enough. Centralized water always ends in peasant/serf/slave laboring. The East has a LOT of locations outside of both city and suburbs that can far more safely be farmed than back West. Nowhere is there a perfect retreat location. For poor people, relying on rain rather than technology, the East most likely is the better compromise.
Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page. ***You can support me through Patreon ( go to www.patreon.com/bison )***You can make donations or book purchases through PayPal ( www.paypal.me/jimd303 )
*** Unless you are in extreme poverty, spend a buck a month here, by the above donation methods or buy a book. If you don't do Kindle, send me a buck and I'll e-mail it to you. Or, send an extra buck and I'll send you a CD ( the file is in PDF. I’ll waive this fee if you order three or more books at one time ). My e-mail is: firstname.lastname@example.org My address is: James M Dakin, 181 W Bullion Rd #12, Elko NV 89801-4184
*** Pay your author-no one works for free. I’m nice enough to publish for barely above Mere Book Money, so do your part.*** Land In Elko* 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
"outside a few acceptable rainfall locations such as northern Idaho which combine high taxes, high real estate prices and about zero jobs"ReplyDelete
Taxes are pretty reasonable in Idaho. Especially, if you live on forest land and qualify for the timber exemption. For example, I have a twenty acre parcel ( separate from my parcel with my house) with no permanent buildings and the yearly taxes are around $90.
The state takes a little from sales tax, car tabs, property tax and income tax. The nice thing about low taxes is low government spending on social services programs. Most of our generational habitually poor people move to Washington for better benefits. So the poor people left here are the working poorly who have middle class values. The value of that is priceless.
Regarding high real estate prices, stay away from the Coeur d'Alene area, the Sandpoint area, and waterfront. There are many small towns in rural Idaho areas with reasonable property prices. (Though this year, prices are up.)
Many jobs can be found if you can afford to live on $10-$12 an hour. Very doable if your place is paid for and you grow a garden, hunt and heat with wood.
My recommendation is to find a small community that feels right for you (they each have a different flavor.), come with cash to buy your place outright, then live cheap.
The nicest thing about North Idaho is all the great recreation opportunities -- lakes, boating, swimming, skiing, hiking, camping, backpacking, hunting, and fishing. Then if the world DOESN'T end before you kick the bucket, you've enjoyed yourself while living in a beautiful place.
I think we have definitions of affordable which differ. If real estate is higher, then property tax on your dwelling is higher, even if your % paid is lower. And of course, to me, it is very important to not have state income tax. And while your comment on the welfare poor is taken as intended, beware feeling too smug when unemployment keeps increasing.Delete
When the crash of 2008 hit, lots of folks lost their jobs. Not many jobs locally meant folks had to move.Delete
That lowered the cost of buying property and made us have even less population -- a double win IMO.
Remember, a person preps to be the last one in the stew post. You just need to have enough put by to outlast everyone else.
So the way I see it, when the crash hits my area becomes even more enjoyable.
I can't really argue with you there, since that is my plan on living in Elko.Delete
First paragraph...I don't understand how fallout from Russian missile strikes is a myth.ReplyDelete
Farming in Idaho...Earlier this week, JWR admitted that in his little piece of paradise in whatever river valley he's at, there's a risk of freezing temperatures at any given night during the summer. There goes the crop! On the plus side, he has an abundance of wild meat.
Do you remember a rather wild poster you had from about 9-10 years ago that called himself Black Dog? He was/is a black man living in the Fresno, CA area (I think) who was out on parole and had a white girlfriend who had her own firearms. He repeatedly stated his SHTF plan was to do home invasions on random houses, beat down and rape the husband in plain view of the rest of the family, and force the wife to cook all the food in the house for him to eat until it was gone. Then he'd move on to the next house. I guarantee he's not the only one with a similar plan.
I remember who you were talking about, but I'm pretty sure that was a very clever white boy pushing our buttons. He was pretty funny. That was one aspect of free comments I miss.Delete