Thursday, September 19, 2019

money to bankers


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

24 comments:

  1. 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...

    In 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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 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 :)

      Delete
  2. Other 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.

    Just depends on what your values are and what you are willing to put up with.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Okay, you got me there. I'll admit, no people is worth having a car. You find my one exception :)

      Delete
  3. I wish Carlos Hathcock was still alive. He'd be a millionaire.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would he be coherent enough to spend it?

      Delete
    2. Damn, 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.

      Delete
    3. Porn star? You tell me. He looks like a genuine stud to me. Were the stories fake?

      As 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.

      Delete
    4. 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.

      Delete
    5. God 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.

      What 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.

      Delete
    6. 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...

      Delete
  4. Glock 19 with plenty of 30 round magazines?????

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Today's plastic Mattel Guns do not have that kind of robustness."
    ==========

    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.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 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.

      Delete
    2. Are you talking about the triangle shaped A4 sight?
      Should 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

      Delete
    3. 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.

      Delete
  6. But, 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.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I 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.

    Old 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.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 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.

      Delete
    2. I remember an incredible 7.62x51 Pattern Five Enfield.
      It 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.

      Delete
    3. Don't get me started on sweet Enfields at unbelievably low prices I stupidly passed on. :)

      Delete

COMMENTS HAVE BEEN CLOSED