If I downloaded "Rome" or whatever of HBO's content -- I would be about a thousand times more likely to get a subscription to HBO then someone who didn't. That is if I could afford it and get the connection.
Some of this might be for convenience of people who don't have TiVo -- or people who are curious. Some might be too cheap to buy HBO programming for the one show they like. But really, isn't it a lot of hassle to download a file like this when you can just change the channel? If $4 to buy something on PPV is more valuable than hours of your time, then perhaps you have to wait for that person to get more allowance.
I've got two bundles of premium channels now. I might want to download an episode I missed. Clicking my remote to channel 390 is a lot easier than trying to get it on P2P.
They could poison all the P2P networks to where nobody could get anything useful. But will it have the effect of making more money?
I admit that I prefer this technique over using the courts and the tax payer funded police to ensure a companies profits. The idea that an officer could be taken off the task of protecting my family, so that they can bust in the door of a neighbors house to drag little Timmy from the basement where he has been using his parents broadband connection has always seemed ridiculous to me.
I will say, that P2P does detrimental impact to computer games revenue, and software. In this case, there isn't a convenience or advertising factor to consider--especially with games. On software, I can only say that I purchase or my company purchases all of the software I use now -- but 99% of those applications are programs that I had gotten a copy of that I didn't pay for when I had no revenue. So, the "logic" of stopping illegal distribution depends upon what type of product you are selling and the economic model of who you want to pay. With games, the end user and the little Timmy ARE the market, whereas most professional applications get money from someone who makes revenue from their use--so you want a lot of people to get familiar.
As an aside, I think that perhaps, businesses should be paying extra fees whenever they want something enforced that does not entail a public benefit.
The nation had few taxes in its early history. From 1791 to 1802, the United States government was supported by internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves. The high cost of the War of 1812 brought about the nation's first sales taxes on gold, silverware, jewelry, and watches. In 1817, however, Congress did away with all internal taxes, relying on tariffs on imported goods to provide sufficient funds for running the government.
In 1862, in order to support the Civil War effort, Congress enacted the nation's first income tax law. Those with incomes of more than $10,000 paid taxes at a higher rate (I read $10,000 as wealthy).
In 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. The amendment gave Congress legal authority to tax income and resulted in a revenue law that taxed incomes of both individuals and corporations.
Taxes increased usually during time of war. But, at the start, I don't see any taxes that affected the wages of the average working man until 1862 and those were very low (I'm thinking they were mostly on property)-- do you have any links for that? So, about 110 years until we had even a basic income tax. Read it here; http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005921.html/ Most of the taxes were tariffs on imported goods and the rest were on sales of luxury items like tobacco and booze. Pretty much opposite of the "free trade" advocates. Now there might be something to the economic theories of "efficiencies" -- that country X can specialize and produce Y product cheaper, thus allowing America to produce a lot of Z. Once we exported simple manufacturing and low tech labor -- maybe that makes some sense. But now outsource everything. But where really does this efficiency come from? We export raw timber out of the US to Canada, on roads that taxpayers built and we charge almost nothing from the timber industry. Then we buy the imported cabinets that might be only a few dollars cheaper than if they were local -- but we got none of the labor wages. And this is only feasible because fuel is almost subsidized. And we do this now with cars and airplanes and parts are shipped here and there -- wherever 10 pennies can be shaved in cost of production. But how much do we lose in money that could have gone to an American worker? How much do we lose in technology and know how? There is more than just raw costs of goods -- but those issues don't matter to the business that wants to make a profit. They would matter to a government that wanted to look out for the welfare of its citizens -- but we don't have that government. If they can rob a dollar from everyone so that a few can get more wealthy -- then that is what you are going to get "told" is the smart thing to do. You aren't privy to the back room meetings that come up with these trade schemes or the Banking Reform Bills. You don't really have an advocacy involved -- other than, someone in the room saying; "what can we get away with?" Also helped now by a corporate media that shills for these schemes.
I also don't think the founding fathers were perfect, untouched by greed or omniscient so all things can change -- for better or worse. I'm just asking people to realize that wages, and sales taxes on Non-luxury items is NOT the best way to do things. Let a business hire an accountant. Why does someone making $60k have to go to H&R Block and spend $400 to figure out what they owe the government when most of them don't even have a retirement plan? I've found that when I made less money -- I was actually working harder. So I don't think that is fair or even good for me -- even though I might make a lot more than that to make people who provide labor for this country to also have to provide a tax base for the government that more and more just creates infrastructure for businesses and the well to do.
I am a technical "smart guy" and I know I had problems at first with girls.
I think smart people have a harder time in relationships just because they are at one end of "the curve". You almost have to translate things to the average person. Some people are intimidated, others resentful, in addition to whatever else might cause anyone to disapprove of things. But the major handicap to "brains" is that we tend to rely too much on them. Emotions can't be reasoned with. If you don't get your basic needs met, there is no amount of study or logic that will overcome it. People of less IQ tend to "get on with things more" and not to sit there and ponder. Psychoanalysis -- unless it is combined with action (called "behavior modification" now) -- will almost guarantee someone is stuck in a morass of self-absorbtion, in my opinion, because little of being happy in life or changing what you don't like is based on understanding. Birds don't think how to fly and we don't often think how to breathe. Feelings don't have to be justified -- just responded to. I used to analyze how I felt and what was appropriate about how someone treated me. I wouldn't just say "go away" when someone got me angry. Now I respond to how I feel and perhaps apologize later. It's amazing how much better that seems to work. So if you are cold, wear a coat or if you get angry, yell. Let your feelings guide you and don't wait until you think you are justified -- that doesn't go for everyone. Just us brainy people who don't think we have a license to look out for ourselves.
I've noticed that the people who have less "angst" in life are often big jerks. They think that a girl is hot, and they tell her and then ask for what they want and they often get it. They just do for themselves and don't question if they have a right. They feel worthy. People who always blame others for things rarely ever go to psychiatrists to find out what is wrong with "them" -- they go to church or a golf club and just talk about what is wrong with others. Jerks are well adjusted. That isn't necessarily an IQ issue. It's about being introspective. And you pay the price of being a thoughtful and better person for it. So balance will be attained if you concentrate more on what you like and not what you are worthy of. Nobody deserves anything and all worth is debatable. If you aren't going to stick up for your unfair share someone else is going to take it. So, go out and get the girl you want, and tell here what you want is her. You will be protecting her from "the jerk". Go get more than what you are worthy of. If, after that, you have some left, then give it away to those you think need it. But you have to take it first.
Us smart people also need to learn to shut-up at times. Girls talk to us about feelings but they don't want us to "fix" or figure out anything. They want empathy, not solutions. Also, in our case, don't always try to please. Give and take at the same amount that someone else is giving and taking -- otherwise they won't respect you. Don't offer up information about yourself until someone has earned it from you. Most people don't have the reference to judge correctly about your life -- nor do most people really want to know who "you" are. People want to know what you think of them, and the are uncomfortable with people who act differently from their expectations. It took me a long time to really understand this. So, don't give others permission to judge you, don't ever ask "what is wrong with me", let people know what YOU want from them. Don't give more than others have given you, unless they need charity. Don't offer advice or criticism -- only sell it if people are buying. Only offer encouragement -- that is what most people want and won't disrespect you for.
Stop me before I sound preachy-- these are just things I tell myself. Some of this might fit or it might not. I'm just assuming, that if you came from the brainy, self-critical place I came from it would make sense. Having trouble with girls just reminds me of what I went through. If I wante
Making beer (or more precisely, meade) is suspected to be the main reason people got together to form societies. All that grain was dumped into pits and fermented to create a thick and sweet high protein meade.
And before refrigeration, about all people would drink is tea (boiled) or something fermented. There was a watered down vinegar that seemed popular to the greeks and israelites in ancient times. Probably added a lot to their endurance.
And yes, selling booze or some narcotic or music and story telling will be a very good way to be appreciated. I still remember how much I enjoyed stories by the fire at camp many years ago. Without cable TV, people will be starving for something to make them forget "survival" and how they are almost constantly itching somewhere.
I am really getting inspired to take my kids camping now.
Hey, if you can rise above "survival" -- that is always the way to go. I didn't go as primitive as you, but I do remember always having crap under my fingernails -- so yeah a towel is nice. Getting clean in a shower and being dry in a bed is the biggest thing you miss when "roughing it".
Pretty cool that you camped through college. Everybody thinks the "have to" do things a certain way -- because have the subtle influence of our peers. But I wouldn't want to camp in many states or do this now that I'm older and not in peak shape.
I agree, if survival skills are necessary, after a few months most people would be dead.
But I think, hunger and discomfort make people become instantly a lot more thoughtful -- so I think that most anyone would learn from any survived mistakes very quickly. You are going to go insane from mosquitos, so you'll be rubbing the sap of every tree on your body inside of two days (after not sleeping for a night) -- just as one example. After your pack is torn open by raccoons, you'll think; "maybe if I hang this away from my bag from a rope on a tree..."
But most will die inside of two weeks from lack of good water. Food poisoning or severe dysentery. Then in a month or two from Pneumonia (if it's cold or wet). Then infected skin sores.
But really, violence from others after a month is a real concern.
I expect more people however, will band together and form small, self-sufficient communities. Surviving on your own really sucks -- and having someone else to dig the privy or watch your back allows you to do something else. I think there is a dangerous fantasy by some "rugged individualists" out there (I see this in Libertarians and Republicans all the time) who think somehow they can "go it alone". Going it alone is called "survival" and it sucks-- and few of us have done it. I've had a taste, and I like society, thank you very much. Anyone who thinks being Rambo is going to be about freedom and somehow glamorous is a fool. You spend all day trying to acquire food and trying to get dry or get bugs off of you. Even just a dry, sealed cabin is a major luxury. There are native indians who live out in the wilds still -- but even they form tribes and these people are a lot tougher than we are.
I was thinking about Polar Bear hair -- but I thought since it was hollow inside, it might never turn off its heat trapping properties. That's why I thought Dog would be better -- because they don't suffer from wearing their coats in the summer (though the downy insulating hairs are shed on many breeds).
But you are way ahead of me on the knitting. Though realistically, I think the hand weaving will still be too labor intensive to be useful even Post apocalypse because 1) there will still be a LOT of clothing around and 2) people know how to make looms. Darning by hand is SLOW;-)
Boy, are we survival geeks. But, I haven't even been camping in about 10 years.
Can you actually order a polar bear sweater? (on that regard, it is something you might wear or hang on your pack -- but in cold weather, a good jacket and boots are essential).
The Constitution puts forth certain explicit rights for US Citizens, but the "establishment clause" (I think), which says in essence, when anything in the Constitution is not explicitly set as a restriction on Citizens then there is no restriction.
So, if the constitution doesn't say being anonymous is or isn't a right, then it IS a right. The tie goes to the citizen -- yeah!
That this concept has been forgotten and largely ignored is a travesty -- boooo!
In some regard, the constitution puts forth those exceptions that restrict rights, while bending over backwards to say; "by not saying you don't explicitly have a right, that doesn't mean you DON'T have that right".
Of course, much has been done to stand our constitution on its ear. I think it is easier to explain how things should be, then you can contrast that with how they are; Businesses have no right to profits -- except when they do not infringe upon the prosperity of the citizen--meaning; The free distribution of music on the internet must be proven to NOT provide utility or the new creation of music of artists BEFORE it can be said to be an infringement. Again, if there is no basic right for a record label to exist and profit from music if it doesn't add the the quality and utility of the consumer. So, if you could prove that artists would stop making music if all music were free -- then you could pass a law curtailing "piracy" which isn't piracy, it is only copyright infringement if it is resold. The consumer is sovereign -- meaning if you buy something, you can sell it or destroy it or even copy it. You just can't copy the design and re-sell it if there is copyright or a patent. If you buy a ticket or a car you can resell it at a profit. Meaning, scalpers of tickets --as annoying as it is, have a perfect right to re-sell what they have bought (the ticket). The companies that sell you tickets have gotten around this by saying the ticket is a document showing that you are leasing a space (you and you alone) for a certain time. Really, the vendor only has the right to change the way tickets are distributed and sold -- but no right to determine what you do with it. Patent law and copyright exist to reward "originators" of unique ideas. Not as "royalties" or things that can be traded down to one's heirs. There was a real fear of the royal obligations that could be used to demand payments on necessary items forever. Since patents and copyrights seem to be rewarding anyone but the originators of the ideas -- I think they are out of whack with the intended purpose. But I do think that some drug patents do reward innovators and are not excessively long (just to show, I'm not anti-business). I think where we went wrong with drug development in this country is #1 allowing for commercial advertising and #2 how the government does NOT try to bid down costs and #3 how the government funds research. Personally, I think the Gov should only support research on CURES or vaccinations -- and only in rare cases treatments if something is wide spread and it can be shown a cure is not yet feasible. You could insert X and Y disease to argue anything here. But if we say we have limited funds, the government should not be improving or guaranteeing business profits. What the government does well is long term research into areas that have little profit incentive but a great deal of utility to the citizen, namely; cures. A drug company has no incentives right now to find cures, if they can develop treatments. Otherwise, you can manipulate accounting practices or studies to prove anything -- we won't have proof that drug companies are just using government research to subsidize what they would otherwise have to spend on the next baldness treatment.
The concept of taxing labor wages I would imagine, would be about the biggest economic sin to the Founding Fathers. Though we are a Republic, in that the original intent was that "wealthy" people of means would be chosen to represent the populace. That idea was based on public service by people who had
I'm glad you took it the right way... some might not see where I was coming from. I remember being very desperate to be accepted by anyone but especially a girl. I would wonder what was wrong with me -- I could see the biggest jerks having no problems and I was smart, looked like Sting, and interesting. Later I discovered that my insecurity and desire to prove myself -- combined with too much forthcoming honesty is definite kryptonite for any girl.
I can respect being cautious about therepy and head drugs. ON the other hand -- I spent a lot of time trying to improve myself. Praying. Doing a million things to "feel right". Even when I was on track with a good job and education -- I never felt "good enough". So, nothing -- nothing worked. And really, when I look back at myself, I would have thought I was a decent person who was a little too self-critical. But worthy...
When I finally got therapy (intensive) it accomplished two things. 1) having been critized and analyzed and put down isn't worth a bucket of spit compared to people just being supportive. 2) If you've been down since you were 10, there may be nothing YOU can do to "get up". Kind of like trying to walk after paralysis; you are going to need someones help to be able to walk again. I took Prozac when it was experimental (results are totally different so there are many other options today). The Doc described my depression as like a stream that had followed a pattern so long, it had worn a deep channel in my mind. So, no matter how much water (happiness) I get, or how much I try to change the thought patters (digging trenches), the next time it rains everything will follow the same channel again.
So what the anti-depressant did was to "level the ground" so that the stream was able to follow new paths. It didn't make me happy. But the change was dramatic and immediate. I just didn't dwell on my shortcomings. I didn't feel like I had to prove things to others. I could actually take a compliment, and appreciate it. Wow. I guess it is like alchoholism in a way -- people who are not addicted (and I haven't been -- just an example) can't understand why people just don't stop. But some people become chemically incapable.
So I think everyone should try the self-discipline angle like you did. And definitely avoid the helplessness route where you always blame a "problem you can't control". But live exists between these extremes. Total self-control and programmability is a delusion brought to us by the fortunate. And don't kid yourself, most people are faking the happiness and self-control. Most people are driven by their urges and then fabricate a story of principles around it.
Sounds like you are doing well without putting blinders on. Personally, I have gotten so self-assured, I don't even think of much of any philosophy anymore. I just think; hey I need to eat better and work out. But, eh... let me make some money. Which I think is pretty healthy. But sometimes I envy the debth and pathos of my early days -- I just don't miss all the frickin' angst.
I'm sort of lucky I didn't find a girl before getting my life together or I would have gone through what you did with the divorce -- nobody can fix anyone else... you just have to follow similar tragectories and have hobbies.
I wish I spent more time giving back to little kids like you do... maybe in the future. I have a 3 year old and a 6 month old (both boys). They are awesome and I also, could not imagine life without them. If you don't screw up being a dad -- you are never a screw up. The rest is small shit. Kids are the only "big thing" in life. No philosophy, cute girl, or high-paying job is worth sacrificing their well-being.
Just don't let yourself fall into the trap that you need to "sacrifice" your own well-being for your kids. You end up being destructive and resentful. You have to be the best person, and happy for THEM. It's a gift. You know that when your kids are sad or acting upset, that it bothers you. It's a two-way street.
It has been fun. You really know your stuff. There definitely needs to be a static page on this. I wasn't mentioning wool socks because I didn't think you pointed that out -- just to re-emphasize that foot-rot is a big issue (but you knew that). I would think under 4 different categories. Practical things every homeowner can do (subsection for renters). Most likely emergency equipment for a 1 week disaster. Most likely equipment for a 3 month shutdown of infrastructure. Shit hits the fan (sub category of Nuclear, Food and Transportation shut down, Government Declares Martial Law [i.e., don't calmly go into any camp -- tell them to air drop supplies])
One other topic would be the top ten health issues and their treatment/prevention. You have; Pneumonia. Dysintery. Cholera. E-Coli and food poisening. Foot rot. Misquito and infected sores (in the Amazon, this would be the #1 issue -- so I've heard). So getting wet and staying damp is probably the biggest health issue that most don't consider. Hygiene is very important. Also, many people will have to eat rotten food -- it will be more common than the rats that start to swarm -- how can you safely "dumpster dive". You get the idea.
My mention of gold is that I think we have a tenous, propped-up economy now. If we had another 1 month disaster, you may have people -- at least locally, not accepting currency. I don't think country-wide, but if you are dealing with locals who have given up believing anything from the Government -- came close to that in Louisiana. So, I think alternative economics is more likely than I would have thought ten years ago.
Anyway, there is a great web site called www.urbansurvival.com that has links to great practical things to do. They consider an economic shutdown the most likely possibility and this would cause much the same situation as a shut-down of the power grid.
And No. I don't have all these things ready. I have rope, twine, walky-talkies, and a few emergency kits. I could stand to lose a few pounds. But I have a 6 month old and a 3 year old to worry about -- so traveling into the woods is definitely out.
I think religion can help you when life sucks and there is no way out.
But it made me a miserable doormat when I was Christian. I have often thought that societies where people were less religious were often happier. Either because they had a better life-style or lack of religion leads to a better lifestyle. One thing I can say for sure, is that it makes you take care of your life here on earth a bit better.
Not to diminish your "journey" to enlightenment (but this IS Slashdot).
I would think that one very important aspect of achieving happiness you didn't mention is something you're grandpa could have told you; don't marry the first girl that will sleep with you.
And for relationships, you need to realize that nobody can be everything. Get some friends who like science fiction if they girl doesn't like Doctor Who -- you'll only annoy her. And if she has lots of cats and stuffed animals on the bed, avoid at all cost unless you both plan on avoiding reality together.
I'd also add, don't sweat the big stuff you can't control. Some of that "faith gives one power" will just give you expectations and turn you into a door matt. If someone mistreats you, admonish them -- you wouldn't allow someone to kick a dog. Act like you are worthy of more. The faith that will work for you is that you will rise to any challenge. There are a lot of types of faith, and some of them are actually destructive -- they won't tell you this in church. But if you read the New Testament on your own, you'll realize that Jesus didn't care about what others think, he was non-violent but never a doormat, and he valued people based on how they treated others. Simple stuff.
I'm around a lot of sales people... that Positive Attitude and Power Faith is good programming to a point. I don't know if some of these people are really happy or just fooling themselves. They tend to get a nice mercedes once they have money. Material things can give you a sense of accomplishment -- but focusing on them will never make you happy. It sounds like you're at the "self programming" stage. So when you get depressed again, you will blame yourself for not being Positive enough. Look, you are going to get down again. You may need anti-depressants or just a good date. But don't take discouragement or sadness as a sign of failure. Sometimes you can still enjoy yourself even with a negative attitude and few prospects. Don't take things too seriously. Like I've adopted the belief in Greek Gods -- so when bad things happen to me, I am proud that I could entertain these great beings. Be comic relief or a warning to others. Just have a perspective that it is alright to BE you. Unless of course, Jesus grades on a curve -- then I'm screwed.
And something I learned from the "Tao of Pooh" -- if you want to be something, enjoy what you want, and you will be it (different from self-indulgence). I used to beat myself up for not being as good and enlightened as I could be -- which didn't help. If I wanted to be good, I should just be -- and that allows my good nature to come through. Also in the book is the idea that you need to find value in what you are... not in what is your ideal. Like if your father stuck in your head that only great football players have value and you are 4 feet tall with lifts. I highly recommend the Tao of Pooh for anyone wanting to attain enlightenment (yes, it talks about eastern philosophy as explained by Winnie the Pooh).
I'm sure that in the Matrix you can't starve -- the feeding tubes are still connected. Thinking you are hit might cause a trauma -- but thinking you are starving can only cause an appetite.
Neo never covered that "reality simulation" issue.
The "there is no spoon" comment was a bit obscure for even people watching the Matrix to get. If you'd preceded it with "make sure your pack has a red pill and a blue pill" -- then the spoon reference would have worked.
Actually, I've heard that the ultimate fiber is Dog Hair.
There is a lady (has a website somewhere) who will make you a sweater from your own dog if you send her the hair.
It seems that dog hair is a better insulator when it is cold than wool or down and insulates even when wet (note Labradors that swim in frozen lakes). Also, the structure of the hair fiber changes when it gets warm and it breathes better than cotton. If it didn't, all those golden retrievers would have heat stroke.
Now which dog -- I don't know. I'm sure short-haired Dachshund is impractical -- I'm guessing that Saint Bernard's might be close to ideal. You'll have to have it washed a lot to not have that doggy smell.
So man's best friend has man's best sweater. Of course, this would be very expensive, but if you wanted the BEST all weather clothing, look no further than Dog Hair.
Actually, I've heard that the ultimate fiber is Dog Hair.
There is a lady (has a website somewhere) who will make you a sweater from your own dog if you send her the hair.
It seems that dog hair is a better insulator when it is cold than wool or down and insulates even when wet (note Labradors that swim in frozen lakes). Also, the structure of the hair fiber changes when it gets warm and it breathers better than cotton. If it didn't, all those golden retrievers would have heat stroke.
Now which dog -- I don't know. I'm sure short-haired Dachshund is impractical -- I'm guessing that Saint Bernard's might be close to ideal. You'll have to have it washed a lot to not have that doggy smell.
So man's best friend has man's best sweater. Of course, this would be very expensive, but if you wanted the BEST all weather clothing, look no further than Dog Hair.
I like that swiss army knife that was linked to. Personally, I'd like that Flash Drive + Knife if it also had the clock and the led light.
A swiss army knife is handy -- but KFG is right about that sturdy blade with a fixed handle. That swiss knife will get gunked up very quickly and won't be usable for eating or cleaning a dead animal -- not sterile. If you have to carve for any length of time on a piece of wood that spring handled gizmo will seem like a toy.
So get both. You can always use it. But for real survival -- I'd rather have a very sturdy blade than a "do it all" toy. The tweezers are a must though. But with a good blade, you can muddle through the can opening or build tools for the rest.
If I were to travel, I'd go for a nice hatchet over an ax. That ax is too heavy -- and I probably will save my energy by using smaller wood to make my fire. Carry just an ax head and cut the handle with the hatchet if you want long-term, end of the world survival.
We can't really support 250 Million + people without our infrastructure. So voting for good, open government is a better option than buying a hunting knife and training in survival skills. Under Carter and Clinton, FEMA was an agency that could actually help with more than blank checks. As much as I know about survival, it will still be a real "iffy" prospect if you are talking about more than 100,000 desperate people. Depending on yourself is a great thing to strive for -- and I will. But it isn't really that practical. Everyone working together to help each other out is a much better survival strategy.
So, stop voting for the Republican's for a few years -- until they can get rid of the crooks. Getting the bums out of the White House is the single most important thing we US citizens can do to ensure our future. Financially, spiritually and physically.
I lived at a camp for a number of years where we built our own cabin. We used kerosene powered heaters -- and that's was it in the winter. Outside was a urinal and a privy. We also had a pump which you would need to prime with water -- but in the winter you'd want to keep salt water, or forget the pump, or dump hot coals and water in it (it was pure, rusted iron).
Anyway, I remember waking up with black soot around my nose from that stupid kerosene heater. The space blanket was could actually get you hot--even at twenty below. But I got a horrible cold and perhaps pneumonia from sleeping in that cold cabin all winter. If you read any stories of early settlers you'll know that most died from some respiratory issue. The next problems were bad food and bad water -- but the pneumonia can get even the most practiced survivor. Getting warm and dry and comfortable at night is going to be a big issue.
If society falls apart, long-term issues are different than short-term camping strategies -- so we should probably separate the two. I've mentioned elsewhere how I don't think a few million people going to the woods is practical. Travel is more dangerous than setting up to survive in your home. Katrina being a rare exception -- most people are at risk in their cars leaving these storms. Just look at Houston... Rita hit at calls 2 or 3 (not enough to wreck most homes) and all of those people could have been stuck in cars -- a much worse place. Most major cities would be even worse. So if you can't get on a bike or on foot to evacuate (like New York city -- one place you really don't want to hang out to survive) -- then for most people (not right on the cost), the best advice is to stay put.
If it is a doomsday scenario... you'd be better off working with neighbors to rebuild things and organize. On the road you'd have nothing but what you brought and be at the whim of the most unhinged in society.
But if you survive a month, your next big issue is Pneumonia or disease (at least when it's cold).
Oh, I almost forgot... silver. Silver is a great anti-bacterial. So make sure you use a "silver spoon" if you want "the best pack". It can also remind you of our beloved president who everyone will curse as society dissolves around them (can't help any opportunity to diss that rat-bastard).
I knew it was for wounds! Attracting bears and using it for tape was just too--suboptimal.
Though even the "pasteurized" stuff will work. Royal jelly is even better (bees use it to preserve killed invaders in the nest). But really, sugar and beta-dyne will work as well. I was reading about a doctor researching burn patients who investigated some Indian treatments that used honey. What he found was that the bacteria actually grow faster in the presence of the sugars -- but they grow too fast without any "nutrition" and so they starve or attack each other for food. The new skin cells also take advantage of the sugars (reducing scaring) but don't have the same issue since they get nutrients from the blood. The anti-biotic takes care of the rest. The combination of honey and anti-baterial are ideal for skin repair.
I would just recommend TeaTree oil in the pack as it is about the best anti-bacterial around--organic or otherwise.
Most of us aren't going to be in a place with a lot of Woods around. The last place I would want to go is the woods, they will be teeming with survivalists types all really excited that they packed a swiss army knife and a 45 ready to repopulate the earth with my wife.
Thanks, but no thanks. I'll sit tight in my house and "survive" there. Out in the woods, there will be ten nuts to each squirrel. Learn to share before you shoot, please.;-)
I think if society fails, most people would want Pot over cigs. Also, it's easier to grow. Unfortunately, it will be hard to explain during "civilized" times. For trade, I'll bring a hand powered DVD/CD player so I can lighten the mood with some good Britney Spears -- I suck at the penny-whistle.
More than likely a dirty bomb that is more a release of plutonium than an explosion -- also more of a threat.
I'm sure there are things like chelated barium -- or something else at the health food store that is used to cleanse the body of heavy metals. I'm not an expert but I'm sure I could google "radiation poisoning remedies".
I remember watching "the day after" and it seemed to me that radioactive fallout and dust were the biggest immediate threat. So a breathing mask, waterproof gloves and a vinyl poncho might be the best thing for a man on the go after a dirty bomb. You'll also want your own water that wasn't exposed to air and a geiger counter. You know, the polyurethane and duct tape would actually be helpful in this case -- not for epidemics though. But really, caulking your house well should do the trick AND help keep down your energy bills should things get bad.
The first thing for a clean-up is to get up all the dust and scrape the top inch of soil off the ground. Another reason I'd like a BobCat.
Slashdot Mirror
If I downloaded "Rome" or whatever of HBO's content -- I would be about a thousand times more likely to get a subscription to HBO then someone who didn't. That is if I could afford it and get the connection.
Some of this might be for convenience of people who don't have TiVo -- or people who are curious. Some might be too cheap to buy HBO programming for the one show they like. But really, isn't it a lot of hassle to download a file like this when you can just change the channel? If $4 to buy something on PPV is more valuable than hours of your time, then perhaps you have to wait for that person to get more allowance.
I've got two bundles of premium channels now. I might want to download an episode I missed. Clicking my remote to channel 390 is a lot easier than trying to get it on P2P.
They could poison all the P2P networks to where nobody could get anything useful. But will it have the effect of making more money?
I admit that I prefer this technique over using the courts and the tax payer funded police to ensure a companies profits. The idea that an officer could be taken off the task of protecting my family, so that they can bust in the door of a neighbors house to drag little Timmy from the basement where he has been using his parents broadband connection has always seemed ridiculous to me.
I will say, that P2P does detrimental impact to computer games revenue, and software. In this case, there isn't a convenience or advertising factor to consider--especially with games. On software, I can only say that I purchase or my company purchases all of the software I use now -- but 99% of those applications are programs that I had gotten a copy of that I didn't pay for when I had no revenue. So, the "logic" of stopping illegal distribution depends upon what type of product you are selling and the economic model of who you want to pay. With games, the end user and the little Timmy ARE the market, whereas most professional applications get money from someone who makes revenue from their use--so you want a lot of people to get familiar.
As an aside, I think that perhaps, businesses should be paying extra fees whenever they want something enforced that does not entail a public benefit.
The nation had few taxes in its early history. From 1791 to 1802, the United States government was supported by internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves. The high cost of the War of 1812 brought about the nation's first sales taxes on gold, silverware, jewelry, and watches. In 1817, however, Congress did away with all internal taxes, relying on tariffs on imported goods to provide sufficient funds for running the government.
In 1862, in order to support the Civil War effort, Congress enacted the nation's first income tax law. Those with incomes of more than $10,000 paid taxes at a higher rate (I read $10,000 as wealthy).
In 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. The amendment gave Congress legal authority to tax income and resulted in a revenue law that taxed incomes of both individuals and corporations.
Taxes increased usually during time of war. But, at the start, I don't see any taxes that affected the wages of the average working man until 1862 and those were very low (I'm thinking they were mostly on property)-- do you have any links for that?
So, about 110 years until we had even a basic income tax. Read it here; http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005921.html/
Most of the taxes were tariffs on imported goods and the rest were on sales of luxury items like tobacco and booze. Pretty much opposite of the "free trade" advocates. Now there might be something to the economic theories of "efficiencies" -- that country X can specialize and produce Y product cheaper, thus allowing America to produce a lot of Z. Once we exported simple manufacturing and low tech labor -- maybe that makes some sense. But now outsource everything. But where really does this efficiency come from? We export raw timber out of the US to Canada, on roads that taxpayers built and we charge almost nothing from the timber industry. Then we buy the imported cabinets that might be only a few dollars cheaper than if they were local -- but we got none of the labor wages. And this is only feasible because fuel is almost subsidized. And we do this now with cars and airplanes and parts are shipped here and there -- wherever 10 pennies can be shaved in cost of production. But how much do we lose in money that could have gone to an American worker? How much do we lose in technology and know how? There is more than just raw costs of goods -- but those issues don't matter to the business that wants to make a profit. They would matter to a government that wanted to look out for the welfare of its citizens -- but we don't have that government. If they can rob a dollar from everyone so that a few can get more wealthy -- then that is what you are going to get "told" is the smart thing to do. You aren't privy to the back room meetings that come up with these trade schemes or the Banking Reform Bills. You don't really have an advocacy involved -- other than, someone in the room saying; "what can we get away with?" Also helped now by a corporate media that shills for these schemes.
I also don't think the founding fathers were perfect, untouched by greed or omniscient so all things can change -- for better or worse. I'm just asking people to realize that wages, and sales taxes on Non-luxury items is NOT the best way to do things. Let a business hire an accountant. Why does someone making $60k have to go to H&R Block and spend $400 to figure out what they owe the government when most of them don't even have a retirement plan? I've found that when I made less money -- I was actually working harder. So I don't think that is fair or even good for me -- even though I might make a lot more than that to make people who provide labor for this country to also have to provide a tax base for the government that more and more just creates infrastructure for businesses and the well to do.
If we got most tax revenue
I am a technical "smart guy" and I know I had problems at first with girls.
I think smart people have a harder time in relationships just because they are at one end of "the curve". You almost have to translate things to the average person. Some people are intimidated, others resentful, in addition to whatever else might cause anyone to disapprove of things. But the major handicap to "brains" is that we tend to rely too much on them. Emotions can't be reasoned with. If you don't get your basic needs met, there is no amount of study or logic that will overcome it. People of less IQ tend to "get on with things more" and not to sit there and ponder. Psychoanalysis -- unless it is combined with action (called "behavior modification" now) -- will almost guarantee someone is stuck in a morass of self-absorbtion, in my opinion, because little of being happy in life or changing what you don't like is based on understanding. Birds don't think how to fly and we don't often think how to breathe. Feelings don't have to be justified -- just responded to. I used to analyze how I felt and what was appropriate about how someone treated me. I wouldn't just say "go away" when someone got me angry. Now I respond to how I feel and perhaps apologize later. It's amazing how much better that seems to work. So if you are cold, wear a coat or if you get angry, yell. Let your feelings guide you and don't wait until you think you are justified -- that doesn't go for everyone. Just us brainy people who don't think we have a license to look out for ourselves.
I've noticed that the people who have less "angst" in life are often big jerks. They think that a girl is hot, and they tell her and then ask for what they want and they often get it. They just do for themselves and don't question if they have a right. They feel worthy. People who always blame others for things rarely ever go to psychiatrists to find out what is wrong with "them" -- they go to church or a golf club and just talk about what is wrong with others. Jerks are well adjusted. That isn't necessarily an IQ issue. It's about being introspective. And you pay the price of being a thoughtful and better person for it. So balance will be attained if you concentrate more on what you like and not what you are worthy of. Nobody deserves anything and all worth is debatable. If you aren't going to stick up for your unfair share someone else is going to take it. So, go out and get the girl you want, and tell here what you want is her. You will be protecting her from "the jerk". Go get more than what you are worthy of. If, after that, you have some left, then give it away to those you think need it. But you have to take it first.
Us smart people also need to learn to shut-up at times. Girls talk to us about feelings but they don't want us to "fix" or figure out anything. They want empathy, not solutions. Also, in our case, don't always try to please. Give and take at the same amount that someone else is giving and taking -- otherwise they won't respect you. Don't offer up information about yourself until someone has earned it from you. Most people don't have the reference to judge correctly about your life -- nor do most people really want to know who "you" are. People want to know what you think of them, and the are uncomfortable with people who act differently from their expectations. It took me a long time to really understand this. So, don't give others permission to judge you, don't ever ask "what is wrong with me", let people know what YOU want from them. Don't give more than others have given you, unless they need charity. Don't offer advice or criticism -- only sell it if people are buying. Only offer encouragement -- that is what most people want and won't disrespect you for.
Stop me before I sound preachy-- these are just things I tell myself. Some of this might fit or it might not. I'm just assuming, that if you came from the brainy, self-critical place I came from it would make sense. Having trouble with girls just reminds me of what I went through. If I wante
I'd forgotten about that.
Making beer (or more precisely, meade) is suspected to be the main reason people got together to form societies. All that grain was dumped into pits and fermented to create a thick and sweet high protein meade.
And before refrigeration, about all people would drink is tea (boiled) or something fermented. There was a watered down vinegar that seemed popular to the greeks and israelites in ancient times. Probably added a lot to their endurance.
And yes, selling booze or some narcotic or music and story telling will be a very good way to be appreciated. I still remember how much I enjoyed stories by the fire at camp many years ago. Without cable TV, people will be starving for something to make them forget "survival" and how they are almost constantly itching somewhere.
I am really getting inspired to take my kids camping now.
Hey, if you can rise above "survival" -- that is always the way to go. I didn't go as primitive as you, but I do remember always having crap under my fingernails -- so yeah a towel is nice. Getting clean in a shower and being dry in a bed is the biggest thing you miss when "roughing it".
Pretty cool that you camped through college. Everybody thinks the "have to" do things a certain way -- because have the subtle influence of our peers. But I wouldn't want to camp in many states or do this now that I'm older and not in peak shape.
I agree, if survival skills are necessary, after a few months most people would be dead.
But I think, hunger and discomfort make people become instantly a lot more thoughtful -- so I think that most anyone would learn from any survived mistakes very quickly. You are going to go insane from mosquitos, so you'll be rubbing the sap of every tree on your body inside of two days (after not sleeping for a night) -- just as one example. After your pack is torn open by raccoons, you'll think; "maybe if I hang this away from my bag from a rope on a tree..."
But most will die inside of two weeks from lack of good water. Food poisoning or severe dysentery. Then in a month or two from Pneumonia (if it's cold or wet). Then infected skin sores.
But really, violence from others after a month is a real concern.
I expect more people however, will band together and form small, self-sufficient communities. Surviving on your own really sucks -- and having someone else to dig the privy or watch your back allows you to do something else. I think there is a dangerous fantasy by some "rugged individualists" out there (I see this in Libertarians and Republicans all the time) who think somehow they can "go it alone". Going it alone is called "survival" and it sucks-- and few of us have done it. I've had a taste, and I like society, thank you very much. Anyone who thinks being Rambo is going to be about freedom and somehow glamorous is a fool. You spend all day trying to acquire food and trying to get dry or get bugs off of you. Even just a dry, sealed cabin is a major luxury. There are native indians who live out in the wilds still -- but even they form tribes and these people are a lot tougher than we are.
I was thinking about Polar Bear hair -- but I thought since it was hollow inside, it might never turn off its heat trapping properties. That's why I thought Dog would be better -- because they don't suffer from wearing their coats in the summer (though the downy insulating hairs are shed on many breeds).
;-)
But you are way ahead of me on the knitting. Though realistically, I think the hand weaving will still be too labor intensive to be useful even Post apocalypse because 1) there will still be a LOT of clothing around and 2) people know how to make looms. Darning by hand is SLOW
Boy, are we survival geeks. But, I haven't even been camping in about 10 years.
Can you actually order a polar bear sweater? (on that regard, it is something you might wear or hang on your pack -- but in cold weather, a good jacket and boots are essential).
The Constitution puts forth certain explicit rights for US Citizens, but the "establishment clause" (I think), which says in essence, when anything in the Constitution is not explicitly set as a restriction on Citizens then there is no restriction.
So, if the constitution doesn't say being anonymous is or isn't a right, then it IS a right. The tie goes to the citizen -- yeah!
That this concept has been forgotten and largely ignored is a travesty -- boooo!
In some regard, the constitution puts forth those exceptions that restrict rights, while bending over backwards to say; "by not saying you don't explicitly have a right, that doesn't mean you DON'T have that right".
Of course, much has been done to stand our constitution on its ear. I think it is easier to explain how things should be, then you can contrast that with how they are;
Businesses have no right to profits -- except when they do not infringe upon the prosperity of the citizen--meaning; The free distribution of music on the internet must be proven to NOT provide utility or the new creation of music of artists BEFORE it can be said to be an infringement. Again, if there is no basic right for a record label to exist and profit from music if it doesn't add the the quality and utility of the consumer. So, if you could prove that artists would stop making music if all music were free -- then you could pass a law curtailing "piracy" which isn't piracy, it is only copyright infringement if it is resold.
The consumer is sovereign -- meaning if you buy something, you can sell it or destroy it or even copy it. You just can't copy the design and re-sell it if there is copyright or a patent. If you buy a ticket or a car you can resell it at a profit. Meaning, scalpers of tickets --as annoying as it is, have a perfect right to re-sell what they have bought (the ticket). The companies that sell you tickets have gotten around this by saying the ticket is a document showing that you are leasing a space (you and you alone) for a certain time. Really, the vendor only has the right to change the way tickets are distributed and sold -- but no right to determine what you do with it.
Patent law and copyright exist to reward "originators" of unique ideas. Not as "royalties" or things that can be traded down to one's heirs. There was a real fear of the royal obligations that could be used to demand payments on necessary items forever. Since patents and copyrights seem to be rewarding anyone but the originators of the ideas -- I think they are out of whack with the intended purpose. But I do think that some drug patents do reward innovators and are not excessively long (just to show, I'm not anti-business). I think where we went wrong with drug development in this country is #1 allowing for commercial advertising and #2 how the government does NOT try to bid down costs and #3 how the government funds research. Personally, I think the Gov should only support research on CURES or vaccinations -- and only in rare cases treatments if something is wide spread and it can be shown a cure is not yet feasible. You could insert X and Y disease to argue anything here. But if we say we have limited funds, the government should not be improving or guaranteeing business profits. What the government does well is long term research into areas that have little profit incentive but a great deal of utility to the citizen, namely; cures. A drug company has no incentives right now to find cures, if they can develop treatments. Otherwise, you can manipulate accounting practices or studies to prove anything -- we won't have proof that drug companies are just using government research to subsidize what they would otherwise have to spend on the next baldness treatment.
The concept of taxing labor wages I would imagine, would be about the biggest economic sin to the Founding Fathers. Though we are a Republic, in that the original intent was that "wealthy" people of means would be chosen to represent the populace. That idea was based on public service by people who had
Love the chinese proverb about the comb...
I'm glad you took it the right way... some might not see where I was coming from. I remember being very desperate to be accepted by anyone but especially a girl. I would wonder what was wrong with me -- I could see the biggest jerks having no problems and I was smart, looked like Sting, and interesting. Later I discovered that my insecurity and desire to prove myself -- combined with too much forthcoming honesty is definite kryptonite for any girl.
I can respect being cautious about therepy and head drugs. ON the other hand -- I spent a lot of time trying to improve myself. Praying. Doing a million things to "feel right". Even when I was on track with a good job and education -- I never felt "good enough". So, nothing -- nothing worked. And really, when I look back at myself, I would have thought I was a decent person who was a little too self-critical. But worthy...
When I finally got therapy (intensive) it accomplished two things. 1) having been critized and analyzed and put down isn't worth a bucket of spit compared to people just being supportive. 2) If you've been down since you were 10, there may be nothing YOU can do to "get up". Kind of like trying to walk after paralysis; you are going to need someones help to be able to walk again. I took Prozac when it was experimental (results are totally different so there are many other options today). The Doc described my depression as like a stream that had followed a pattern so long, it had worn a deep channel in my mind. So, no matter how much water (happiness) I get, or how much I try to change the thought patters (digging trenches), the next time it rains everything will follow the same channel again.
So what the anti-depressant did was to "level the ground" so that the stream was able to follow new paths. It didn't make me happy. But the change was dramatic and immediate. I just didn't dwell on my shortcomings. I didn't feel like I had to prove things to others. I could actually take a compliment, and appreciate it. Wow. I guess it is like alchoholism in a way -- people who are not addicted (and I haven't been -- just an example) can't understand why people just don't stop. But some people become chemically incapable.
So I think everyone should try the self-discipline angle like you did. And definitely avoid the helplessness route where you always blame a "problem you can't control". But live exists between these extremes. Total self-control and programmability is a delusion brought to us by the fortunate. And don't kid yourself, most people are faking the happiness and self-control. Most people are driven by their urges and then fabricate a story of principles around it.
Sounds like you are doing well without putting blinders on. Personally, I have gotten so self-assured, I don't even think of much of any philosophy anymore. I just think; hey I need to eat better and work out. But, eh... let me make some money. Which I think is pretty healthy. But sometimes I envy the debth and pathos of my early days -- I just don't miss all the frickin' angst.
I'm sort of lucky I didn't find a girl before getting my life together or I would have gone through what you did with the divorce -- nobody can fix anyone else... you just have to follow similar tragectories and have hobbies.
I wish I spent more time giving back to little kids like you do... maybe in the future. I have a 3 year old and a 6 month old (both boys). They are awesome and I also, could not imagine life without them. If you don't screw up being a dad -- you are never a screw up. The rest is small shit. Kids are the only "big thing" in life. No philosophy, cute girl, or high-paying job is worth sacrificing their well-being.
Just don't let yourself fall into the trap that you need to "sacrifice" your own well-being for your kids. You end up being destructive and resentful. You have to be the best person, and happy for THEM. It's a gift. You know that when your kids are sad or acting upset, that it bothers you. It's a two-way street.
Good luck.
KFG,
It has been fun. You really know your stuff. There definitely needs to be a static page on this. I wasn't mentioning wool socks because I didn't think you pointed that out -- just to re-emphasize that foot-rot is a big issue (but you knew that). I would think under 4 different categories.
Practical things every homeowner can do (subsection for renters).
Most likely emergency equipment for a 1 week disaster.
Most likely equipment for a 3 month shutdown of infrastructure.
Shit hits the fan (sub category of Nuclear, Food and Transportation shut down, Government Declares Martial Law [i.e., don't calmly go into any camp -- tell them to air drop supplies])
One other topic would be the top ten health issues and their treatment/prevention.
You have; Pneumonia. Dysintery. Cholera. E-Coli and food poisening. Foot rot. Misquito and infected sores (in the Amazon, this would be the #1 issue -- so I've heard).
So getting wet and staying damp is probably the biggest health issue that most don't consider. Hygiene is very important. Also, many people will have to eat rotten food -- it will be more common than the rats that start to swarm -- how can you safely "dumpster dive". You get the idea.
My mention of gold is that I think we have a tenous, propped-up economy now. If we had another 1 month disaster, you may have people -- at least locally, not accepting currency. I don't think country-wide, but if you are dealing with locals who have given up believing anything from the Government -- came close to that in Louisiana. So, I think alternative economics is more likely than I would have thought ten years ago.
Anyway, there is a great web site called www.urbansurvival.com that has links to great practical things to do. They consider an economic shutdown the most likely possibility and this would cause much the same situation as a shut-down of the power grid.
And No. I don't have all these things ready. I have rope, twine, walky-talkies, and a few emergency kits. I could stand to lose a few pounds. But I have a 6 month old and a 3 year old to worry about -- so traveling into the woods is definitely out.
True. Good point.
;-)
I'm just pointing out a 100% effective technique. Of course, destroying all packages might accomplish that.
I think religion can help you when life sucks and there is no way out.
, 00.html
But it made me a miserable doormat when I was Christian. I have often thought that societies where people were less religious were often happier. Either because they had a better life-style or lack of religion leads to a better lifestyle. One thing I can say for sure, is that it makes you take care of your life here on earth a bit better.
Here's a great article with statistics to back up the damage of religion;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944
Just look at anywhere in the world with the most religious control, and you'll find more war and suffering.
Not to diminish your "journey" to enlightenment (but this IS Slashdot).
... that Positive Attitude and Power Faith is good programming to a point. I don't know if some of these people are really happy or just fooling themselves. They tend to get a nice mercedes once they have money. Material things can give you a sense of accomplishment -- but focusing on them will never make you happy. It sounds like you're at the "self programming" stage. So when you get depressed again, you will blame yourself for not being Positive enough. Look, you are going to get down again. You may need anti-depressants or just a good date. But don't take discouragement or sadness as a sign of failure. Sometimes you can still enjoy yourself even with a negative attitude and few prospects. Don't take things too seriously. Like I've adopted the belief in Greek Gods -- so when bad things happen to me, I am proud that I could entertain these great beings. Be comic relief or a warning to others. Just have a perspective that it is alright to BE you. Unless of course, Jesus grades on a curve -- then I'm screwed.
... not in what is your ideal. Like if your father stuck in your head that only great football players have value and you are 4 feet tall with lifts. I highly recommend the Tao of Pooh for anyone wanting to attain enlightenment (yes, it talks about eastern philosophy as explained by Winnie the Pooh).
I would think that one very important aspect of achieving happiness you didn't mention is something you're grandpa could have told you; don't marry the first girl that will sleep with you.
And for relationships, you need to realize that nobody can be everything. Get some friends who like science fiction if they girl doesn't like Doctor Who -- you'll only annoy her. And if she has lots of cats and stuffed animals on the bed, avoid at all cost unless you both plan on avoiding reality together.
I'd also add, don't sweat the big stuff you can't control. Some of that "faith gives one power" will just give you expectations and turn you into a door matt. If someone mistreats you, admonish them -- you wouldn't allow someone to kick a dog. Act like you are worthy of more. The faith that will work for you is that you will rise to any challenge. There are a lot of types of faith, and some of them are actually destructive -- they won't tell you this in church. But if you read the New Testament on your own, you'll realize that Jesus didn't care about what others think, he was non-violent but never a doormat, and he valued people based on how they treated others. Simple stuff.
I'm around a lot of sales people
And something I learned from the "Tao of Pooh" -- if you want to be something, enjoy what you want, and you will be it (different from self-indulgence). I used to beat myself up for not being as good and enlightened as I could be -- which didn't help. If I wanted to be good, I should just be -- and that allows my good nature to come through. Also in the book is the idea that you need to find value in what you are
I'm sure that in the Matrix you can't starve -- the feeding tubes are still connected. Thinking you are hit might cause a trauma -- but thinking you are starving can only cause an appetite.
Neo never covered that "reality simulation" issue.
The "there is no spoon" comment was a bit obscure for even people watching the Matrix to get. If you'd preceded it with "make sure your pack has a red pill and a blue pill" -- then the spoon reference would have worked.
Actually, I've heard that the ultimate fiber is Dog Hair.
There is a lady (has a website somewhere) who will make you a sweater from your own dog if you send her the hair.
It seems that dog hair is a better insulator when it is cold than wool or down and insulates even when wet (note Labradors that swim in frozen lakes). Also, the structure of the hair fiber changes when it gets warm and it breathes better than cotton. If it didn't, all those golden retrievers would have heat stroke.
Now which dog -- I don't know. I'm sure short-haired Dachshund is impractical -- I'm guessing that Saint Bernard's might be close to ideal. You'll have to have it washed a lot to not have that doggy smell.
So man's best friend has man's best sweater. Of course, this would be very expensive, but if you wanted the BEST all weather clothing, look no further than Dog Hair.
Actually, I've heard that the ultimate fiber is Dog Hair.
There is a lady (has a website somewhere) who will make you a sweater from your own dog if you send her the hair.
It seems that dog hair is a better insulator when it is cold than wool or down and insulates even when wet (note Labradors that swim in frozen lakes). Also, the structure of the hair fiber changes when it gets warm and it breathers better than cotton. If it didn't, all those golden retrievers would have heat stroke.
Now which dog -- I don't know. I'm sure short-haired Dachshund is impractical -- I'm guessing that Saint Bernard's might be close to ideal. You'll have to have it washed a lot to not have that doggy smell.
So man's best friend has man's best sweater. Of course, this would be very expensive, but if you wanted the BEST all weather clothing, look no further than Dog Hair.
I like that swiss army knife that was linked to. Personally, I'd like that Flash Drive + Knife if it also had the clock and the led light.
A swiss army knife is handy -- but KFG is right about that sturdy blade with a fixed handle. That swiss knife will get gunked up very quickly and won't be usable for eating or cleaning a dead animal -- not sterile. If you have to carve for any length of time on a piece of wood that spring handled gizmo will seem like a toy.
So get both. You can always use it. But for real survival -- I'd rather have a very sturdy blade than a "do it all" toy. The tweezers are a must though. But with a good blade, you can muddle through the can opening or build tools for the rest.
If I were to travel, I'd go for a nice hatchet over an ax. That ax is too heavy -- and I probably will save my energy by using smaller wood to make my fire. Carry just an ax head and cut the handle with the hatchet if you want long-term, end of the world survival.
We can't really support 250 Million + people without our infrastructure. So voting for good, open government is a better option than buying a hunting knife and training in survival skills. Under Carter and Clinton, FEMA was an agency that could actually help with more than blank checks. As much as I know about survival, it will still be a real "iffy" prospect if you are talking about more than 100,000 desperate people. Depending on yourself is a great thing to strive for -- and I will. But it isn't really that practical. Everyone working together to help each other out is a much better survival strategy.
So, stop voting for the Republican's for a few years -- until they can get rid of the crooks. Getting the bums out of the White House is the single most important thing we US citizens can do to ensure our future. Financially, spiritually and physically.
I lived at a camp for a number of years where we built our own cabin. We used kerosene powered heaters -- and that's was it in the winter. Outside was a urinal and a privy. We also had a pump which you would need to prime with water -- but in the winter you'd want to keep salt water, or forget the pump, or dump hot coals and water in it (it was pure, rusted iron).
... you'd be better off working with neighbors to rebuild things and organize. On the road you'd have nothing but what you brought and be at the whim of the most unhinged in society.
Anyway, I remember waking up with black soot around my nose from that stupid kerosene heater. The space blanket was could actually get you hot--even at twenty below. But I got a horrible cold and perhaps pneumonia from sleeping in that cold cabin all winter. If you read any stories of early settlers you'll know that most died from some respiratory issue. The next problems were bad food and bad water -- but the pneumonia can get even the most practiced survivor. Getting warm and dry and comfortable at night is going to be a big issue.
If society falls apart, long-term issues are different than short-term camping strategies -- so we should probably separate the two. I've mentioned elsewhere how I don't think a few million people going to the woods is practical. Travel is more dangerous than setting up to survive in your home. Katrina being a rare exception -- most people are at risk in their cars leaving these storms. Just look at Houston... Rita hit at calls 2 or 3 (not enough to wreck most homes) and all of those people could have been stuck in cars -- a much worse place. Most major cities would be even worse. So if you can't get on a bike or on foot to evacuate (like New York city -- one place you really don't want to hang out to survive) -- then for most people (not right on the cost), the best advice is to stay put.
If it is a doomsday scenario
But if you survive a month, your next big issue is Pneumonia or disease (at least when it's cold).
Oh, I almost forgot... silver. Silver is a great anti-bacterial. So make sure you use a "silver spoon" if you want "the best pack". It can also remind you of our beloved president who everyone will curse as society dissolves around them (can't help any opportunity to diss that rat-bastard).
I knew it was for wounds! Attracting bears and using it for tape was just too--suboptimal.
Though even the "pasteurized" stuff will work. Royal jelly is even better (bees use it to preserve killed invaders in the nest). But really, sugar and beta-dyne will work as well. I was reading about a doctor researching burn patients who investigated some Indian treatments that used honey. What he found was that the bacteria actually grow faster in the presence of the sugars -- but they grow too fast without any "nutrition" and so they starve or attack each other for food. The new skin cells also take advantage of the sugars (reducing scaring) but don't have the same issue since they get nutrients from the blood. The anti-biotic takes care of the rest. The combination of honey and anti-baterial are ideal for skin repair.
I would just recommend TeaTree oil in the pack as it is about the best anti-bacterial around--organic or otherwise.
You have to worry about Mosquitos as well.
;-)
Most of us aren't going to be in a place with a lot of Woods around. The last place I would want to go is the woods, they will be teeming with survivalists types all really excited that they packed a swiss army knife and a 45 ready to repopulate the earth with my wife.
Thanks, but no thanks. I'll sit tight in my house and "survive" there. Out in the woods, there will be ten nuts to each squirrel. Learn to share before you shoot, please.
Had to have a reference to Hitchhikers Guide on SlashDot, didn't we?
I think if society fails, most people would want Pot over cigs. Also, it's easier to grow. Unfortunately, it will be hard to explain during "civilized" times. For trade, I'll bring a hand powered DVD/CD player so I can lighten the mood with some good Britney Spears -- I suck at the penny-whistle.
More than likely a dirty bomb that is more a release of plutonium than an explosion -- also more of a threat.
I'm sure there are things like chelated barium -- or something else at the health food store that is used to cleanse the body of heavy metals. I'm not an expert but I'm sure I could google "radiation poisoning remedies".
I remember watching "the day after" and it seemed to me that radioactive fallout and dust were the biggest immediate threat. So a breathing mask, waterproof gloves and a vinyl poncho might be the best thing for a man on the go after a dirty bomb. You'll also want your own water that wasn't exposed to air and a geiger counter. You know, the polyurethane and duct tape would actually be helpful in this case -- not for epidemics though. But really, caulking your house well should do the trick AND help keep down your energy bills should things get bad.
The first thing for a clean-up is to get up all the dust and scrape the top inch of soil off the ground. Another reason I'd like a BobCat.