1930's vs oo's

Discussion in 'General Preparedness Discussion' started by palooka slim, Mar 9, 2009.

  1. palooka slim

    palooka slim Guest

    9
    0
    So how much different do you will things be now compared to the 30's if we have an economic collapse? will there be riots? martial law? I think things will be worse for numerous reasons.most of the population in the 30's were living in rural areas and used to farming,had knowledge of growing,canning,livestock etc. There were a lot less people.people did not expect the goverment to take care of them.In other words Americans were still rugged individuals instead of pampered children.:eek:
     
  2. dukman

    dukman Greenhorn

    96
    0
    I think "pampered children" is putting it lightly. SPOILED BRATS is more like what we are. :D If and when the time comes, I am ready to do what it necessary and change my ways, without losing sight of the morals I was brought up with.

    Unfortunately you are right. There are a lot more people out there, most of who don't share the same moral compass. They would have no problem looting and stealing their way to survival. That is why we plan and think ahead. That is why we are here. We all feel the need to survive, but also feel the need to adhere to the same values as our forefathers.

    If all we end up having to survive is a couple bad winter storms, so be it. At least we were prepared.
     

  3. Herbalpagan

    Herbalpagan Well-Known Member

    252
    0
    I agree that people are spoiled brats now a days...but then some back then thought those kids were too, I'm sure!
    There is more media coverage now than back then and more communications (internet) and phone. Back then people didn't always have a daily paper, more houses didn't have phones than did, and families sat around the radio once a day to hear the news. There was no "in depth interviews" with experts. There was really only one point of view and that was what you were told.
    On the other hand, people were able to do without a lot easier, knew how to garden and cut back. Cut back, heck, none had credit cards, let alone credit card debt. Most people who had their own home, owned it out right. Family stuck together and many generations of family lived together to get through hard times.
     
  4. Canadian

    Canadian Well-Known Member

    1,512
    0
    It'll be much worse. People don't know how to take care of themselves anymore.
     
  5. UncleJoe

    UncleJoe Well-Known Member

    6,764
    108
    That is the epitome of understatement. In 2 short generations the majority of people in this country have lost the ability to do anything for themselves.
    We enjoy all the modern conveniences as much as the next person, but we are also able to provide about 75% of our own food. We could, if necessary, live without the grid. We heat with wood and could cook with it as well, again if necessary, and water can be hand pumped from the well, but there are very few of us that could continue on in a civilized manner without the modern amenities that prevail in society today.
    YES I also feel an extended depression will be FAR worse today than in my grandparents day.
     
  6. The_Blob

    The_Blob performing monkey

    4,230
    4
    well... maybe a kick in the complacency is what MY (b1984) generation needs! :eek: :rolleyes: ;)
     
  7. Expeditioner

    Expeditioner Well-Known Member

    482
    0
    Maybe a reality check is in order. We are slowly and surely becoming an "idiocracy". Check out the movie by the same name. It is a not so funny comedy but is a good indicator of where we could be heading.
     
  8. FreeAmerica

    FreeAmerica Guest

    6
    0
    In the 1930's, 21% of people lived on a farm. Today, less than 2%. That means alot more people will not be able to self-sustain. Food shortages will create a lot of violence as starving people will do anything for food.
     
  9. dukman

    dukman Greenhorn

    96
    0
    An ironic thought crossed my mind. You all have heard about the Marijuana growing fields that people have stumbled upon in the middle of the woods, and the heavily armed guards that scared them away or shot at them? Kind of weird thinking that in 10 years, instead of the cash crop being narcotics, it could be regular old vegetables they were growing in the middle of a forest, guarded by heavily armed people...
     
  10. Herbalpagan

    Herbalpagan Well-Known Member

    252
    0
    Dukman; that's a total riot! I can see it now, people sneaking up on the veggie farm in the middle of the night for a raid.:p
     
  11. MaryV

    MaryV Well-Known Member

    123
    0
    might be the govt one day taking your crops in broad daylight...
    but yes, starving people will do anything including steal your food or even kill you trying to get to it.
     
  12. MaryV

    MaryV Well-Known Member

    123
    0
    i remember reading during WW2 in nazi europe farmers just about to harvest their fields when along came trucks of soldiers who hopped out and began taking the crops, by nightfall it was all gone to the army.
    khmer rouge took everyones food, killed anyone who tried to grow or hunt their own.
    stalin and mao both controlled the people by taking the food.
    govts may very well be feared in a time of famine, because do you think THEY will let their children go hungry? No, they will let YOUR children go hungry.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2009
  13. UncleJoe

    UncleJoe Well-Known Member

    6,764
    108
    Yep. All they have to do is drag the anti-hoarding laws back up and take what you and I have worked so hard for all in the name of the public good. Never mind that I tilled the ground, planted the seeds, watered, weeded, harvested, canned, and dried all that stuff. They can " legally" take it because the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The few being those of us that prepared for this mess.
     
  14. Paronoid1

    Paronoid1 Member

    13
    0
    And this is one of many reasons why the Founding Fathers included the 2nd Amendment. God forbid any of us are in the situation you describe.
     
  15. endurance

    endurance Well-Known Member

    190
    0
    I'm just not a zombie hord kind of guy. I just don't see it. Do I see crime rising? Sure, but it's lower now than it was when I was born (in the 60s). Do I see people struggling to buy food? Some are already, but others are living on less than you or I can imagine and eating just fine because of the things they've elected to do without. It's a hard lesson for this generation (including mine) but what we've assumed we're entitled to just isn't sustainable. Cheap gas is soon to be a thing of the past. That means that owning a car is going to be a luxury more and more folks can't afford. That means the suburbs will become less and less desirable places to live and the high density housing of the inner city may become the most desirable. Sure you can't grow your own food, but you can save a lot on gas, insurance, registration, and the cost of a car if you can walk, bike or use public transportation to get you around. Is that the life I want? Probably not, but it's already a choice some folks are making which is part of the reason suburban homes in many cities are the hardest hit.

    I've already seen changes in my community, specifically, in my neighborhood that are improvements rather than problems caused by the challenges of these times. I'm talking more with my neighbors. We're exchanging ideas on gardening. We're helping each other out more with projects that benefit us all (repairing a fence recently, weed wacking an overgrown vacant lot, etc). I see Americans as a lot more resourceful than people give credit to. Let's remember that we're still one of the largest food producing nations in the world. We're still one of the most affluent nations in the world. If times are tough here, think what they're like in Bangladesh or Somalia or India or China. We're lucky as hell and we should be grateful for what we have. The fact that we can even have the luxury to have enough surplus income to store extra food or own more than one gun in the household or have access to the internet or have two cars in the driveway of our 2-3,000 sq. ft. house means that we're a long way from starving as a nation.

    This is an opportunity to sort out priorities for every American and I see that as a good thing.
     
  16. Samoan

    Samoan Guest

    35
    0
    Everything is a lot more complicated these days then in those days....
     
  17. Viking

    Viking Well-Known Member

    2,280
    79
    My wife and I have been doing in depth studies of the economy for nearly ten years so the this thread is right down my alley so I'm going to jump in with both feet. First of all to get an idea of what could happen to our economy you have to back in the timeline to 1920 to 1923 Weimar Republic of Germany, in 1920 one could buy a loaf of bread for one Mark, by 1923 inflation was so bad that it took 1 million Marks to buy a loaf of bread. The people there were burning their money to heat with, rich people were selling their prize possesions. Once all the trillions of freshly printed money hits our markets the effect will be about the same, possibly much worse. A few things to take into consideration here is that when the 1930s Great Depression was going on is that the population was 1/3rd of what it is now, also remember that the US dollar was still backed by gold and silver and there was a great deal of factories and steel mills which add to the power of a dollar. Today most of our heavy manufacturing plants are gone as well as steel mills, thanks to NAFTA and our shift from a industrial age to a service age, other than farming there is not much that makes our Federal Reserve Notes worth anything. One of the worst things that happened actually started in 1913 when the Federal Reserve System was put into place, all lovingly designed by the great and powerful world bankers that told everyone that their plan would "Decentralize the banking system." What it did in reality was to open the door to remove all control of the value of gold and silver backing to allow them to print as much "paper" as they wanted too. When the US dollar was on the Constitutional gold/silver standard the difference in value between it and gold and silver stored never exceeded 2% to 4%. Todays dollar is probably worth about 2 cents compared with pre 1913 dollars and gold has been artifically held down to just over $900 a troy oz., I figure that if gold were to be released from banksters controls it would be worth about $3200 a troy oz. . Banks hate to see gold that's $1000 an oz. because it shows the dollar for what it really is, paper that could be better used on a roll in the bathroom. Thankfully Pres. Nixon took off the controls on gold ownership that FDR put in place in 1933, what most of you may not know is that physical gold and silver in bullion and coins are in very short supply due to the great demand for a stable reserve currency. Of course there are other things that work like currency, things like food, ammo, labor etc., in other words, the barter system. If you are not prepared by now for what is coming you may end up on the short end of a stick. There is still time to get some things but most of the important things are getting pretty scarce and increasingly expensive. I've told my wife and friends that even all that we have done may end up not being enough, but at least we have done the best we could. Believe me, our friends and neighbors and we will not go down without a fight, we realize what our founding fathers gave so that we could have the freedoms we have. Should we give anything less?
     
  18. Canadian

    Canadian Well-Known Member

    1,512
    0
    The decline in value in the U.S. dollar can be tracked to 1971 when the last parts of the gold standard were dropped. You can also trace a gradually increasing price trend in gold starting that same year.

    The value of a currency needs to be tied to something. At a certain point the paper dollar will be seen for what it is. a make believe asset.
     
  19. Viking

    Viking Well-Known Member

    2,280
    79
    Nixon did a real job on the dollar, I remember that there was a huge demand for gold, seems to me that Japan was one of major countries going for the exchange as we had a large trade embalance due to all the electronics and other products we were getting from them. I don't think they trusted the US dollars all that much, maybe the Viet Nam war had some effect as well, anyway there definately was a lot of unrest going on at that time.
     
  20. The_Blob

    The_Blob performing monkey

    4,230
    4
    Viking, even though the U.S. has not yet reached the depths to which Germany descended in that era, you can't look at the constant depreciation of the dollar since the early 1970s and really be alarmed. It seems the contemporary US differs from 1924 Germany only in the duration between cause and effect. While the German experience was compressed over a few short years, the effects of the our inflation have been more drawn out.

    In my view, this has occurred for two reasons...

    1. American central bankers have learned enough from the German troubles to delay and extend the consequences of printing too much fiat money.

    2. Germany was a small state isolated from the rest of the world, a pariah after World War I. Consequently, it had a difficult time finding a market for its government bonds. German deficits had to be financed internally... a state which greatly accelerated the printing of fiat currency.

    Up until recently, the United States enjoyed a strong world-wide demand for its government paper, so the negative affects of government deficits have been subdued. Now, with consistently low interest rates, and a growing fear globally that U.S. deficits may have run out of control, foreign support for the U.S. bond market has faltered. In the absence of international buyers, the Fed could be forced to monetize an ever larger portions of the debt -- the modern equivalent of printing money, not the actual printing of it (but the result seems to be the same IMO).

    Whether or not the situation will slip out of control is a matter for debate. The trend is alarming though. The largest annual contribution to the outstanding public debt during the Nixon years was $30.9 billion; Ford - $77.2 billion; Carter - $181.2 billion; Reagan - $202 billion; Bush(Sr.) - $312 billion; Clinton - $397 billion; GW Bush - $596 billion.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2009