Episode-1559- Listener Calls for 4-17-15
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (28.5MB)
Today on The Survival Podcast I take your calls on permaculture, SHTF, preparedness storage, getting shit done, bone broth, back up power, medications and more.
Remember to be on a show like this one just pick up your phone and call 866-65-THINK. The best way to improve your chances of being on the air is ask your question or make your point up front, then provide details.
Also please do your best to call from a quiet area with a good connection and speak up so you can be well heard.
While I can’t put all calls on the air but I do my best to get as many of them on as I can.
Join Me Today As I Respond to Your Calls and Discuss…
- The role of annuals in permaculture systems
- Would I continue to broadcast during a SHTF
- Thoughts on storing preparedness items with redundancy
- What can be done when you decide to do it, sacrifice vs. return as an equasion
- A weak dollar good for American exports, how a misrepresented fact can make person look stupid
- Steven Harris on extended battery life on extended off grid camping
- Why Walmart should not be specifically demonized
- How to make venison bone broth that doesn’t smell and taste like ass
- Is president Hillary in our future, if so does it matter
- Prepping new garden beds in early spring
- Moss on your homestead, what it does for you, what it tells you
Resources for today’s show…
- Join the Members Brigade
- The Year 1559
- Join Our Forum
- Walking To Freedom
- TSP Gear
- Fortress Defense Consultants – (sponsor of the day)
- The Berkey Guy – (sponsor of the day)
Remember to comment, chime in and tell us your thoughts, this podcast is one man’s opinion, not a lecture or sermon. Also please enter our listener appreciation contest and help spread the word about our show. Also remember you can call in your questions and comments to 866-65-THINK (866-658-4465) and you might hear yourself on the air.
Also remember we have an expert council you can address your calls to. If you do this you should email me right after your call at jack at thesurvivalpodcast.com with expert council call in the subject line. In the body of your email tell me that you just called in a question for the council and what number you called in from. I will then give the call priority when I screen calls.
Want Every Episode of TSP Ever Produced?
Remember in addition to discounts to over 40 vendors who supply stuff you are likely buying anyway, tons of free ebooks and video content, MSB Members also get every edition of The Survival Podcast ever produced in convenient zip files in blocks of 24. More info on the MSB can be found here.
Romney was a white flag?
Back when I actually cared about politics and thought there were a decent number of legitimate leaders in the republican party Romney seemed like an ideal candidate, right down to business experience.
Sold as the best big turd floating on the top of the septic tank!
Well yeah we’re talking about politicians. It’s all pretty much a cesspool.
On Jack’s last point, here are live tornado chasers you can watch..
The dudes you wouldn’t mind seeing drive through your neighborhood, but don’t want to see them stop!
Regarding the presidential politics part… I’ve been thinking for a while that they’re setting up Condoleeza Rice as the VP, with her being a part of seemingly random events like the College Football Playoff Committee.
You think Marco Rubio is more likely?
Rice has too much GW stuck to her!
Good point, but I still think they like the idea of it not being a party represented by old white guys. So, Rubio checks 2 out of the 3 boxes.
Regarding the wild card, I think that would be Petraeus entering the race.
Hey, good call on the Walker/Rubio ticket. I’ve been thinking along the same lines. And wouldn’t you know it – those two names top the list in the latest Economist for approval ratings of Republican candidates.
Given I live in his state, I can also say that Walker fits the standard politician mold – doing what his masters tell him, not rocking the boat, and surrounding himself with flat out criminals. The “stare down the union” thing gives him the appearance of rocking the boat, but scratch the surface and you find your typical politician.
Re: Martial Law
For may years now, Mexico has had some form of Martial Law, i.e. military in full gear patrolling the streets and engaging cartels in day broad light, no prisoners policy. And when they are withdrawn from a city, people clamor back for their presence.
Regarding the guy that called in about his friend saying it’s good for exports to lower the value of the dollar:
I’ve found that when discussing complex things with friends and family, and it gets the least bit contentious, it’s best to respond by reflecting without any judgment.
In this case it would be something to the effect of: “So, you think raising the minimum wage will make it easier for companies to sell their goods overseas?” Usually they realize they probably missed something, and then you can explain in a way that doesn’t result in hurt feelings.
At least in my experience a lot of people make arguments that are typically 1 or 2 dimensions deep and can’t reconcile many “beliefs” that they have. This is really a question of cognitive dissonance without it really connecting.
I find that attempting to get into nitty gritty reveals that. Any “conversation” with my dad ends up this way it seems. I had a recent argument with my dad about the constitution, and for the life of me I could not get him to spend any time actually thinking and arguing his points because he wanted to hang out bumper slogan like broad sweeping statements.
I find people who talk about minimum wage really just live in broad sweeping statements exclusively. Always feel good, always emotional, never part of a cohesive set of congruent beliefs.
I took a permaculture workshop with a certain wisconsin farmer (who will remain unnamed) this weekend who in a side conversation begged me and a couple other people to never vote for Scott Walker based on the crap he pulled in Wisconsin, ie, when he got elected one of the first things he did was not bust the unions, but put restrictions on small farmers. Think about it, all.
What restrictions? I know he cut funding to a program he proposed designed to help farmers, but to me that isn’t “cracking down” there is no cut to spending by the state I oppose.
What exactly did he do, I am sure he is a douche like all of them but I also deal in facts not conjecture.
After an increase in minimum wage to $15 an hour stabilizes and prices reflect the change doesn’t that devalue debt?
For example I borrow $100,000 to buy a house while making 7.25/hr my wage then increases over 50%, along with the cost of living, while the payments on my debt stay the same.
If this works for consumer debt what does it mean for the national debt? How would this affect the income qualifications for “welfare benefits”? Do you think that the income requirements would be increased to allow for the same people on welfare now with an inflated wage to receive the same “benefits”? Which beggs the same adjustment to all sorts of programs/laws/requirements such as tax brackets Roth ira contributions etc, would they get adjusted/minipulated? Isn’t this a kind of inflation?
How likly are the powers that be to want to implement this wage increase?
To a degree, not to the degree you’d expect.
Here is why, minimum wage goes to 15 an hour, you say make 18 an hour, you don’t get a raise.
Minimum wage goes to 15 an hour, you say make 14 an hour, you don’t get a raise of anything more then a dollar.
Joe, Tom and Frank, all make 8 dollars an hour, the raise to 15 seems good to them. Joe gets a raise, Tom gets a raise but has his hours cut to 20 (zero sum game) and Frank looses his job to a kiosk.
In this model which is far more realistic then anything you will see on the TV left or right leaning about it, the key is, only the basic costs go up significantly. Food, etc.
Housing will eventually but there will be a lag, a big one.
No one on minimum wage carries any significant debt! No one will give it to them. Most people with a mortgage already make more than or very close to 15.
So for those people they get no extra money, their housing costs are locked in sure but the cost of their food, cars, etc. goes way up!
Yay we all lose!
Well except government union workers! Yea see their raises are tied to minimum wage, even though none of them make it. And that is where all the hype about how great it would be comes from.
Oh and as the cost of all the other shit goes up, property values will go up, and your state, city, county will all jack up your property tax bill, that is why I said your housing costs are locked in sort of.
By the way I totally agree that this is a terrible idea, but I operate under the assertion that if I believe is a terrible idea there must be some kind of benefit to the state. So I’m trying to figure out why anyone with a significant amount of intelligence would want this.
@Josh – This post is simply looking at raising the minimum wage from the state’s perspective in order to try and answer at least somewhat what they might be thinking in an attempt to answer your question. I’m fully aware there is a lot more bad that comes from raising the minimum wage than I put in this post.
There’s an immediate “wealth effect” that is short lived but there none the less when people who were getting say $9 per hour, suddenly are getting $15 per hour. They go out and spend money on things that were on their list of wish they could have, but never could afford it.
To the state, this generates an increase in sales tax revenue immediately, as well as some increase in income tax revenues. There is also an immediate and much more obvious increase in payroll taxes that is generated.
The long term negative effects of a raised minimum wage does not effect the state very much, they do not produce anything anyway.
To the long term health of the economy, this is about as helpful as taking a sugar pill because market forces would normalize everything within a year or so anyway, but the new normal would mean that all the debt the state has acquired over the past 15 years or so would be significantly lower value to pay back.
So to recap: in the short term the state gets more money, and in the long term the state pays back the debt at a significantly lower rate. They may also justify it as it being good for us too because anyone who has debt from student loans, car, or a mortgage would be paying at the old rates.
As an example of this, I grew up in a neighborhood that was built in 1978. There were some old timers who were original owners and still had their original mortgage from 1978, they were paying less on their mortgage than they were on the leases on their cars every month.
Here’s the problem: this would work great for the state if and only if they (meaning all governments federal, state, and local levels) suddenly started running a balanced budget. They would be able to pay back the debt in the past at lower rates, and they are not accruing new debt that would need to be paid at the new higher rates and they could even use the initial spike to be on much more fiscally stable ground going forward. Unfortunately, we all know that will not be the case.
I’d have to disagree that people won’t get raises. The market will force employers to pay more for skilled labor.
RE LAST CALL: It seems like it would be a great idea to introduce earthworms to the mossy area. You could harvest the earthworms, of course and then do whatever you like with them.