Episode-826- Listener Feedback for 1-24-12 — 23 Comments

    • @Christopher

      Point One – Balls of the feet
      Point Two – Calve
      Point Three – Thigh
      Point Four – Buttocks
      Point Five – “Push up muscle”

  1. On the diesel storage, it may be worth it to install a oil furnace. That way, you can get bulk delivery which is much cheaper. Last price I got was $3.33/gallon. You may even qualify for programs like HEAP where you would get assistance paying for it. Also, the fuel would be constantly rotated. Like Jack said though, it is illegal to use this fuel on the road. You may also find it somewhat dishonest to use HEAP for this purpose, but I won’t get into that.

  2. On the copyright issue on youtube: I posted a few segments of a tv show on my youtube channel. I did not name the clips anything obviously connected to the show. Within moments, I got the following:

    Copyright Info: harry4
    Your video, harry4 , may include content that is owned or administered by this entity:

    * Entity: Warner Bros. Entertainment Content Type: Audiovisual content

    What should I do?

    No action is required on your part. Your video is still available worldwide.
    What can I do about my video’s status?

    Please note that the video’s status can change, if the policies chosen by the content owners change. You may want to check back periodically to see if you have new options available to you.

    Under certain circumstances, you may dispute this copyright claim. These are:

    * if the content is mistakenly identified and is actually completely your original creation;
    * if you believe your use does not infringe copyright (e.g. it is fair use under US law);
    * if you are actually licensed by the owner to use this content.

    I need more information. I want to learn more about the dispute process.

    Please take a few minutes to visit our Help Center section on Policy and Copyright Guidelines, where you can learn more about copyright law and our Content Identification Service.

  3. Hey Jack — I haven’t made it all the way through this show yet, but I was struck by some of what you were talking about regarding currencies. Let me start out by saying that I completely agree with you 100% regarding the way in which gold-backed currencies can be manipulated, and that our current monetary system is a debt-backed one that must continually expand in order to survive (hence its current difficulties while we’re hitting up against some of the limits to growth predicted in the 1973 book of the same name).

    However, I have to say that the portrayal of Rome’s currency problems in The Secret of Oz, at least in the way that you described, is not historically accurate. I must admit at least partial ignorance here — I never watched that movie in its entirety, but I did watch all of The Money Masters, Bill Still’s earlier work. However, many historians and archaeologists have pointed out that the decline in the Roman economy was coincident with the debasement of the silver Denarius, the official coin of the realm, from being nearly 100% silver in the days of the early empire to being less than 5% silver by the end. Of course, since the currency was based upon the total wealth of the empire, and that wealth declines steadily from around AD 100 onward due to declining crop and mining yields combined with ever-growing administrative costs, the debasement of currency is really a symptom more than a straight-up cause.

    For further discussion on this, I very, very, VERY highly recommend the work of Joseph Tainter, particularly his wonderful book, “The Collapse of Complex Societies.” You can also find some relatively recent podcast interviews of him through Financial Sense and The Extraenvironmentalist, and there is a presentation on the decline of Rome he gave available on YouTube.

    Thanks for all you do again, Jack, and keep up the great work!

  4. The ONLY thing worse than the Reuters article were the comments!!! They really did prove the naivety of the majority of people. My name is Josh, I’m a prepper, and I am proud!

  5. Quick comment on Roundup beans and glyphosate…I agree that I don’t want to put Roundup on my salad but I would much less put Cobra, Blazer, Basagran, Pursuit, Scepter, etc etc on my salad! These are the chemicals that were used prior to Roundup…they have much more restrictive safety labels than glyphosate. And…since so many weeds are becoming resistant to glyphosate farmers are going back to those chemicals (this of course does not apply to organic soy but to the vast majority of soybean acres that use conventional chemistries for weed control. Probably not news to you but didnt want people to get the impression that prior to GMO chemicals were not used over the top of crops. Thanks Jack,

    • @Scott thing is all those other “worse” options could only be sprayed on WEEDs because if you spay them on food crops it KILLS THEM. Like I said with GMO it is what they modify the food to do that is the issue. Your contention that they are going back, if true and if they STOP spraying roundup will create healthier soy because the soy itself can’t be directly DRENCHED in spray.

      Of course I consider soy to be largely toxic to humans in the first place and no suited for human consumption.

    • I’ll apologize in advance if I am misunderstanding what you are saying but these chemicals ARE sprayed directly over the soy in exactly the same manner that Roundup is…there is absolutely no difference in how they are sprayed…and, in most cases where the old chemistry is being used they are still throwing in the glypohsate because it is cheap and still good on most grass species…for now (with the exception of volunteer corn which the Roundup won’t kill because it is Roundup Ready…so, in addition to the Roundup a grass killer is thrown in to kill the Roundup corn…I know…ughhhhh!). Like I said, if I’m missing your point I apologize…just didnt want you thinking that prior to Roundup that farmers were somehow using a directed spray or something like that to spray the weeds but miss the crop. And I’m with you on eating soy…these days I’m trying to avoid eating most anything that I can’t club or make a salad out of. Thanks again Jack

      • @Scott what you are saying makes no sense how can they spray a food crop with a herbicide with out killing it. That is the entire point of round up ready soy. So my question to you if what you say is true why do these herbicides not kill the soy?

        • No…the entire point of Roundup soy is so that Roundup can be sprayed over it…Roundup Ready was developed as Roundup was coming off patent in the 90’s. These older products have been sprayed over the crops for decades…difference is that prior to Roundup a guy might mix 2-5 different chemicals in a tank mix because each chemical only killed a certain species…Roundup came along and you throw a quart in and kill everything…except the soy (plus, Roundup was much cheaper…however, farmers now pay much more for the seed so basically the money has just went from the chemicals to the seed…and now the trait in the seed is being devalued because the Roundup will not kill many of the most problematic species…do a search on palmer amaranth in the south…hand weeding it in soy and cotton…cousin of it in the midwest is waterhemp and much of it is now resistant…also ragweeds, lambsquarter, marestail, etc…). There have been many products prior to GMO’s that have been used over the top (referred to as a post emergence application) of corn, beans, etc. But they are all specific to the weeds and to the crops they can be sprayed on. For example, atrazine has been sprayed over corn for ages (it is not gmo) but if you spray it over beans you kill them dead. Be glad to talk to you more about this stuff if you want…

    • dont think i answered the question about why they dont kill the crops…not sure, they were just discovered to kill a particular weed but not the crop so they are now used. Example: not sure why it doesnt kill grass but 2, 4-d that everyone uses in their yards to kill dandelions is also used over the top of corn (not real safe because it while it doesnt kill corn it can cause some growth deformities and make it brittle) and over wheat in the earlier stages of growth but it will kill the heck out of beans and other broadleaves. By the same token, a grass killer that you spray over the top of a soybean will also kill corn and wheat.

      • @Scott, well that is a real problem and one that further exposes the flaws of modern ag.

  6. Ok this may sound jerkish but I don’t have a lot of time to write out a long comment.

    1.) Read a book on logical fallacies.

    2.)If you believe what is presented about Rome in “The Secret of OZ” you need to do a little more research into Roman coins, how they came about and why the different types of coins came about and what really killed Roman society and ultimately Rome. “The secret of OZ” misconstrues and leaves out just as much as does the author they quote Charles Howell who was a gold hater.

    3.) It is/was not the gold standard that caused problems. It was the same thing that is causing problems today, CREDIT, banks would issue more credit than they had gold. Credit is was and always will be the problem period.

    • @eMan if you believe in the magical properties of gold and that I am wrong and that makes you feel good great.

      In response to your points though

      1. May be you should.

      2. It was presented as one component not the component but what was rebutted is the NONSENSE that fiat money was the cause.

      3. Actually you only have it part right depending on who’s gold standard you mean. In the US the inverse was often the case.

      No go grow some food cause what you and I think about this shit isn’t going to change a damn thing anyway. There will soon be a new currency with gold backing in and we will be screwed by it when it happens. By soon I mean 5-20 years.

      • *phone acting up so I couldn’t finish comment.

        “Magical properties of gold” see what I mean about logical fallicies.

        2.) Non sequitor, I wasn’t claiming that fiat caused it. Fiat does present the problem that you have to rely on thoes who manufacture the fiat to not over supply, people are corruptable. When I am not on my phone I might write out the whole thing. The cause was war and overspending by the government, etc… choices by those in power.

        3.)absolutly not, in the US, credit expansion mal investment, and the ultimate contraction was the cause.

        I agree 5-20 years, problem is how will it be structured.

        Yes I do grow good and all should, cause

  7. @eMan ignore the comment I removed it wasn’t for you. I will respond to your last comment with the following though. YOU JUST EXPLAINED WHY THE FED EXISTS and how the loophole it created made our modern system of money which is clearly flawed unfortunately also completely constitutional though I doubt you realize it.

    • Because I don’t agree with you, you doubt I realize X. lolz

      I know why the FED exists, I don’t have to agree with it nor do I think it made things better than independent banks. It just allowed larger credit expansions to happen… thus larger contractions. The FED, FDIC and other government involvement cause people to, not asses a financial institutions stability or practices before trusting their currency to them.

      Putting any person or group of people in charge of the measure of the monetary unit is a fail any way you look at it. I don’t feel that the measure of time, or length, or weight should be arbitrary, I doubt you do either… I may be wrong but I doubt it. If you corrupt an inch or a foot or a centimeter or a meter you make it unusable for it’s original purpose and is eventually dropped. Same with a minute, an hour, a pound or a kilo. These are all based in the physical which can be referred to independent of human involvement and is thus stable. Our measure for money should be the same. For that gold has many qualities that make it work well.

      That doesn’t mean that gold has to be the only money but it is one of the reasons that many like it because you can rely on it to be the same every time. It has a molecular weight of 196.96, that can be tested over and over and over and over again.

      Are you by chance an MMT guy?

      Cheers, I enjoy the discussion

        • Can you make a clear point of what/how you disagree? Or at least give a link that explains what you vaguely claim I don’t know or don’t understand.

          It seems tha no matter what I say you will just return with “uh just don’t understand, I won’t say why but trust me you don’t”

  8. Regarding gas fuel blends:
    The two main differences are winter blend and summer blend fuel. The winter blend has a higher heating value ( more energy per unit volume) in order to help startability in cold temps. So this blend is dependent upon the time of year and where you are in the country. You may notice slightly better mileage in the winter and this is due to the higher heating value. For storing fuels, these blend differences really shouldn’t matter much. The winter blend fuel will boil off the lighter fractions as the temperatures get warmer and basically turn into summer grade. Purchase the fuel, stabilize it, and keep some starting fluid on hand if you live in a very cold climate.

    Additional info for generators since this is mostly why people are storing fuel:
    One of the big problems people have is not running it and then the fuel left in the carb. This can cause varnishing or gunk to build up and then it never wants to start. I recommend running it monthly and then shut it off by turning off the gas supply. Most generators will have this shut off valve and if you’re doesn’t, it’s an easy add. This keeps the fuel out of the carb during storage and will make your life easier when you finally need it.

  9. “Can you make a clear point of what/how you disagree? Or at least give a link that explains what you vaguely claim I don’t know or don’t understand.” “It seems tha no matter what I say you will just return with “uh just don’t understand, I won’t say why but trust me you don’t”- eMan 1/27/12

    I have experience this. It seems that he is channeling a little Tom Cruise(at the 1:27 mark too often in these discussions.

    I have already registered my protest about “The Secret of Oz” here:

    As far as Rome is goes, like all the other examples in “Oz”, it shows that the government should not have control of money, contra one of its’ conclusions and recurrent themes. In every example the government (or at the current time lends power to the fascist Fed to) manipulates the money whether it is a commodity or paper. The conclusion that “Oz” comes to that government should control the money does not follow from any of the historical examples given. The government is involved and it is not good.