<DrumBeat: June 24, 2006The Oil DrumNatural Gas concerns continued>
<DrumBeat: June 24, 2006DrumBeatDrumBeat: June 26, 2006>

243 comments on DrumBeat: June 25, 2006

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Descolada on June 25, 2006 - 7:04pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Here's the answer I keep coming back to:

Right now, at this period in my life, I have a unique chance through education to exploit a comparitive advantage I have over the crowd of millions that will, on the remote chance of a soft landing, leave me in an above average resource position. I have issues about this greedy nature in myself, and whether it's a productive instinct, but I've chosen to sidestep that question.  Faced with the alternative, die-off (50% chance, IMO) or powerdown (75%), I have to weigh the opportunity cost of foregoing preperation for these possibilities with foregoing my opportunity for future wealth (and, yes, I do see them as mututally exclusive.)  I keep weighing this, and at this point, I find betting on my future wealth is the better possibility.

I suppose the reason I figure this is because in dieoff or powerdown, the skills that will be necessary to survive (food production, community building, hitting people's heads with rocks...) are relatively low skill, and people have been doing them for the length of human existence.  So, I guess I just don't feel much preperation is needed for those cases, apart from preparing ones' self mentally.  

Or am I completely off track?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Magnus Redin on June 25, 2006 - 7:36pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I do not concider community building and social skills to be low level skills. But they are perhaps easy for most people?
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on June 25, 2006 - 7:49pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
One of the HUGE mistakes that almost everyone makes is thinking the other guy is dumb.

We are not really that smart (depite our knowing about PO). and "they" are nowhere near as dumb as you might imagine. We are all just people, doing as best we can for the moment.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
fleam on June 25, 2006 - 8:26pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Descolada you may have something there, and while we need to do something like a 90% die-off ultimately, it will be a lot easier if it's over generations or centuries rather than years or even decades.

90% is an interesting figure, since that seems to have been the die-off rate among American Indians, Pacific Islanders, etc when Westerners came on the scene. It's not just a figure pulled out of a hat either, it shows up everywhere, for instance search "peak oil" on google video or youtube and you'll find an interesting movie about some of the lesser-visited Pacific islands and there are figures like, 6000 people used to live on this island, now there are 600.

Now we Westerners get to enjoy what we have imposed on others.

And yes, the other guy is NOT dumb. The American/Iraqi kill rate has been something like 50:1 in this latest war, but that's because we have all this neat hardware and gas etc to run it on. On an equal footing, if someone were to wave a magic wand and eliminate humvees and helicopters etc. they'd kick our asses. When we're ALL scrawny and hungry and canny from years of survival, who knows, after all we European-extraction types have been through as harsh a winnowing process over the centuries as anyone, and the ways we've treated each other through centuries of wars and famines etc make most indigineous groups look like lapdogs.

The other guy is definately not dumb though. Soldiers in Vietnam were amazed at the intelligence, resourcefulness, and creativity of the Vietnamese, whether it was in their farming technology, fish traps, or soldier traps. The Polynesians have cultures that emphasize being the brutal badass but their crafts show that the only reason these guys didn't come up with something like the Space Shuttle is they lacked the fuel etc lol.

If there's one major leap forward for us Western cannibals over the last 100 years, I'd have to say that 100 years ago we had utter contempt for anyone who wasn't a workaholic, pleasure-denying, type A person. We're the ones who justified genocide against the Indians because we saw them as lazy and hedonistic, and therefore "animals". This attitude is still prevelent, but now it's not absolute. There are a lot of us realizing our Westerna culture involves working perpetually harder for less, and killing the Earth in the process.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
wkwillis on June 26, 2006 - 9:34pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
The kill rate in Iraq is 100 Americans for each Iraqi combatant, maybe 10 Americans for each Iraqi of any side and collateral civilian killed.
We spend hundreds of thousands of dollars per combat soldier per year. The cost of training, the cost of technology, the cost of support, the cost of salaries and benefits and pensions, it adds up.
We are taxing Americans out of having children. Think about how much a second child costs, even, let alone a first one.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Oilrig medic on June 26, 2006 - 9:43pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
????? Where are you getting these numbers?????

That would mean we've killed less than 30 combatants since the war began and only three hundred civilians.  I personally know a guy who has killed 6 combatants and has pictures.  We killed more than three hundred civilians for sure in shock and awe.  Our kill rate is WAY above 1.0.  Yes we have had casualties but comared to Vietnam or Korea or any other war?  

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
john milton on June 25, 2006 - 8:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
"I suppose the reason I figure this is because in dieoff or powerdown, the skills that will be necessary to survive (food production, community building, hitting people's heads with rocks...) are relatively low skill, and people have been doing them for the length of human existence.  So, I guess I just don't feel much preperation is needed for those cases, apart from preparing ones' self mentally.  

Or am I completely off track?"

Ummm.. I think you are off track

Case: Food production
Can you milk a cow? Raise a flock of chickens to slaughter  weight? Kill, clean and butcher an animal? Manage a 4 field rotation scheme? Build a barn? know how to correctly store hay and grain? Help a goat give birth? Manage pest problem in a field of soybeans? Harness a team of draft horses or oxen, or repair a wonky tractor engine? Weld a broken disk harrow, or fix a leaking irrigation pump seal? Understand which type of soil is better suited to potatoes and which to cabbage?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Descolada on June 25, 2006 - 9:22pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
All of which are issues that would take reading, maybe, one book on the subject and a little hands on experience.  Compare this to, say, the high skill jobs of today, such as engineering or medicine, and there's no comparison.

Like I said, there was a point in time that 90% of the population knew how to do exactly what you described.  Some not sucessfully, but each one of them had to learn it at some point in their lives.  I think it will be easier to learn how to farm after powerdown than it will be to learn how to, say, combine chemicals into productive substances.  Or, I could just be off track again.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
oldhippie on June 25, 2006 - 9:59pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Descolada
The first para of your post is one of the most arrogant short statements I have ever read.
Time to start giving some respect to the skilled, accomplished hard-working people, your equals and then some, who make your pampered existence possible.
Go read one book on animal husbandry and then try to yoke a team of draft animals. Read a mechanics text and try to repair   a tractor engine. What a laugh.
"At some point in their lives" is not where those skills are learned. It takes a lifetime. Just like doctoring or engineering. And doing those jobs while coping with disrespectful know-nothings.....You, Descolada, should always drive a new car, 'cause your mechanic ain't ever gonna work hard for you.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Oilrig medic on June 26, 2006 - 11:30am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
"All of which are issues that would take reading, maybe, one book on the subject and a little hands on experience.  Compare this to, say, the high skill jobs of today, such as engineering or medicine, and there's no comparison."

What do you think a Dr. does?  Hmmm....yep mmmhmm. Interesting then steps out of the exam room and opens a reference book.  When he comes back in he gives you a diagnosis.  MUCH easier than farming.  I love to garden but never want to depend on it for my livelihood.  They work from 5 am to 9pm.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlphaMaleProphetOfDoom on June 26, 2006 - 2:43pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Descolada,

If that was the case, you wouldn't have people getting 4 year degrees in things like soil science and animal husbandry.

Best,

Matt

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Agric on June 26, 2006 - 5:26pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Oh dear, Descolada, you may be heading for one of the died off. If your estimate of a die off is 50% (not sure if that is probability or mortality) is correct your chosen path looks unwise.

Growing food is not as easy as scattering seed, waiting a few weeks and munching on the produce. Weather, pests, diseases are unpredictable and make years of practical experience invaluable. You have a much better chance at 'learning' your 'highly skilled' and well paid job from a book than you do subsistence farming. The pressures are different, too: if your job doesn't go well you can probably get another, if you fail at your subsistence farming there is a fair chance you will starve to death.

If you can I'd suggest allocating a chunk of your time to experiencing a bit of plant growing, even if only in pots outside your window or in a small yard. Perhaps holidays working on organic farms? You can learn many things from books but there is much to learn that books can't really teach. Best you discover that sooner rather than later ;)

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Agric on June 26, 2006 - 5:41pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
As a case in point: it takes me a season to get to know what types of plant will do well or badly on a specific patch of ground. I can have a look at it, dig it a bit, see what is growing and guess what it will be like and what special care it will need (extra compost, irrigation, deeper digging, etc) and what plants will grow well or poorly. I'll be mostly right, but not completely so, there are always surprises, sometimes seriously unpleasant like soil based diseases afflicting certain plant families.

I have the experience to usually see something going awry almost immediately, only a small part of that skill could come from books. No doubt it is similar for animals, and just as many crops are different so will be animals.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Consume More on June 26, 2006 - 10:36pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Ding dang, Descolada, I hate to keep beating on this dead horse, but you are pretty flippin' deluded if you think any, far less all of these skills can be mastered by a newbie after reading a book.  You gonna want to clan up with somebody who can do these things, cuz when the SHTF those little green beetles will have your potatoes hosed up before you can say "honey, can you run to the library?"
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on June 27, 2006 - 3:47pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I am "half way" knowledgeable.  My father was the expert (BS Ag, Masters Farm Management, PhD Ag Economics) and I did the "child labor" thing.

Raised a 1/4 ot 1/2 acre garden in my childhood (rented ground usually), planted 400 azealas ($20 hole for a $5 bush was my father's motto), 100 camellias (grafted onto sasanqua, over 90% success rate).

I got turned off of gardening and came to like trees much better.  I learned enough to know that I do not know enough about growing outside my childhood home in Alabama.  And even then I was not so curious (mainly hoped for a smaller garden NEXT year since we gave so much away this year).

And my father knew what to buy from the store (too much trouble to raise, or not the right climate to raise quality with good yield.  Potatoes for example).

So I would be desperate for the first couple of years trying to raise (and preserve) my own food till I got the hang of it.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
xuewen on June 25, 2006 - 10:01pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Put simply, we are all in a train that is headed for a crash. Most of us here at TOD are doing our best to assess the situation: will I get hurt more if I jump off the train, or if I stay on it?
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.