[interdoc-y2k 294] Hoarding v Stockpiling

[Bob Olsen <bobolsen@tao.ca>]

Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 15:32:11 +0000
To: uk-y2k-action@egroups.com
From: Paul Swann <pswann@easynet.co.uk>
Subject: [uk-y2k-action] Fwd: Hoarding v Stockpiling

HOARDING versus STOCKPILING

by Alan E. Lewis

<aelewis@provide.net>

http://www.provide.net/~aelewis/y2ko

-------------------------------------------------------------------

I am concerned about the use of the pejorative "hoarding" to refer to
stockpiling or even any material preparation. I think that this is not
only counterproductive from the standpoint of Y2K preparation, but
dangerous, as it may precurse civil rights violations and worse.

Duncan Long remarks that "purchasing food when it is plentiful and
storing it for an emergency is not hoarding (despite what some
government workers and TV commentators might have you believe).
Storing food during a time of plenty is stockpiling. Hoarding will be
done after a disaster when those who didn't prepare strip grocery
shelves and squirrel away the food for their own use"
(http://www.michaelhyatt.com/overview.htm). I agree, and I would add
that making a deposit each month in a savings account or in a mutual
fund would never be called "hoarding"; that would be called "prudent
saving" or "investing for the future". So it is with food and other
consumables, as long as you are accumulating it while there is still
plenty for everyone.

Consider for a moment the subtle class-baiting in the "hoarding"
epithet. Is not the obscene concentration of wealth, everywhere
evident, a most egregious form of "hoarding", and indeed, is not
capitalism itself a veritable celebration of same? Through this lens,
could anything be more absurd than the depiction as greedy hoarders of
individuals wishing to exchange a few Federal Reserve Notes for things
of real value? Are not hundred-billion dollar hedge fund operators,
currency speculators and other magnates of the casino economy the real
"hoarders"? And if you want to bring it down to individual terms, is
not the bidding-up of stock prices to absurd, unsustainable levels
(e.g. amazon.com at $200/share!) by millions of speculators a form of
hoarding? Their hoarding has made it difficult for sensible investors
to venture into stocks with any measure of confidence. The prices are
just too damn high.

Besides, the "hoarding" epithet disparages the concept of saving
anything, as though one would be remiss for not devouring or spending
on the spot whatever comes into one's posession. Would it be
preferable, rather than putting by a few essentials, to hurl oneself
into the typical American consumption orgy -- beanie babies,
"sport-utility" vehicles, Big Macs, cell phones, and heaps of other
trash, washed down with barrels of petrol. This orgy has gone on for
decades with scant protest; NOW, suddenly, prudent individuals get
tarred as "hoarders" for accumulating water and brown rice!

Further, this issue of "hoarding" probably will be seized upon by
demogogues seeking easy scapegoats when things heat up, and could
become an excuse for still more-intrusive state snooping, or worse. Ed
Yourdon has remarked that "stockpiling extra food in 1998 might be
considered unnecessary or crazy, but it could be labeled 'hoarding' in
late 1999 and declared illegal"
(http://www.yourdon.com/articles/y2ksafehaven.html). Indeed it could
be.

"Hoarders" -- those who chose real goods over state-issued promissary
notes (cash, bonds) and especially electronic representations of same
-- may even find themselves held up as enemies of the people, and the
stage will be set for such outrages by those referring to stockpiling
with the pejorative "hoarding", or by describing any and all
individual preparation efforts as somehow selfish, anti-social or
"dysergic". The irony in all this is that precisely the opposite is
true: personal preparation and stockpiling are, regardless of
individual motivations, inherently supportive of families,
neighborhood and community.

Here's why: Increased purchasing of food and other consumables now,
and at least through mid-1999, will filter through the system and
increase supply of finished goods. (The "invisible hand" has its uses,
in a pinch.) Early stockpiling will not deprive anyone else, and will
actually INCREASE the supply for others later. (There is even some
evidence that this has begun to happen; see:
http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/3508)

It is important to buy now while the Just-In-Time systems are
functional and have a chance to respond to your purchases. And it is
likely that continuous high demand through and beyond 1/1/2000 will
have a salutary effect on supplies well into the "crunch" period
(later on in 2000), unless there are catastrophic distribution
problems. Remember that there is a huge overhang of cheap bulk
commodities (soybeans, grains, pork, sugar, etc.), available at
incredibly low prices, that are waiting to be incorporated into
finished goods. You can stimulate this production process in all its
phases -- i.e. you can support the real economy and help increase the
supply of finished goods for everyone -- by adding your money energy
to the aggregate demand, the sooner the better. Production and
distribution systems, even if crippled after the rollover, will
respond to increased demand unless the infrastructure melts down
catastrophically (in which case all bets are off, anyway).

(Of course the longer term goal is to move toward local materials and
finished goods, and away from dependence on non-local or foreign
stuff. But it will take time to develop local production methods and
infrastructures; probably 5-10 years, minimum. Meanwhile the only
option is to support the real economy as we find it today -- as much
local stuff as possible, supplemented with lentils from Minnesota,
t-shirts from South Carolina, whatever. On the other hand, if Y2K is
"bad" enough, the conversion to local sources may have to be
compressed into a year or two... one of many potential blessings.)

Well-prepared individuals will act to reduce the ultimate stress on
the system when and if the crunch comes.  Having stocked-up early,
they will be out of the way (not out shopping and scrounging, adding
to the congestion) when the serious demand gets underway, and of
course they will not be taking away a share of (then-limited) finished
goods. Well-prepared individuals will be among those who do NOT have
to rely on emergency rations and services from the Red Cross, or FEMA,
or whoever -- no doubt to the great relief of those (then-swamped)
organizations. And last but not least, such individuals will have the
wherewithall to lend a hand, share with others, and generally be an
asset rather than a liability to the community.

Whether or not the prepared will have the WILL to share with others is
another matter, one of individual conscience. But in any case being
well-prepared gives one the OPTION of behaving graciously, supporting
unprepared friends and family, and perhaps others in the neighborhood
-- the old, young, weak or sick -- as supplies allow. The
well-prepared ones could even wind up saving lives. Being without
those options serves no one.

The issue of being well-prepared ought not be confused with the issue
of ownership, or the issue of who, ultimately, will use the stuff.
(Consider: you can GIVE IT ALL AWAY, retaining NONE for yourself, if
that is what your conscience dictates.) The point is to stock up now
while supplies are essentially unlimited and production and
distribution are still plastic -- i.e. while your efforts are still
NOT "hoarding".

Last, there is the subtler matter of the way in which preparedness and
stockpiling express a faith in the individual, family and community,
and acts to increase citizen empowerment, while implying less than
perfect faith in authority.  This point was made excellently in the
12/22/98 issue of the "Y2K Alert" (an email newsletter from
alertsend@y2knewswire.com):

   Why has Y2K preparedness been so loudly scorned? Here's the answer:
   because preparing for Y2K calls into question everything that big
   business and big government wants you to believe about our country.
   They want you to think the banking industry is strong. But if we
   all pull out a little cash, the banking system crashes, revealing
   its weakness. They want you to think the stock market is strong.
   But if we all sell a few stocks, the market plummets and reveals
   its weakness. The examples could continue, of course, but you get
   the idea. PREPARING for Y2K is intellectually inconsistent with the
   ideas government officials want Americans to hold.

Right. I would only volunteer that building up a reserve of things of
real value (as opposed to paper "money" or, worse, entries in some
electronic ledger) is HIGHLY intellectually inconsistent with the
ideas government officials, central bank ministers, and corporate
lords want Americans to hold -- inconsistent and perhaps even
subversive. To question the value of the state's promissary notes
("money") is to question the legitimacy of the state itself, and that,
of course, is the Ultimate Heresy.

-----------------

ON ANOTHER NOTE:

http://www.usagold.com/cpmforum/archives/2019993/default.html

Goldfly (3/20/99; 9:31:28MDT - Msg ID:3607)

Yesterday
We had a party and we sang away
Now I envy those who squirreled away
Oh, I believe in Y2K

Suddenly,
There are no banks, or water, or TV
And they've declared a state emergency
Oh, Y2K is cramping me

Now the power grid's down, for how long, I couldn't say
Guess they told us wrong, now I long for yesterday......

Yesterday
Lies and obfuscation were the way
Now the Devil is the one to pay
Oh, I believe in Y2K


_____________________________________________________________________



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does your free web site address contain more letters than the alphabet?
Register a domain name with DomainDirect. A domain with NO hosting fees.
Visit http://offers.egroups.com/click/233/0 for full details.


eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/uk-y2k-action
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com


   .............................................
   Bob Olsen, Toronto            bobolsen@tao.ca
   .............................................