As we prepare our purposefully irreverent meal for this day of thanksgiving - boiled oats and day-old biscuits - we would like to stop and make a fearless prediction which has been rolling around in our heads since about the middle of this year. We really don't have any hard data to back up our assertion; in fact, we're going to just put it right out there, that this is an intuition.
Simply put, we posit this will be the last holiday season that anyone in the United States, or elsewhere, can call normal. Note the call normal; last year saw the last holiday season which could be considered actually normal. This season, however, will be all about keeping up appearances; the show must go on, after all.
Take this Thanksgiving in the United States; 49 million Citizens are going hungry at the end of every month. Now, at last report in September, 28.4 million Citizens are on food stamps. Hmm, we sense a number problem here... but anyway, on top of that, half of all children in the U.S. will receive food aid, as well as 90% of African-American children.
Let that settle in your mind for a moment, dear Reader. Those numbers are not from Haiti or Zimbabwe, but rather the only so-called superpower in the world, the United States. Those are not good numbers to be seeing from an OECD nation; it makes us think about terms like 'third world' and 'failed state.'
This will be a failed Thanksgiving; people will max out what little credit they have remaining for the month in order to have a 'feast.' By that, we mean keep up appearances, as there are really very few people in the U.S. right now who can actually afford to have an extravagant meal, pay their bills, and have savings. Perhaps the 'recovery' propaganda has worked its magic, and most Citizens have moved into a Keynesian dreamland, where they spend now and have an economy later. We frankly think not; we posit most U.S. Citizens couldn't make a budget - and keep it - if their lives depended on it. For 49 million of those Citizens, their lives do depend on it, and they seem to prove unequal to the task.
After Thanksgiving will be the failed consumer orgy of Christmas; failed, because one cannot have an orgy if no one shows up. That's not to say that lights won't be strung and trees erected, because they will be... probably with more 'animal spirits' energy than ever. Under those trees, though, will tell the real tale. Show us an average Citizen who has lots of gifts, and we will show you someone who is nearing the end of their financial rope.
As we're writing, an ironic thought occurs to us: would it not be an expression of cosmic justice, if the attempt at summoning up a holiday shopping extravaganza is what finally topples the still-tottering U.S. economy? Think about it: maxing out credit cards for one last huzzah; blowing the savings on gifts for the kids, or Social Security cheques on the grandkids? Citizens of the United States are far too broke to enjoy the spendy, spendy ways to which they became accustomed; at this point, they should go limp, take their financial kicks to the stomach, and try to get things in order again. Instead, they will - and we mean will - go down, in vast numbers, and in flames.
Showing posts with label food. Show all posts
Showing posts with label food. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
The Worst-Off Places
Based on our proprietary stress index and the ongoing parade of bank failures, we are coming to the conclusion that the worst off states in the USA are (insert drum-roll, please) Arizona and Nevada. Both of these States are in the top ten of bank-failures-to-population, and losses-to-assets; additionally, unreleased data from our stress index shows that both States have moved into the top ten of stressed states. Further evidence includes the above-national-average unemployment rate in Nevada and house foreclosure rates in both states.
We suggest the acuteness of distress in these two states is a telling commentary on the nature of the present Depression. This Depression is not just about economics, but habitability itself - that is, the very appropriateness of a place for human habitation.
These two, desert states are the quintessence of artifice. They are full of cities that have no business being there and only exist because developers wanted to make a fast buck. Now the easy credit bubble which drove the process of unsustainable colonisation has popped, these states are entering a tailspin faster and harder than the rest of the Union. We posit that the drying-up-and-blowing-away process will be much shorter and more catastrophic than the aforementioned colonisation.
Generally speaking, people appear to have forgotten that Arizona and Nevada are predominantly deserts; indeed, they seem sublimely convinced that those states are somehow permanently sustainable. This can easily be contrasted with, say, Michigan, another severely distressed state, which has an enviable natural endowment - the Great Lakes, ample rainfall, fertile farmland, vast forests.
Simply put, however bleak the future might be, Michigan's population has one. The same can not be said for Arizona and Nevada. As the Federal highway, water, and electric systems upon which these two states are utterly dependent decline, the capacity of these two states to support human population will diminish and the dream of the Desert Paradise in the American Southwest will expire.
We suggest, as part of Depression preparedness, our readers ask themselves how habitable is it where they live? How would you get around without cars and highways? Where is the nearest source of fresh water? of electrical power? In the deserts, how would you manage without air conditioning? In colder climes, what if it cost four times as much to heat your house during winter?
What answers you might derive, dear Reader, informs whether or not any given area will be able to support people. This includes both basic foodways, as well as the economic systems necessary to facilitate their interaction in the larger economy. We feel the national (and global) economy will not have sufficient 'fat,' if you will, to support places which, in the end, contribute nothing of any value or importance.
We suggest the acuteness of distress in these two states is a telling commentary on the nature of the present Depression. This Depression is not just about economics, but habitability itself - that is, the very appropriateness of a place for human habitation.
These two, desert states are the quintessence of artifice. They are full of cities that have no business being there and only exist because developers wanted to make a fast buck. Now the easy credit bubble which drove the process of unsustainable colonisation has popped, these states are entering a tailspin faster and harder than the rest of the Union. We posit that the drying-up-and-blowing-away process will be much shorter and more catastrophic than the aforementioned colonisation.
Generally speaking, people appear to have forgotten that Arizona and Nevada are predominantly deserts; indeed, they seem sublimely convinced that those states are somehow permanently sustainable. This can easily be contrasted with, say, Michigan, another severely distressed state, which has an enviable natural endowment - the Great Lakes, ample rainfall, fertile farmland, vast forests.
Simply put, however bleak the future might be, Michigan's population has one. The same can not be said for Arizona and Nevada. As the Federal highway, water, and electric systems upon which these two states are utterly dependent decline, the capacity of these two states to support human population will diminish and the dream of the Desert Paradise in the American Southwest will expire.
We suggest, as part of Depression preparedness, our readers ask themselves how habitable is it where they live? How would you get around without cars and highways? Where is the nearest source of fresh water? of electrical power? In the deserts, how would you manage without air conditioning? In colder climes, what if it cost four times as much to heat your house during winter?
What answers you might derive, dear Reader, informs whether or not any given area will be able to support people. This includes both basic foodways, as well as the economic systems necessary to facilitate their interaction in the larger economy. We feel the national (and global) economy will not have sufficient 'fat,' if you will, to support places which, in the end, contribute nothing of any value or importance.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Underestimating the Damage
Thoughtful commentators on the economy are noticing big changes afoot: less dining out; more 'value' shopping; and so forth. So far, they are being rather conservative in their estimations of how far the citizenry is going to be cutting their spending on consumer items. For example, people speak of dining out in the USA being reduced from 50% of the food budget to 40%, returning to the level of 2000.
We believe this is ridiculously over-optimistic. In 1955, dining out was 25% of the food budget. Remember, 1955 was a time of prosperity. Since the world is sinking into a Depression that will last for ten years or more, it would be more realistic to see the luxury of dining out returning to a very low proportion of food spending - say 10%.
In a nutshell, we expect to see this collapse in restaurant and other luxury spending because making it through the next ten years is going to be increasingly a matter of economic survival. More and more of the population will be feeding themselves primarily by way of government food assistance (which does not allow for prepared meals) - as long as such assistance lasts, and most of the rest will sensibly economise by eliminating dining out.
For households not to commence draconian economisations at this point is an invitation to poverty and potential destitution. Such economisations will become more and more evident on a survivor basis. Functioning households will be economical, non-economical households will be dissolved or become economical.
In spite of increasing awareness of deterioration, there is an almost ubiquitous fantasy that recovery is nigh, and when it arrives the population will return to its consumeristic ways. Such a recovery is simply never going to materialise. When, and more importantly if, something akin to economic progress resumes at some point in the increasingly distant future, the economic landscape of the world will be utterly and permanently changed.
We intend to survive this transition and, more than that, experience as much as we can of our idea of the good life. We hope, Reader, the same for you. The severity of the Depression and its consequences must not be underestimated if you wish to be a survivor.
Consider the lessons of the survivors of the Great Depression (1929-1939): pay for everything with cash; make do, mend, use it up, do without; throw away nothing that could be put to use. Our progenitors were altered (often traumatically considering most survivors became compulsive hoarders at least to some extent) by the experience. And remember these are the survivors! Think how much worse it was for the non-survivors!
We believe this is ridiculously over-optimistic. In 1955, dining out was 25% of the food budget. Remember, 1955 was a time of prosperity. Since the world is sinking into a Depression that will last for ten years or more, it would be more realistic to see the luxury of dining out returning to a very low proportion of food spending - say 10%.
In a nutshell, we expect to see this collapse in restaurant and other luxury spending because making it through the next ten years is going to be increasingly a matter of economic survival. More and more of the population will be feeding themselves primarily by way of government food assistance (which does not allow for prepared meals) - as long as such assistance lasts, and most of the rest will sensibly economise by eliminating dining out.
For households not to commence draconian economisations at this point is an invitation to poverty and potential destitution. Such economisations will become more and more evident on a survivor basis. Functioning households will be economical, non-economical households will be dissolved or become economical.
In spite of increasing awareness of deterioration, there is an almost ubiquitous fantasy that recovery is nigh, and when it arrives the population will return to its consumeristic ways. Such a recovery is simply never going to materialise. When, and more importantly if, something akin to economic progress resumes at some point in the increasingly distant future, the economic landscape of the world will be utterly and permanently changed.
We intend to survive this transition and, more than that, experience as much as we can of our idea of the good life. We hope, Reader, the same for you. The severity of the Depression and its consequences must not be underestimated if you wish to be a survivor.
Consider the lessons of the survivors of the Great Depression (1929-1939): pay for everything with cash; make do, mend, use it up, do without; throw away nothing that could be put to use. Our progenitors were altered (often traumatically considering most survivors became compulsive hoarders at least to some extent) by the experience. And remember these are the survivors! Think how much worse it was for the non-survivors!
Monday, December 29, 2008
We Scared Ourselves
Yesterday's post about dealing with hyperinflation got us scared. So we will tell you about two action steps we are beginning to implement immediately.
The first step is to lay in a one year supply of non-perishable food and basic consumable items. We will maintain this inventory and rotate the stock. Our inventory consists of things like 100 pounds of rice, 100 pounds of flour, 100 pounds of oats, and so forth.
We imagine several benefits from this programme. First, is that it is probably one of the best uses of cash. If stuff explodes in price, we will regret hanging on to our little dollars. Second, it provides an emergency ration we could use to keep being reasonably well fed if shortages should develop. Third, it will lay in a stock of useful 'trade' items such as food, soap, razor blades, etc. More than once a neighbor has knocked on the door asking for a roll of toilet paper. Next time we'll ask for a jar of herring, or whatever, in return.
The second step is to keep an eye out for things that are 'too cheap'. There is much liquidation going on as many businesses fold. This makes for a plethora of odds and ends that get sold below cost at places like Big Lots (and even Wal-Mart from time to time). Additionally, more good, cheap stuff is pouring out into our neighbour's lawns during rummage sales. It's an art to know when to pounce and 'buy it all', and when to avoid buying something one won't use and probably can't parlay into something one will.
We suspect the coming hyperinflation is going to turn a lot of people into peddlers. It's a tried and true survival strategy in hard times. It's also a way people can work together - swapping an extra candle for a chocolate in order to maintain a modicum of creature comfort in a dark hour.
The first step is to lay in a one year supply of non-perishable food and basic consumable items. We will maintain this inventory and rotate the stock. Our inventory consists of things like 100 pounds of rice, 100 pounds of flour, 100 pounds of oats, and so forth.
We imagine several benefits from this programme. First, is that it is probably one of the best uses of cash. If stuff explodes in price, we will regret hanging on to our little dollars. Second, it provides an emergency ration we could use to keep being reasonably well fed if shortages should develop. Third, it will lay in a stock of useful 'trade' items such as food, soap, razor blades, etc. More than once a neighbor has knocked on the door asking for a roll of toilet paper. Next time we'll ask for a jar of herring, or whatever, in return.
The second step is to keep an eye out for things that are 'too cheap'. There is much liquidation going on as many businesses fold. This makes for a plethora of odds and ends that get sold below cost at places like Big Lots (and even Wal-Mart from time to time). Additionally, more good, cheap stuff is pouring out into our neighbour's lawns during rummage sales. It's an art to know when to pounce and 'buy it all', and when to avoid buying something one won't use and probably can't parlay into something one will.
We suspect the coming hyperinflation is going to turn a lot of people into peddlers. It's a tried and true survival strategy in hard times. It's also a way people can work together - swapping an extra candle for a chocolate in order to maintain a modicum of creature comfort in a dark hour.
Labels:
big lots,
comsumable,
flour,
food,
hyperinflation,
liquidation,
non-perishable,
oats,
rice,
wal-mart
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)