WW1 Govt Recomendations

[x10]

What if we all followed this a little bit more

http://archive.timesonline.co.uk/to...03-001&pageId=ARCHIVE-The_Times-1914-08-06-03
How to be useful in wartime: practical patriotism
We are receiving a constant stream of letters containing suggestions for personal conduct or useful action in the national emergency. We publish a selection below.
They vary, no doubt, in value. But they all reflect the intense interest and desire to help which animates the whole population, and they will, we hope, encourage the spirit of duty, unselfishness, restraint, and consideration for others which it behoves us all to cherish to the utmost.




First and foremost, keep your heads. Be calm. Go about your ordinary business quietly and soberly. Do not indulge in excitement or foolish demonstrations.




Secondly, think of others more than you are wont to do. Think of your duty to your neighbour. Think of the common weal.
Try to contribute your share by doing your duty in your own place and your own sphere. Be abstemious and economical.



Avoid waste.


Do not store goods and create an artificial scarcity to the hurt of others. Remember that it is an act of mean and selfish cowardice.
Do not hoard gold. Let it circulate. Try to make things easier, not more difficult.



Remember those who are worse off than yourself. Pay punctually what you owe, especially to your poorest creditors, such as washerwomen and charwomen.


If you are an employer think of your employed. Give them work and wages as long as you can, and work short time rather than close down.


If you are employed remember the difficulties of your employer. Instead of dwelling on your own privations think of the infinitely worse state of those who live at the seat of war and are not only thrown out of work but deprived of all they possess.



Do what you can to cheer and encourage our soldiers. Gladly help any organization for their comfort and welfare. Explain to the young and the ignorant what war is, and why we have been forced to wage it.
​

 

[Disposable Heart]

Eye opening!

 

[jeremy]

And that is why that was such a great generation...

 

[Fletch]

Do not store goods and create an artificial scarcity to the hurt of others. Remember that it is an act of mean and selfish cowardice.
​

How ridiculous. You can draw an unbroken line from this statement straight through FDR's nonsense to George Bush's "spend money you don't have for the good of the economy."

 

[x10]

How ridiculous. You can draw an unbroken line from this statement straight through FDR's nonsense to George Bush's "spend money you don't have for the good of the economy."

I think you made a bigger jump than I was going for,

I thought people hoarding primers should take note

but I just saw this and thought it also pointed out a great big difference in the way Gov't thought of its people and People thought of its Gov't. I really wasn't bashing any administration current or past,

I saw in the test an encouragement to work together and take responsibility for your community not make yourself an island

 

[Fletch]

I think you made a bigger jump than I was going for,

I thought people hoarding primers should take note

but I just saw this and thought it also pointed out a great big difference in the way Gov't thought of its people and People thought of its Gov't. I really wasn't bashing any administration current or past,

I saw in the test an encouragement to work together and take responsibility for your community not make yourself an island

Making yourself an island is one thing. Saving and storing up goods, on the other hand, is a perfectly reasonable and rational response to times of great uncertainty, such as war. If I have no savings (in terms of surplus goods that I'm not planning to consume immediately), I have no ability to help my neighbors beyond mere subsistence levels. What is being advocated here is essentially a return to hunter-gatherer economy: go out every day and work your butt off to get just enough to eat for today and maybe a little bit for tomorrow. They're advocating willful poverty.

The accumulation of material wealth can be a means to moral edification if used properly. I find vague accusations of "starving your fellow man" more likely to be projections of the speaker's own moral turpitude than a statement of what must necessarily occur.

 

[x10]

again a bigger jump,

profiteers should be chastised

 

[Fletch]

again a bigger jump,

profiteers should be chastised

Why? Profits are a sign that someone is serving their fellow man in a way that allocates resources rationally according to the laws of supply and demand. When something becomes scarce, those who have stored it up should be able to profit from their storage: they have mitigated the shortage by preserving that which would have otherwise been consumed. Higher prices are a signal to consumers to conserve, and to producers to increase production. Holding prices at some nominal, arbitrary level only serves to make the scarcity worse. The price caps on gas in the 1970's are a perfect example of this.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Do not store goods and create an artificial scarcity to the hurt of others. Remember that it is an act of mean and selfish cowardice.

How ridiculous. You can draw an unbroken line from this statement straight through FDR's nonsense to George Bush's "spend money you don't have for the good of the economy."

Sorry, Fletch, I don't agree. They're not saying only to not store goods, they're saying not to store goods to the level that it creates an artificial scarcity.

As I read it, it means you can buy thirty loaves of bread, but not if they're the last 30 on the shelf with no more coming.

If you have 1,000 rds for each of your guns, that's understandable. Having 100,000 for each gun is excessive. They wisely left the determination of where to draw the line to the individual.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Lucas156]

yeah i don't agree that storing food is a bad thing to do for your fellow neighbor. What about the story in the bible that God says to store up food and one person does and it saves nations of people. four years of plenty three years of famine or something like that.

 

[Fletch]

If you have 1,000 rds for each of your guns, that's understandable. Having 100,000 for each gun is excessive. They wisely left the determination of where to draw the line to the individual.

Your last sentence contravenes your first two, in which you implicitly assert that the right of determination is yours.

Using an ammo shortage as an example, consider: what would be more useful nowadays, to the people who live in areas where ammo is really difficult to come by? A neighbor with 1,000 rounds for each of his guns, unwilling to part with any because of the uncertainty surrounding how long it will take ammo manufacturers to bring production up to the current level of demand? Or a neighbor with 100,000 rounds for each of his guns, who is willing to part with some of his "excess" (as determined by him) in exchange for a profit?

I submit that the person who saves excessively is far more useful to the community than the person who saves "reasonably". His margin will be far wider than the "reasonable" saver, and thus he will have a far lower price point to offer his potential customers.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Your last sentence contravenes your first two, in which you implicitly assert that the right of determination is yours.

Using an ammo shortage as an example, consider: what would be more useful nowadays, to the people who live in areas where ammo is really difficult to come by? A neighbor with 1,000 rounds for each of his guns, unwilling to part with any because of the uncertainty surrounding how long it will take ammo manufacturers to bring production up to the current level of demand? Or a neighbor with 100,000 rounds for each of his guns, who is willing to part with some of his "excess" (as determined by him) in exchange for a profit?

I submit that the person who saves excessively is far more useful to the community than the person who saves "reasonably". His margin will be far wider than the "reasonable" saver, and thus he will have a far lower price point to offer his potential customers.

I see your point. My numbers were arbitrary (other than in reference to each other), however, and though I didn't say it, I was thinking about both the 1K "hoarder" and the 100K "hoarder" as doing so solely to provide for themselves.

While the one may comfortably sell off his self-determined excess, there will be (and even in this thread have been) calls of "profiteering". While I support capitalism, I don't much like the idea of paying, say, $15.00/rd for 9mm... Note that I did not say I supported laws prohibiting that, nor do I think such laws would matter in a SHTF/TEOTWAWKI situation.

Sorry I wasn't more clear.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Fletch]

I see your point. My numbers were arbitrary (other than in reference to each other), however, and though I didn't say it, I was thinking about both the 1K "hoarder" and the 100K "hoarder" as doing so solely to provide for themselves.

And that may well be their intent. However, in times of scarcity, the 100k hoarder will soon find that their excess rounds of ammunition are far more valuable as a means of trade than they are for shooting. It will take the 1k hoarder a lot longer to reach this point... his ammunition is more precious to him because of its scarcity relative to the 100k hoarder. This is what I mean by the 100k hoarder's margin being wider; the relative abundance of his ammunition stores when compared to say, perishable food items like meat and grains, will lead him to begin exchanging one for the other.

While the one may comfortably sell off his self-determined excess, there will be (and even in this thread have been) calls of "profiteering". While I support capitalism, I don't much like the idea of paying, say, $15.00/rd for 9mm... Note that I did not say I supported laws prohibiting that, nor do I think such laws would matter in a SHTF/TEOTWAWKI situation.

It may be that $15/rd is the appropriate market-clearing price. It doesn't mean you'll like it, and you may very well seek substitute goods instead (like taking up archery). But the price must be allowed to fluctuate, as you apparently agree, in order to ensure the preservation of the resource at levels that are the most efficient they can be (which is not to say perfectly efficient).