How do you buy food with dirt?

[durentu]

If the national currency goes bankrupt, how is one supposed to get food and other necessities like gas, water, electricity, wages etc ?

Do you have a plan? What did people in history with a collapsed currency do ? Was it effective? Does a bankrupt currency really mean the end of government? Is it really a fatal crisis?

[djm]

Dirt + work = crop

Worked for a very long time before money came along :mellow:

[wote]

lol, djm! :grin:

durentu, I suspect you're talking about the threat of the US dollar diving around November when China and other creditors may decide not to extend the US' loans? I've been noticing articles about that cropping up here and there over the last couple of months. Which source did you hear this from? Care to provide a link?

[NoahFence]

The first step is in locating and scouting all other sources of dirt.

Then you nuke them.

Now your dirt is the most valuable thing on Earth.

[stopharian]

You have to find someone in your neighborhood and beat the crap out of them right away to establish your dominance.

[fripping]

rhymes with koranic harming.

[NoahFence]

What did people in history with a collapsed currency do?

Hyperinflation.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Inflaci%C3%B3_utan_1946.jpg/220px-Inflaci%C3%B3_utan_1946.jpg

When money becomes cheaper than toilet paper, people wipe their ass with it.

[durentu]

lol, djm! :grin:

durentu, I suspect you're talking about the threat of the US dollar diving around November when China and other creditors may decide not to extend the US' loans? I've been noticing articles about that cropping up here and there over the last couple of months. Which source did you hear this from? Care to provide a link?

I'm not thinking of it as a certainty, but more of a "prepare your parachute" sort of deal. First, it's the reasoning of where this money is coming from and how we use it. Sure it's not the same as our own personal balance sheets, but the money must come from somewhere. As a benchmark of the strength of the us dollar, I've been watching the price of gold. from about $300 in 2003 to $1000 right now, to me this means that the dollar is 3x as worthless.

Another thought is where are they getting the money for the bail outs and the healthcare plan? Increasing currency supply or pushing off the debt into the future isn't really that smart. There are reports I read about the national debt and how the money is being used: investments vs consumption etc. THis is from the ron paul and peter schiff camp. Some cato institute materials. The zeitgeist movie I basically consider as entertainment.

Just as a thought experiment, if Obama says that the dollar has collapsed tomorrow, how would life look like tomorrow? next week? next month? Would states like texas split from the union before the nation crashes? would china start annexing states just to reclaim their loans? How soon after a currency collapse would the government collapse and under which conditions?

At a personal practical matter, what would I have to trade for food if my bank account, credit cards and cash in my wallet were are worthless? Would it really be that bad?

I've never thought about actually living through the great depression. Just trying to get a mental model because that possibility seems a bit more probable to me these days. Or is it just like the y2k scare?

[kble]

The first step is in locating and scouting all other sources of dirt.

Then you nuke them.

Now your dirt is the most valuable thing on Earth.

And my mind went "Starcraft". :grin:

[vSv]

You could always use a wooden stick for example, it has worked earlier in human history.

[Randwulf]

Everything's pretty much based on food. As someone already suggested, I'd just go around town and beat all of my neighbors into subservience on my farm. Then I'd buy guns and girls and beer with the extra crops.

[Incandescence]

The idea that it's impossible to have an economy without growing food isn't exactly true anymore, ever since agriculture began and caused enough of a surplus for specialized worker-classes to form. There are definitely places now hat have economies that aren't based on food anymore. The world ended up with places like China which focuses on industry. These all rely on their currency though, which means that they also would probably collapse. There is nothing being produced in America right now that the world really can't live without, which means that we would probably collapse too.

On the other hand, in the event of the United States dollar collapsing (which I'm assuming was what prompted this...) we have a lot more space and a lot fewer people per acre than most of the rest of Europe. This gives us a natural advantage if the global economy collapses. It's also possible to increase food production by changing people's expectations of what constitutes a meal. The amount of land, water, and resources that it takes to make a pound of eatable meat is much more than is required for a pound of corn* We have enough space to grow food that if the dollar collapsed, it would be more of an issue of transportation than it would be of actual food-growing capacity. In a worst-case scenario, I like to hope that the government would take over some land and put those people who are desperate for food to work farming.

On the other hand, oppression of my neighbors and a return to small bands ruled by the strongest sounds like great fun too. *starts mentally sizing up her neighbors*

(this is my first post here, by the way. *waves shyly*)

*statistics here change depending on whether the weight is the entire cow, or just the edible parts of the cow, and whether the comparison was taking into account grazing space which was used for the cows and was assumed would otherwise be used for growing corn. The most common statistic I found was 16:1, but it varied quite widely.

[wote]

Welcome, Incandescence. It's nice to see another female newbie here. Hope you don't mind me debating your first post...


The idea that it's impossible to have an economy without growing food isn't exactly true anymore, ever since agriculture began and caused enough of a surplus for specialized worker-classes to form.
It may be possible to have an economy without producing any of your own food, but it sure as heck is expensive importing everything. Japan is famous for its technology but you can ask any child here about his/her opinion on the low national (food) self-sufficiency rate-- it's that important an issue here.

There have been global surpluses but distribution has been far from equitable, for a raft of reasons from underdeveloped infrastructure and lack of education in the developing world to subsidies for American and European farms that include even crops going to tariff-free countries (thereby flooding the market and killing local competition). When the surpluses you mention are a global phenomenon, I might agree with you though. Maybe. :p


There are definitely places now hat have economies that aren't based on food anymore. The world ended up with places like China which focuses on industry. These all rely on their currency though, which means that they also would probably collapse. There is nothing being produced in America right now that the world really can't live without, which means that we would probably collapse too.
China and India are the world's two largest producers of rice. Unlike Thailand, they just hardly export any of it. Considering the obvious savings involved, I would think that this has an effect on both of their economies that they aren't eager to give up.


In a worst-case scenario, I like to hope that the government would take over some land and put those people who are desperate for food to work farming.
What happens if there is a surplus of labour?


On the other hand, oppression of my neighbors and a return to small bands ruled by the strongest sounds like great fun too. *starts mentally sizing up her neighbors*
*is suddenly afraid to move back to MB!!!* :ph34r:

[mchampagne]

If the national currency goes bankrupt, how is one supposed to get food and other necessities like gas, water, electricity, wages etc ?

Do you have a plan? What did people in history with a collapsed currency do ? Was it effective? Does a bankrupt currency really mean the end of government? Is it really a fatal crisis?

No, it means a reversion to Gold. Happens all the time.

[stuck]

The idea that it's impossible to have an economy without growing food isn't exactly true anymore, ever since agriculture began and caused enough of a surplus for specialized worker-classes to form. There are definitely places now hat have economies that aren't based on food anymore. The world ended up with places like China which focuses on industry. These all rely on their currency though, which means that they also would probably collapse. There is nothing being produced in America right now that the world really can't live without, which means that we would probably collapse too.

On the other hand, in the event of the United States dollar collapsing (which I'm assuming was what prompted this...) we have a lot more space and a lot fewer people per acre than most of the rest of Europe. This gives us a natural advantage if the global economy collapses. It's also possible to increase food production by changing people's expectations of what constitutes a meal. The amount of land, water, and resources that it takes to make a pound of eatable meat is much more than is required for a pound of corn* We have enough space to grow food that if the dollar collapsed, it would be more of an issue of transportation than it would be of actual food-growing capacity. In a worst-case scenario, I like to hope that the government would take over some land and put those people who are desperate for food to work farming.

On the other hand, oppression of my neighbors and a return to small bands ruled by the strongest sounds like great fun too. *starts mentally sizing up her neighbors*

(this is my first post here, by the way. *waves shyly*)

*statistics here change depending on whether the weight is the entire cow, or just the edible parts of the cow, and whether the comparison was taking into account grazing space which was used for the cows and was assumed would otherwise be used for growing corn. The most common statistic I found was 16:1, but it varied quite widely.

great 1st post imo.

post more!

[Incandescence]

Welcome, Incandescence. It's nice to see another female newbie here. Hope you don't mind me debating your first post...

Nice to meet you, and looking forward to it.


It may be possible to have an economy without producing any of your own food, but it sure as heck is expensive importing everything. Japan is famous for its technology but you can ask any child here about his/her opinion on the low national (food) self-sufficiency rate-- it's that important an issue here.
True. And if their national currency goes down, they'd be pretty much sunk. But that's not true for America. I wasn’t saying that it would be lovely everywhere. In fact a lot of places would probably starve. I’m just saying that the United States wouldn’t be one of them. Which is selfish, but if it was a question about the U.S. currancy, then I think it's most relevant.

China and India are the world's two largest producers of rice.
oops… :blush:

If there were more people ready to farm than there needed to be, then the farms themselves would be working, which means that there would soon be enough food to feed more people anyways, which means that the price of food would go down, and it would be easier to buy food food, which makes it not matter quite so much that they can't just work for food directly. (does that make sense the way I phrased it...?)

Thanks Bronze

[wote]

I wasn't saying that it would be lovely everywhere.
No, I just took issue with China being used as an example. There must be more comparable countries to use for comparison to the US (maybe Australia?).

Like you said, you don't need to produce your own food just to *have* a stable economy. I just think that any country that cannot guarantee its own food security is severely vulnerable to threats both domestic and international.


If there were more people ready to farm than there needed to be, then the farms themselves would be working, which means that there would soon be enough food to feed more people anyways, which means that the price of food would go down, and it would be easier to buy food food, which makes it not matter quite so much that they can't just work for food directly. (does that make sense the way I phrased it...?)

I may be completely off here but it sounds to me as though you're saying "more people working on farms = surplus food = lower food prices." Sadly, as you may well know, there are piles of other issues surrounding the viability of this idea (land availability and location, environmental conditions, farm management/practices, &c.). Probably, the only guaranteed outcome of having huge supplies of workers is a lower cost of labour.

[jyng1]

I may be completely off here but it sounds to me as though you're saying "more people working on farms = surplus food = lower food prices." Sadly, as you may well know, there are piles of other issues surrounding the viability of this idea (land availability and location, environmental conditions, farm management/practices, &c.). Probably, the only guaranteed outcome of having huge supplies of workers is a lower cost of labour.

Increased productivity in agriculture and horticulture is related to removing the labour content by increasing mechanisation, but is also due to increases in quality of genetics, crop management, fertility, and optimisation of growing conditions.

One of my concerns would be that almost nothing is grown without intensive fossil fuel input, either as fertiliser or mechanisation and transport. If there was a collapse of the fuel supply there would also be a collapse of the food supply (or more simply the price of food is directly related to the price of oil).

I wonder if one day we will look back on how good we had it; we produce so much and waste such a lot of it: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10636346

[durentu]

So I've been reading about Greece and watching videos of the rioting there.

In comparing greece and usa, currency will collapse for both. The difference is that greece doesn't have the federal reserve to keep printing money. Since the greek banks don't have someplace to get cash to finance debt, it will collapse. For the US, the situation will worsen because the market corrections will happen later and much worse because our ability to print currency (and being world reserve).

I'll agree that it will revert to gold, however, what is one supposed to do between the collapse and the established gold standard instead of rioting and causing problems. What are the more constructive ways to survive this sort of anarchy ?

[bkindness]

Dirt + work = crop
Great idea! HAHA

[barrylevon]

if you're kevin costner you could just swim to the bottom of the ocean and trade it for whatever you want.

serioulsy though, if the currency were to collapse, why would you assume that these things (electricity especially) will be available? who's going to go to work if they're getting paid with useless currency? not me. i'm going to assume that at least 70% of the population would do the same. no workers, no service. bye bye internet, bye bye lights, so long walmart. at least for a while.

in between the collapse and re-stabilization would be a real bitch. think i be movin' back to the ole family farm. anyone's welcome to come work for food.