Is NH Ready for the coming collapse Part Two

[diamondlady1025]

In the Soviet Union, very little could be obtained for money. It was treated as tokens rather than as wealth, and was shared among friends. Many things – housing and transportation among them – were either free or almost free.

Slide [14] Soviet consumer products were always an object of derision – refrigerators that kept the house warm – and the food, and so on. You'd be lucky if you got one at all, and it would be up to you to make it work once you got it home. But once you got it to work, it would become a priceless family heirloom, handed down from generation to generation, sturdy, and almost infinitely maintainable.

In the United States, you often hear that something "is not worth fixing." This is enough to make a Russian see red. I once heard of an elderly Russian who became irate when a hardware store in Boston wouldn't sell him replacement bedsprings: "People are throwing away perfectly good mattresses, how am I supposed to fix them?"

Economic collapse tends to shut down both local production and imports, and so it is vitally important that anything you own wears out slowly, and that you can fix it yourself if it breaks. Soviet-made stuff generally wore incredibly hard. The Chinese-made stuff you can get around here – much less so.

Slide [15] The Soviet agricultural sector was notoriously inefficient. Many people grew and gathered their own food even in relatively prosperous times. There were food warehouses in every city, stocked according to a government allocation scheme. There were very few restaurants, and most families cooked and ate at home. Shopping was rather labor-intensive, and involved carrying heavy loads. Sometimes it resembled hunting – stalking that elusive piece of meat lurking behind some store counter. So the people were well-prepared for what came next.

In the United States, most people get their food from a supermarket, which is supplied from far away using refrigerated diesel trucks. Many people don't even bother to shop and just eat fast food. When people do cook, they rarely cook from scratch. This is all very unhealthy, and the effect on the nation's girth, is visible, clear across the parking lot. A lot of the people, who just waddle to and from their cars, seem unprepared for what comes next. If they suddenly had to start living like the Russians, they would blow out their knees.

Slide [16] The Soviet government threw resources at immunization programs, infectious disease control, and basic care. It directly operated a system of state-owned clinics, hospitals, and sanatoriums. People with fatal ailments or chronic conditions often had reason to complain, and had to pay for private care – if they had the money.

In the United States, medicine is for profit. People seems to think nothing of this fact. There are really very few fields of endeavor to which Americans would deny the profit motive. The problem is, once the economy is removed, so is the profit, along with the services it once helped to motivate.

Slide [17] The Soviet education system was generally quite excellent. It produced an overwhelmingly literate population and many great specialists. The education was free at all levels, but higher education sometimes paid a stipend, and often provided room and board. The educational system held together quite well after the economy collapsed. The problem was that the graduates had no jobs to look forward to upon graduation. Many of them lost their way.

The higher education system in the United States is good at many things – government and industrial research, team sports, vocational training... Primary and secondary education fails to achieve in 12 years what Soviet schools generally achieved in 8. The massive scale and expense of maintaining these institutions is likely to prove too much for the post-collapse environment. Illiteracy is already a problem in the United States, and we should expect it to get a lot worse.

Slide [18] The Soviet Union did not need to import energy. The production and distribution system faltered, but never collapsed. Price controls kept the lights on even as hyperinflation raged.

The term "market failure" seems to fit the energy situation in the United States. Free markets develop some pernicious characteristics when there are shortages of key commodities. During World War II, the United States government understood this, and successfully rationed many things, from gasoline to bicycle parts. But that was a long time ago. Since then, the inviolability of free markets has become an article of faith.

Slide [19] My conclusion is that the Soviet Union was much better-prepared for economic collapse than the United States is.

I have left out two important superpower asymmetries, because they don't have anything to do with collapse-preparedne ss. Some countries are simply luckier than others. But I will mention them, for the sake of completeness.

In terms of racial and ethnic composition, the United States resembles Yugoslavia more than it resembles Russia, so we shouldn't expect it to be as peaceful as Russia was, following the collapse. Ethnically mixed societies are fragile and have a tendency to explode.

In terms of religion, the Soviet Union was relatively free of apocalyptic doomsday cults. Very few people there wished for a planet-sized atomic fireball to herald the second coming of their savior. This was indeed a blessing.

Slide [20] One area in which I cannot discern any Collapse Gap is national politics. The ideologies may be different, but the blind adherence to them couldn't be more similar.

It is certainly more fun to watch two Capitalist parties go at each other than just having the one Communist party to vote for. The things they fight over in public are generally symbolic little tokens of social policy, chosen for ease of public posturing. The Communist party offered just one bitter pill. The two Capitalist parties offer a choice of two placebos. The latest innovation is the photo finish election, where each party buys 50% of the vote, and the result is pulled out of statistical noise, like a rabbit out of a hat.

The American way of dealing with dissent and with protest is certainly more advanced: why imprison dissidents when you can just let them shout into the wind to their heart's content?

The American approach to bookkeeping is more subtle and nuanced than the Soviet. Why make a state secret of some statistic, when you can just distort it, in obscure ways? Here's a simple example: inflation is "controlled" by substituting hamburger for steak, in order to minimize increases to Social Security payments.

Slide [21] Many people expend a lot of energy protesting against their irresponsible, unresponsive government. It seems like a terrible waste of time, considering how ineffectual their protests are. Is it enough of a consolation for them to be able to read about their efforts in the foreign press? I think that they would feel better if they tuned out the politicians, the way the politicians tune them out. It's as easy as turning off the television set. If they try it, they will probably observe that nothing about their lives has changed, nothing at all, except maybe their mood has improved. They might also find that they have more time and energy to devote to more important things.

Slide [22] I will now sketch out some approaches, realistic and otherwise, to closing the Collapse Gap. My little list of approaches might seem a bit glib, but keep in mind that this is a very difficult problem. In fact, it's important to keep in mind that not all problems have solutions. I can promise you that we will not solve this problem tonight. What I will try to do is to shed some light on it from several angles.

Slide [23] Many people rail against the unresponsiveness and irresponsibility of the government. They often say things like "What is needed is..." plus the name of some big, successful government project from the glorious past – the Marshall Plan, the Manhattan Project, the Apollo program. But there is nothing in the history books about a government preparing for collapse. Gorbachev's "Perestroika" is an example of a government trying to avert or delay collapse. It probably helped speed it along.

Slide [24] There are some things that I would like the government to take care of in preparation for collapse. I am particularly concerned about all the radioactive and toxic installations, stockpiles, and dumps. Future generations are unlikely to able to control them, especially if global warming puts them underwater. There is enough of this muck sitting around to kill off most of us. I am also worried about soldiers getting stranded overseas – abandoning one's soldiers is among the most shameful things a country can do. Overseas military bases should be dismantled, and the troops repatriated. I'd like to see the huge prison population whittled away in a controlled manner, ahead of time, instead of in a chaotic general amnesty. Lastly, I think that this farce with debts that will never be repaid, has gone on long enough. Wiping the slate clean will give society time to readjust. So, you see, I am not asking for any miracles. Although, if any of these things do get
done, I would consider it a miracle.

Slide [25] A private sector solution is not impossible; just very, very unlikely. Certain Soviet state enterprises were basically states within states. They controlled what amounted to an entire economic system, and could go on even without the larger economy. They kept to this arrangement even after they were privatized. They drove Western management consultants mad, with their endless kindergartens, retirement homes, laundries, and free clinics. These weren't part of their core competency, you see. They needed to divest and to streamline their operations. The Western management gurus overlooked the most important thing: the core competency of these enterprises lay in their ability to survive economic collapse. Maybe the young geniuses at Google can wrap their heads around this one, but I doubt that their stockholders will.

Slide [26] It's important to understand that the Soviet Union achieved collapse-preparedne ss inadvertently, and not because of the success of some crash program. Economic collapse has a way of turning economic negatives into positives. The last thing we want is a perfectly functioning, growing, prosperous economy that suddenly collapses one day, and leaves everybody in the lurch. It is not necessary for us to embrace the tenets of command economy and central planning to match the Soviet lackluster performance in this area. We have our own methods, that are working almost as well. I call them "boondoggles. " They are solutions to problems that cause more problems than they solve.

Just look around you, and you will see boondoggles sprouting up everywhere, in every field of endeavor: we have military boondoggles like Iraq, financial boondoggles like the doomed retirement system, medical boondoggles like private health insurance, legal boondoggles like the intellectual property system. The combined weight of all these boondoggles is slowly but surely pushing us all down. If it pushes us down far enough, then economic collapse, when it arrives, will be like falling out of a ground floor window. We just have to help this process along, or at least not interfere with it. So if somebody comes to you and says "I want to make a boondoggle that runs on hydrogen" – by all means encourage him! It's not as good as a boondoggle that burns money directly, but it's a step in the right direction.

Slide [27] Certain types of mainstream economic behavior are not prudent on a personal level, and are also counterproductive to bridging the Collapse Gap. Any behavior that might result in continued economic growth and prosperity is counterproductive: the higher you jump, the harder you land. It is traumatic to go from having a big retirement fund to having no retirement fund because of a market crash. It is also traumatic to go from a high income to little or no income. If, on top of that, you have kept yourself incredibly busy, and suddenly have nothing to do, then you will really be in rough shape.

Economic collapse is about the worst possible time for someone to suffer a nervous breakdown, yet this is what often happens. The people who are most at risk psychologically are successful middle-aged men. When their career is suddenly over, their savings are gone, and their property worthless, much of their sense of self-worth is gone as well. They tend to drink themselves to death and commit suicide in disproportionate numbers. Since they tend to be the most experienced and capable people, this is a staggering loss to society.

If the economy, and your place within it, is really important to you, you will be really hurt when it goes away. You can cultivate an attitude of studied indifference, but it has to be more than just a conceit. You have to develop the lifestyle and the habits and the physical stamina to back it up. It takes a lot of creativity and effort to put together a fulfilling existence on the margins of society. After the collapse, these margins may turn out to be some of the best places to live.

Slide [28] I hope that I didn't make it sound as if the Soviet collapse was a walk in the park, because it was really quite awful in many ways. The point that I do want to stress is that when this economy collapses, it is bound to be much worse. Another point I would like to stress is that collapse here is likely to be permanent. The factors that allowed Russia and the other former Soviet republics to recover are not present here.

In spite of all this, I believe that in every age and circumstance, people can sometimes find not just a means and a reason to survive, but enlightenment, fulfillment, and freedom. If we can find them even after the economy collapses, then why not start looking for them now?

Thank you.

~~~ editorial notes ~~~~
Energy Bulletin published an excerpt from this talk yesterday (Dec 3), and Dmitry reported that his small webserver was overwhelmed with requests. Although it's good news that his writing has such a following, PLEASE don't access the document on his web server (Club Orlov). The same content is here, on Energy Bulletin's heavier duty webserver.
---
Orlov has many penetrating insights, couched in his dark humor. Particularly striking is the strong case he makes that the peoples of the USSR were actually better prepared for a collapse becausethey had learned to be more self-reliant many crucial functions (like housing and transportation) were taken care of by the state sector which was more stable than a private sector would have been. Orlov's cynicism about the possibility of intelligent government action was probably justified in the case of the Soviet Union, but I think it would be a tragic mistake to abandon efforts to change the direction of the U.S. The Soviets had little chance to make democratic institutions work. We do have that chance.
-BA

~~~ About Energy Bulletin ~~
Energy Bulletin is a not-for-profit energy news clearinghouse exploring the relationships between peak oil and peak gas with climate and the environment, geopolitics, finance, transport, urban design, food systems, permaculture, relocalisation and much more.
www.energybulletin. net

[error]

And missing the point.

Unfortunately he not only completely fails to identify the cause of economic collapse, both in the USSR and here, he MISidentifies it here as being caused by the evil free market capitalist system, where in reality in both countries it was actually caused by the government screwing around with the free market.

[diamondlady1025]

And missing the point.

Unfortunately he not only completely fails to identify the cause of economic collapse, both in the USSR and here, he MISidentifies it here as being caused by the evil free market capitalist system, where in reality in both countries it was actually caused by the government screwing around with the free market.

This may be or may not be so, I do not know, my point in posting this really was to ask is NH being a freer/going to be a free state prepared for this type of collapse, because if NH is free from being ready to handle this occurring then it matters little where one lives in the US when this occurs.

This is why I am asking because if NH can and does have a plan to implement sustaining itself free from oil and can be self-sustaining, then this is a BIG a HUGE plus and would make it more enticing for others such as myself to move to NH

[David]

He seems to forget that some of the estimates of the 'illegal black market' being a full 50% of the economy in Russia. 
However he is right that the US is not prepared for a collapse.  Oh, and the borrowed money the gov't owes, at some point it will likely be defaulted on.  That happens where gov't want to give voters something, but don't have the money due to interest payments. 
The Russians were probably better at dealing with what was really a gov't collapse because it had been going on slowly for quite some time but few realize it until some big benchmark event happening that makes people recognize it.  The coup in russia was their benchmark. 
It is a myth to believe the economy will be destroyed, but there will be tremendous contraction.  That is painfull to all involved.  The ederly will be some of the hardest hit.  S security will never go out of business, but the payments relitive to inflation will become smaller every year. 
The writter is right on the money about learning from others when trying to figure out how to deal with collapse. 

[error]

I suspect you'll be much better off in NH than other places, simply because people are already more aligned with market principles.

[Dreepa]

This may be or may not be so, I do not know, my point in posting this really was to ask is NH being a freer/going to be a free state prepared for this type of collapse, because if NH is free from being ready to handle this occurring then it matters little where one lives in the US when this occurs.

This is why I am asking because if NH can and does have a plan to implement sustaining itself free from oil and can be self-sustaining, then this is a BIG a HUGE plus and would make it more enticing for others such as myself to move to NH

Well the 'plan' is to have 25% of energy come from 'renewable' sources by 2025.

In the Concord area some of our electricity comes from burning trash.

[SeanSchade]

This may be or may not be so, I do not know, my point in posting this really was to ask is NH being a freer/going to be a free state prepared for this type of collapse, because if NH is free from being ready to handle this occurring then it matters little where one lives in the US when this occurs.

This is why I am asking because if NH can and does have a plan to implement sustaining itself free from oil and can be self-sustaining, then this is a BIG a HUGE plus and would make it more enticing for others such as myself to move to NH

Well the 'plan' is to have 25% of energy come from 'renewable' sources by 2025.

In the Concord area some of our electricity comes from burning trash.

Why are we exporting the electricity generated from the nuclear plant? Doesn't Florida Power & Light own 88% of the Seabrook plant?

The plant has the capacity to power over 900,000 residences. It should be able to handle the lion's share of NH's power needs reducing the need for coal and oil plants. We also have one or more hydro stations available as well.

[Insurgent]

Diamondlady--were you a From the Wilderness subscriber? The author of this, Dimitri Orlov, the author, gave this presentation earlier this year. The whole speech can be found here http://energybulletin.net/23259.html  It's a sobering read.

One of the reasons why I moved to NH is that I think we'll be a little better off than people in other states when the collapse comes. While we are at a disadvantage in terms of the electric grid, we have a lot of fresh water and timber. We also have relatively thriving small towns; local economies will be critical. The state also is inhabited with relatively industrious, hard working and self-reliant type people. The state is also fairly homogenous racially which helps to keep the peace in times of unrest. It also doesn't have any very large metropolitan areas filled with people who are dependent on government.

All in all, I think we'll survive, if we begin preparing for the collpase and cementing local relationships

[joeyforpresident]

When the American economic system collapses, we will all embrace - a la 9/11 - a "new" world order. Bring on the amero, biiiitches!

[Dreepa]

Why are we exporting the electricity generated from the nuclear plant? Doesn't Florida Power & Light own 88% of the Seabrook plant?

The plant has the capacity to power over 900,000 residences. It should be able to handle the lion's share of NH's power needs reducing the need for coal and oil plants. We also have one or more hydro stations available as well.

I guess part of the answer is capitalism... they might make more selling it in FLA... (Someone can now comment on we don't have free markets and it is the govt's fault)

[David]

When the American economic system collapses, we will all embrace - a la 9/11 - a "new" world order. Bring on the amero, biiiitches!

You are in luck.  Economic collapses tend to create a strong sence of nationalism, jobs for americans first type thing.  The false free trade agreements may also be dismantled.  I doubt we will see a 'new world order' type thing during any disaster. 

[Pat McCotter]

Why are we exporting the electricity generated from the nuclear plant? Doesn't Florida Power & Light own 88% of the Seabrook plant?

The plant has the capacity to power over 900,000 residences. It should be able to handle the lion's share of NH's power needs reducing the need for coal and oil plants. We also have one or more hydro stations available as well.

"We" are not exporting the power, FPL is selling it on the open market - wherever they can get the best price.

In 2005 50% of US electricity came from coal - a domestic US commodity.

19% came from natural gas - another US commodity, though we do get some from Canada.

19% also came from Nuclear - also a US commodity.

Hydro accounted for another 7%.

Petroleum was used to produce 3% of the US electrical needs in 2005.

[KBCraig]

"We" are not exporting the power, FPL is selling it on the open market - wherever they can get the best price.

Genau.

FPL owns/controls the plant; they can sell the electrons wherever they wish. The people of NH don't own Seabrook, and aren't entitled to its output.

Kevin

[error]

Then why oh why are the people of NH being taxed for it?

[Pat McCotter]

Then why oh why are the people of NH being taxed for it?

What tax is that?