In a shtf scenario, what do you think will replace money – page 4 – survivalist forum gas bubbles in colon

#

I guess most people’s plans don’t include living through the SHTF event and coming out the backside of it when society re-emerges. Because that’s when PMs come into play in a large way. You’ve taken a portion of your current wealth and saved it for later after an event in a form the majority of the world understands.

All the supplies you have now could very well be used up during the event. Your house gone, your ammo spent, the banks gone, etc., etc. but you made it through the event. What’s the plan now, retire and live off your 401(k)? PMs are natural stores of wealth throughout all of recorded history.

If you plan on actually surviving the event, they are a hedge. No different then your bank account, savings, wads of cash, house, 401(k), pile of supplies, or land is to you now. Gold is one of thee densest form of wealth you can carry on you. If you come out of the back end of the event with each member of your family carrying a small stack of gold and silver coins, and having lost everything else in life, you’re going to be in a much, much better position.

I don’t understand people that don’t apply hedging strategies to everything in life. Buying PM is even one of the simplest hedging strategies out there and requires zero legal documents. Even idiots can figure out how to hand cash over for coins and store them somewhere. If you have cash or a bank account a SHTF event could theoretically drive their values to zero and never recover. PMs have never had zero value long term. So if you have everything else squared away you should have been hedging a percentage of your life savings in an instrument that has never been worthless.

I guess most people’s plans don’t include living through the SHTF event and coming out the backside of it when society re-emerges. Because that’s when PMs come into play in a large way. You’ve taken a portion of your current wealth and saved it for later after an event in a form the majority of the world understands.

All the supplies you have now could very well be used up during the event. Your house gone, your ammo spent, the banks gone, etc., etc. but you made it through the event. What’s the plan now, retire and live off your 401(k)? PMs are natural stores of wealth throughout all of recorded history.

If you plan on actually surviving the event, they are a hedge. No different then your bank account, savings, wads of cash, house, 401(k), pile of supplies, or land is to you now. Gold is one of thee densest form of wealth you can carry on you. If you come out of the back end of the event with each member of your family carrying a small stack of gold and silver coins, and having lost everything else in life, you’re going to be in a much, much better position.

I don’t understand people that don’t apply hedging strategies to everything in life. Buying PM is even one of the simplest hedging strategies out there and requires zero legal documents. Even idiots can figure out how to hand cash over for coins and store them somewhere. If you have cash or a bank account a SHTF even could theoretically drive their values to zero and never recover. PMs have never had zero value long term. So if you have everything else squared away you should have been hedging a percentage of your life savings in an instrument that has never been worthless.

Interesting thought I had about gold. I was thinking about the question we’re discussing, and wondering what gives PMs their intrinsic value. I was thinking that it’s obviously just for making stuff for women. Then I was adding that it’s for BEAUTIFUL women. It’s like when the fur trade was so important in the 1600s or 1700s- it was just for making hats that had become fashionable for women in Europe.

If I’m right, then it’s interesting that survivalists don’t really discuss that or factor it in. If enough of that context doesn’t exist post-shtf, are post-apocalyptic people going to eventually find that PM / its value becomes exposed? And is being obsessed with PMs as a post-shtf currency a little absurd if you’re not doing enough to ensure the continuation of that context?

The stuff about divisibility and durability is smart, but I just wonder what happens to the equation when that intrinsic value factor is messed with a lot- for instance, if people don’t have enough opportunity to be romantic, or there aren’t enough women around.

Have been thinking, a good motto for the apocalypse may be, if something’s worth having or worth doing, it’s worth paying for. Think doing something for free might be too newfangled an idea, that it should mean something special when you do it, and that maybe you’re setting yourself up when you do it too much.

It’s like that stereotype they put in TV a lot about men not wanting to ask for directions. Thing is when you ask for directions, you obligate yourself, right? It’s better to plan the trip right than to embarrassingly have to obligate yourself to a stranger, or to have him make a fool of you in front of your wife to teach you another man a lesson about not doing things well.

Think there may be times, then, when you have to take payment from people who haven’t prepped well, and don’t have much to give that’s very valuable. In that case, I think movie DVDs and music CDs might be alright payments that are halfway to being token, nominal payments.

For instance, Mike’s getting rid of a bunch of bandits that live or are operating across town from Mike is worth something to Mike, but it’s also worth something to Dan who’s right next to them, and who called Mike in to do it or gave him the tip. Shouldn’t Dan give him at least something? Or shouldn’t Dan even more rather be obligated to help Mike out w/ sthg in the future, even sthg very serious?

You shouldn’t be running around like a chicken with its head cut off post-shtf. You should have everything very straightened out with everyone. That’s the spirit of what I’m saying. If something happens that effects someone or benefits them in some way, we should figure out what that means. It’s a context, possibly, for some kind of payment. And if there’s no money, that means, pay another way. If you’re grazing yr goats on someone’s lawn, is it worth more to you, or more to him? There should be some kind of a payment, whether it’s to the one person or the other.