In my research on the socio/economic repocussions leading upto and beyond the useby date of the year 2000 problem have found a large percentage of those who understand the problem at a loss [financialy] with preperation at a very basoc level.

That is most people dont have the spare dollars [even having $5.00 spare after paying bills and buying weekly food]to stock-pile food enough for their families. How do we get around this social problem, how do we set up co-ops and organisations to help these people to get basic food needs to keep them going in-case Y2K does what we are all predicting it to do.

Any ideas folks?

Re Timothy J Wilbur ******************* Beyond 2000 Awareness Project Rosebank 2480 NSW Australia timkaz@nor.com.au elbethel@one.net.au

-- Timothy J Wilbur (timkaz@nor.com.au), November 19, 1998

Answers

I am storing enough for myself and others, thinking in terms of setting up a soup kitchen and bread line. I think the best way to do this is just to do it, if you have the means. You can keep it going by soliciting donations from other people who are well stocked. I'm getting big soup pots, a propane cooking system; I have yet to determine the best way to mass-produce bread, however.

The best way is to get the word out now, raise awareness in your community so that even if people can only do a little, they at least do what they can. A little bit of preparation is better than none, and there's a lot you can do for cheap - free buckets and other containers to scrounge, wheat for dirt cheap; if I were desperately poor, I would double up on my food bank visits, and start storing the booty. Unethical perhaps, but better to lean on that service a little now than steal to feed your babies later.

You might want to work with a local church; that takes the action away from your domicile, and disassociates you, personally, with the handout. The Bible says "do good in secret," and there's a very practical reason for that approach! (although there might be something more to it than that...)

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), November 19, 1998.

Tim, you're in Australia (I'm in the Sydney suburb of Mosman as I write this). What kind of trouble do you think will happen here? Do you expect all hell to break loose as it probably will in the States?

--Leo

-- Leo (leo_champion@hotmail.com), November 19, 1998.

# # # 19981119

What Tim is describing _will be only an economic problem, begging the extended _social question(s). Altruism is the philosophy of nihilists, socialists and defeatists.

The U.S. ( culture ) was founded upon principals of "rugged individualism," individual property rights and FREEDOM, while pursuing happiness. Individuals, living for their own ( sovereignty ) sake. Ideas and concepts that are lost on most of the population today.

There is no _just power on Earth that can substitute for the will and drive of the individual to provide for [him/her]self and family. Life is always a struggle, and then you perish. Re-learning the essentials of subsistence living must be reconfirmed and reinforced as a _responsibility of the individual as the means to that individual's reprise or demise.

The promise of an all caring teat ( e.g., government, corporation ) is the fantasy world of children. Individuals must mature and accept responsibility for themselves, and only thereafter, shared responsibility _along _with _others ( community; teamwork ).

My life experience with friends and neighbors less ( financially ) fortunate than me and mine ( family ), is that _they are more likely to be far better off and adaptable to future ( Y2K ) "interesting times." It's the other 90% of the "slovenly" segment of society that I shall be concerned about for my and mine rights to survive for our own sake.

Individual will be at the mercy their devices and cunning, to thrive or perish as the real/true substance and measure of success.

The weak will perish -- regardless of economic status. The strong will survive -- regardless of economic status.

Take excellent care of you and your own, without over-extending strength(s) into the realm of the weaker at your own risk and peril.

These will be the tough ( Y2K ) philosophical arenas facing individuals; their survival dependent upon choices -- with success _and/or failure.

The ultimate, "all caring teat" is located between the ears of the individual. What each of us do with it, and wisdom about how we use it, will determine the fate of the individual in the end.

Do what you are able, as long as you are able! Thus avoiding the aimless fog of the "... never never!"

Regards, Bob Mangus # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), November 19, 1998.

I don't know, Robert,...I think there is a fine line a person can walk in regards to assisting others. There is the toxic sort of altruism that we all know too well. Then there is the "assisting" that is like holding up a lamp in the darkness. Starting a community food co-op seems to me of the latter. Everyone who comes to the co-op brings for the pantry...if you do not bring (and what you bring can have guidelines up front), you cannot take.

William Shakespeare: "Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds."

It is unnecessary to have knee-jerk reactions to plans to help others help themselves. Not a popular stance, I agree, but I'm sticking to it.

I just returned from driving my elderly neighbors to their doctor appointment. They are pretty self-sufficient old human survivors...69 and 75 years. They have massive health issues though, and the husband is losing his sight and can no longer drive until they can schedule a cataract operation for him. They are delightful people,...full of stories...they always palm me 5 bucks for gasoline...Karmically I would hope that when I am in need there is someone about to notice.

Just my nickel's worth of opinion.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), November 19, 1998.

Sorry Bob, but I have to disagree. "Altruism" isn't a philosophy at all. It's a distinguishing feature of humanity. I agree that it can't be enforced from without. But it's one thing to be against State Socialism, and quite another to go calling people "nihilists, socialists and defeatists" because they want to help out their less fortunate neighbors. If you are deficient in social skills, if people sense that you care nothing for them, you won't last long in any community. You can have a strong community, in which those with greater resources voluntarily care for those who are young, old, sick, etc. - and it doesn't have to be "socialism" or "collectivism." It just requires a little compassion and common sense. So if you haven't figured out what that apparently empty space in your chest cavity is for, don't take it out on those to whom life is more than mere survival.

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), November 19, 1998.

# # # 19981119

Without apology and ( SET SHOUT ON ) EMPHATICALLY: SURVIVAL IS EVERYTHING; WITHOUT THAT ATTRIBUTE, THERE _IS NOTHING! ( Of course, it all depends on what _your definition of "is," _is! )

( Spoken from the _HEAD ( brain ) and _EXPERIENCE of a _SURVIVOR from a year hugging the war-torn turf of Vietnam! All laggards must be eliminated! NO EXCEPTIONS! )

May you be SMART ENOUGH to LIVE LONG and PROSPER, through the Year 2000 Techno-Ambush!

Regards, Bob Mangus # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), November 19, 1998.

Is that really you E?

You care for others more than I suspected. That is what eats at me every day in this whole matter. It hurts me when others don't even want to discuss Y2K. They don't realize how much is riding on this.

We must all try to do what Timothy suggests. Work to raise awareness and get people to cooperate in marshalling our common resources. But until we help everyone break through the wall of ignorance about Y2K it will be difficult to organize. It is said that awareness is 1% of a Y2K project, but that 1% seems to be taking 99% of the effort.

-- Buddy (DC) (buddy@bellatlantic.net), November 19, 1998.

Quoting: ****All laggards must be eliminated! NO EXCEPTIONS! )****

I don't know you Robert, but if I did, I'd send you to your room to think about this a bit more. The above quote is pure unadulterated crap! No man is an island, dear heart...and if you'd like to be the last living cell in a dead body that is up to you....I think I'd rather be part of a vibrant community where head and heart are used, where the weak are assisted, the lame given an arm, the hungry fed...in the future world I am visioning beyond 2000 that is what will happen in small communities...without poisonous governmental enabling...

Go now and breathe a bit...and listen a lot...and ask how you would have your loved ones treated in any community.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), November 19, 1998.

Hi Tim,

Excellent post Tim

The law-from-a-gun barrel folks of the world are entitled to their views provided they stay where they are. As I said in an earlier post, we (in New Zealand) put people away who carry guns. I think it may have been the ultimate testosterone hero Clint Eastwood who said something like: The measure of a man's self worth is his inclination to use extreme force.

That said, your question gets to what I am seeing as the heart of the issue. Communities need to act now on the issue of basic needs. Each community has existing mechanisms for meeting needs. These may have to be expanded to cover increased numbers of dependent people.

Good Luck in finding the people to make this work.

-- Bob Barbour (r.barbour@waikato.ac.nz), November 19, 1998.

# # # 19981119

> Quoting: ****All laggards must be eliminated! NO EXCEPTIONS! )****

> I don't know you Robert, but if I did, I'd send you to your room to > think about this a bit more. The above quote is pure unadulterated > crap!

[RMangus] I haven't been "sent to my room" in over ~30 year, madame! You have quite a bit of reality to grasp before TY2KSHTF. No "crap" about _that! You'll grow weary of crap floating about you.

> No man is an island, dear heart...and if you'd like to be the last > living cell in a dead body that is up to you....I think I'd rather > be part of a vibrant community where head and heart are used, where > the weak are assisted, the lame given an arm, the hungry fed...in > the future world I am visioning beyond 2000 that is what will > happen in small communities...without poisonous governmental > enabling...

[RMangus] There will be NOTHING VIBRANT about TY2KSHTF! You will witness humanity at the depths of despair for survival. It will be like nothing YOU have never witnessed in your SHELTERED LIFE! No turf for pansies in the Y2K, dog-eat-dog scenario. Only the strong _will survive pending "indignities."

>Go now and breathe a bit...and listen a lot...and ask how you would >have your loved ones treated in any community.

[RMangus] Breathing's the whole point, Donna! My ears have served and carried me through many a firefight! ( Do YOU even have a clue as to what it is/was _like to have _unscheduled_ bullets, RPG's, satchel-charges, and who knows what other sundry [ crude, field- rigged ] pyrotechnics aimed AND FIRED in YOUR direction? ) I will do everything in my power to teach my wife, son, and whoever is worthy and proven psychologically capable of self- preservation, to be willing to do whatever it takes -- in the face of immeasurable turmoil and tribulation -- to SURVIVE! Communities -- post-Y2K -- must be rebuilt upon ( earned ) trust the common will to exercise self-sufficiency in order to THRIVE and SURVIVE! That will be a healthy community. The constructions of "community" today are diminished for that of sub-human automatons by the overwhelming, ubiquitous intrusions of governments into virtually every aspect of the lives of individuals and so-called "communities." That is not how I will permit my family and loved ones to be treated by any community.

> >Answered by Donna Barthuley

Regards to the Strong, Bob Mangus # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), November 19, 1998.

Robert, sounds like you may have taken Ayn Rand just a LITTLE too seriously. (though we do seem to be living in Atlas Shrugged times...) And this isn't necessarily directed just at you...

I agree that there is nothing without survival. That's a given. Robert Heinlein gave a commencement speech at the naval academy years ago where he said basically that there is no morality without survival. Survival is the ONLY morality. Especially the survival of the community. He then went on to illustrate it using a community of monkeys. The young males would be on the lookout while the females and youngsters were gathering nuts and fruit. If a predator came into the area the monkeys would all yell and scream as a warning. The males (monkey and human) must be willing to die for the sake of the females and youngsters. (women and children first!) He used this to justify his militarism.

In any animal society, if there is not enough for every individual's survival, of course the weaker ones will be killed off. That happens in human society right now, and will probably increase as the division of labor breaks down and the distribution of goods decreases dramatically. (if?) However, there is still the idea of one's own enlightened self-interest. If I'm a member of a community, aren't I safer and better off if everyone in the community is basically safe and well fed? That might be the basis of liberalism, and I would agree that it's gotten way out of hand and coercive. However, those early settlers who built this country did not do it as individuals. That would not have been possible. The idea of rugged individualism and community sharing based on enlightened self-interest are not mutually exclusive. Believe me, I've lived in communes of very rugged individuals who were also willing and able to share everything they had. (though that's an extreme example)

I suppose the point is that none of us (or very few, anyway) will be able to get through the coming storm, if it is indeed as bad as it appears from the distance, without a certain amount of cooperation with others. One might not like the idea of altruism for its own sake, but I believe that a balance of rugged individualism, altruism, cooperation and even force, if needed, will be the best recipe for success...

-- pshannnon (pshannon@inch.com), November 19, 1998.

The fact that you are attacking me, Robert Magnus, when I have not attacked you shows to me that you might need more breathing time, and some focus on your rampant fears of annihilation...

Breathe, Robert, breathe. And stop attacking me...I am not your enemy.

-- Donna Barthuley (moment@pacbell.net), November 19, 1998.

On Thursday, November 19, 1998 20:17, trash wrote: | | Hi Tim, | | Excellent post Tim | | The law-from-a-gun barrel folks of the world are entitled to their | views provided they stay where they are. As I said in an earlier | post, we (in New Zealand) put people away who carry guns. I think | it may have been the ultimate testosterone hero Clint Eastwood who | said something like: | | The measure of a man's self worth is his inclination to use extreme | force.

[RMangus] NZ's will wilt and be carried away by their own _armed forces_, by virtue of their spineless, intellectual bankruptcy and cowardliness character. ( To wit, Mr. Barbour ducking out immediately after his post to this thread. ) The testosterone barb is a red herring. Women are better Marksmen than men!

I would complete/improve the CE phrase ...

''"The measure of a man's self worth is his inclination to use extreme force" in the struggle to SURVIVE!

| | That said, your question gets to what I am seeing as the heart of | the issue. Communities need to act now on the issue of basic needs. | Each community has existing mechanisms for meeting needs. These | may have to be expanded to cover increased numbers of dependent | people.

[RMangus] Acting NOW is beyond the realm of imagination and possibility of socially hollow -- government disgorged -- and thus, bankrupt "community" populations around the globe. These synchophants DGI and WGI until it is EXTREMELY TOO LATE TO BEGIN ANYTHING MEANINGFUL ABOUT NEEDFUL THINGS TO THEIR SURVIVAL!

Regards, Bob Mangus # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), November 19, 1998.

Kiwis have a history of commitment to the world community and have appeared alongside allies in times of need. We are also slow to anger and not moved to shout at others despite being provoked. If I have provoked anyone here, Robert in particular, I am happy to retract whatever caused the provokation. What I will not retract is the assertion that guns will not solve Y2K problems. We also believe in taking all possible measures to resolve problems before the stage of having to resort to violence. My best regards was and is unequivocal.

So my answer to Tim's question is: Use the existing mechanisms..

Best Regards to all.

-- Bob Barbour (r.barbour@waikato.ac.nz), November 19, 1998.

"The measure of a man's self worth is his inclination to use extreme force" in the struggle to SURVIVE!" -Bob M

According to the Bible the measure of a man's worth is that he is willing to lay down his life for his friends. You say you were in Vietnam, was your own survival more important to you than covering your friends?

-- Post Traumatic Stress? (see@doctor.soon), November 19, 1998.

Back to the original question.

Go buy 50lbs. of rice. ($10.80/bag at Costco) Buy one a week. In two months you will have 400lbs. Buy bags of rice for Christmas presents for your friends. It is not too expensive to prepare!

-- Bill (bill@microsoft.com), November 19, 1998.

An open, giving hand receives more than a closed fist.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 19, 1998.

# # # 19981119

Dear Traumatically Stressed ( TS ):

| willing to lay down his life for his friends.

[RMangus] Not at all, TS! Not at all!

| You say you were in | Vietnam, was your own survival more important to you than covering | your friends?

[RMangus] Yes, TS! If I hadn't considered _my survival _more important to me, than I would not have been ABLE TO COVER MY FRIENDS. Am I missing something here? You folks sure seem to express your thoughts in very strange convolutions Regards, Bob Mangus # # #

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@mail.netquest.com), November 19, 1998.

While we would all like to live to a ripe old age in the company of friends and family, our "survival" isn't- and never has been- entirely in our control. And just what are we surviving for? What price are we willing to pay to survive? Our friends? Our family? Our consciences? My father got into concentration camp as a 15-yr.-old in WWII helping someone who couldn't have helped himself, later, after escaping, and fleeing across several borders,he got out of prison (no papers, a refugee) because a family with scarcely enough food to survive themselves to took him in. An aunt was gang-raped several times because she refused to leave patients (she was nurse) when front lines passed the hospital- three times. Hey, just surviving isn't enough for me. There is more to fight for! Like faith and hope and love. Why do we expect them to be cheap?

-- adam (encelia@mailexcite.com), November 20, 1998.

Altruism is merely helping the selfishness of someone else. How many people that expect you to be altruistic towards them would return the favour in kind, eg if the State provides welfare to those who might regard it as a right, would they pay it back (when they're able to).

-- Richard Dale (rdale@figroup.co.uk), November 20, 1998.

To address Tim's original question: "That is most people dont have the spare dollars [even having $5.00 spare after paying bills and buying weekly food]to stock-pile food enough for their families."

I don't know how the system works for you in Australia, but here in the USA, as long as we pay a percentage on our bills, like electric/telephone/water etc., they're not turned off. If I was in the situation you describe, I would pay half the amount on each bills monthly and use the leftover money to prepare. If I had credit, I would run up my credit cards. If it's TEOTWAWKI/worse case scenario, who cares if i'm in debt? If it's a bump in the road, then I could try to either sell my surplus stockpile and gear or worry about paying debts then. Depends on how fearful of worse case scenario your people are. I'm fearful enough that I want to sell my big house but hubby's not sold on this yet.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), November 20, 1998.

E, fantastic approach to Y2K! Wish you the best and hope you can recruit a church or some others to assist in your eforts. I've just read an article describing how more and more pastors across the US are mobilizing their churches to be the center of Y2K assistance for their communities (shelter, soup kitchen, protection, fellowship, etc.). They should be open to the idea. After all, they know about the sheep and the goats "For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink . . ." (Matthew 25:35).

David.

-- David (David@BankPacman.com), November 20, 1998.

David, was the article online? If so, could you post the URL? Thanks.

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), November 20, 1998.

Gayla, sorry, the article was from the Dec '98 issue of Charisma magazine (just got it in the mail last night) and that issue is not yet online. It will probably be available online next month. The website is www.charismamag.com.

One of the features of the article was the Joseph Project 2000. A Christian organization whose purpose is to help churches organize and prepare to help their communities post Y2K. A good article from the organiztion's founder is found at www.josephproject2000.org/preparation.htm. Sorry, I don't know how to post a URL yet, still a net novice.

-- David (David@BankPacman.com), November 20, 1998.

Thanks, David. I will see if I can get a copy of the magazine at the local Christian bookstore.

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), November 20, 1998.

Bob, I just love it when you British commonwealth types turn up your noses and tell us Americans how mean and dangerous our guns are. Just remember pal, you and the Aussies would be a prefecture in the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity sphere had not a bunch of testosterone crazed U.S. marines come out there and beat back the Japanese before they got to you. No doubt you'll call on us again when the Chinese decide to move. Just hope we're still around with plenty of firepower. A firearm is an inanimate object niether good nor bad. It is a tool with many legitimate uses and purposes when in the hands of a FREE people. Just remember feedom is not free.

-- doktorbob (downsouth@dixie.com), November 20, 1998.

Cruising the archives...

-- * (***@__._), November 20, 1999.