• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

This assessment, (cost-benefit) analysis, deliberation and decision process (AADD) is similar to the OODA loop mentioned earlier: Observe, Orient, Decide and Act. The principle is to anticipate risks before they unfold and plan contingencies to counteract the risks--in other words, to establish negative feedback loops which can counter possible runaway positive feedbacks (fall ill, lose your job, become more ill, etc.) and create a bulwark against the most likely, and most threatening, possibilities.

The process of making trade-offs is implicitly one of setting priorities and goals--what some commentators have described as a purpose-driven life or a goal-oriented life. A life without goals or priorities is an aimless, unhappy one; without purpose, humans fall into depression and self-destruction.

The permanent adolescent (the state of mind encouraged by the marketing/mass media complex) seeks distraction and "entertainment;" he or she has no priorities or goals and thus no purpose other than the next "fun" distraction. This is highly profitable for those selling distractions but destructive for the individual and household.

Trusting the Savior State, or indeed, any institution, to provide for oneself heightens one's vulnerability; ultimately, the only elements we "own" that are within our control are our integrity, skills, networks and capital.

5. Redundancy/Distributed Risk/Hedging

I have grouped these three strategies together as the purpose of each is to mitigate or lessen risk. Lessening risk increases security.

I have described in previous chapters the inherent vulnerability of long global supply chains which are dependent on a limited number of nodes, transfer points and sources. On a household level, we can look for the same kinds of vulnerabilities, both within the household and within regional networks we depend on (grocery stores, etc.)

In one sense, a household depending on one job and one skillset is like a supply chain which depends on one source; if anything disrupts that source then the entire supply chain breaks down.

Some years ago a single fire in a Japanese plant which produced a product essential to the fabrication of semiconductors instantly drove up global prices for semiconductors, as only two or three plants made this product worldwide. There were no substitutes or redundant facilities that could be activated.

This is an example of systems in which the apparent stability is illusory; the dependency on a small number of sources and transport networks renders them inherently unstable.

A battery and a solar-powered battery recharger are very small but nonetheless useful redundant systems to the electrical grid. If an earthquake disrupts the grid for days or weeks, I would be very happy to have these modest redundancies. If the supermarkets close for lack of goods (perhaps due to some transport disruption) then the bag of rice in my cupboard is a redundant source of sustenance.

If you have ever observed squirrels, you know that they are genetically programmed to distribute their risks by burying nuts in a scattered pattern. Stashing the entire hoard of nuts in one place heightens the risk of other rodents discovering and plundering the stored food. Thus distributing the food lessens risk and increases security.

Having some food stored at another family member's home as well as one's own is a form of distributing risk. Developing more than one source of income is also distributing risk. As with redundancy, this principle has widespread applications in the real world.

Knowing how to bake and having flour on hand lessens dependency on the supermarket bakery. Creating surplus value and sharing it with your network lessens dependency on the devolving Savior State.

Productive assets, gold and silver are redundant stores of value; owning them lessens dependency on the State's fiat currency, which could eventually be devalued to near-zero. Owning dollars is perfectly fine, but distributing one's assets amongst several asset classes lessens the