I had written to the homestead list a synopsis of earlier extended writings: >> The most important votes are made at the checkout counter. In the case of >> food, not purchasing is the strongest vote of all.
Jeff replied here: >I suspect quite a few economists would argue with that statement. >They often make the case that a strong economy helps everyone and >everyone suffers in a weak economy. It is our purchases that help >drive the economy. My view is that we need to go deeper and look at >the quality of our purchases and economy. I do not recommend a lifestyle that seeks to remove itself from the greater economy, only one that strives for maximal self-reliance, to ensure security, choice and community. As I have written earlier on the homestead list, the checkout counter is where we get to vote for those companies of whose practices we approve and to refrain from buying from those companies--like Monsanto--whose practices we deplore. Those choices are, I believe, stronger than our votes for representatives. As for food, even the most self-sufficient homesteader has to buy a lot of stuff or eat a very limited diet. But when we do not buy any chemically produced food from agrimonsters we are making the strongest possible vote for how we feel about the food system. As for what economists think, they have mindsets that come from present-day colleges, which are highly supportive of business-as-usual, an economy in which the rich get richer and the poor get the leftovers. Trickle-down economics is gush-down spin. In the present recession the poor will suffer disproportionately. Those living a highly self-reliant lifestyle will suffer more only than the rich, whose losses will be largely in investments, not day-to-day needs. Jeff, I don't have the time to write duplicates of my material. If you wish clarification of anything I write on the homestead list, please ask for it there. Thanks, Gene GeRue, author, How To Find Your Ideal Country Home: A Comprehensive Guide http://www.ruralize.com/
