In your article you stated a good amount of junk silver to have would be around $300 to $400 dollars worth. My question is, is that amount in face value of junk silver or would that be the amount you would spend to have some junk silver?

Thanks

Grant Underwood

Grant,

That’s my mistake.  I should have stated it clearly that that’s $300-$400 in face value in junk silver.  Nowadays, you’ll spend a several thousand to get it.

John

Share or Bookmark

We believe in the Constitution and capitalism with freedom. We were every bit as angry about the Wall Street bail out and hostile against the Patriot Act.

Why don’t you do an article on the differences between libertarians and Liberal socialists and see which group sounds better you then.

Stephen from Texas

Share or Bookmark

I was standing in the checkout line at my local health-food store and discovered your magazine.  And there on the cover was listed an article about Ron Paul.  Pretty amazing!

Mr. Duffy has written a clear and concise article recapping why we so desperately need Ron Paul as president, one of the better articles on the subject (and I’ve read most of them …. a huge fan since 2008).

Thank you Dave Duffy.  I am going to forward it to Mike Rivero at whatreallyhappened.com in the hopes that he posts it and gives you and your writing the exposure you both deserve.

Thank you again.

T Quigly

RON PAUL 2012 !!!!!

(Now that I’ve discovered you, will be checking out your website as I am interested in ideas about living on the land)

Thanks very much. I’m a solid Ron Paul supporter, but the article you refer to was actually written by the magazine’s long-time senior editor, John Silveira. — Dave

Share or Bookmark

Thank you for this. If I ever think about cancelling (not likely) I’ll remember that this one gem of information is worth more than I would pay in my lifetime. You’ve just given me, if you’ll pardon the reference, all the ammo I will ever need to go against the tide of gun control idiots!!

Thank you,

Dixie Dever

Share or Bookmark

I do have one request. How about an article on Pikeminnow fishing. I have heard some stories about some of those fisherman making a lot of money. If I could just pay off my mortgage it would really help. I almost went to try it myself this year but my wife is blind and would not go. Maybe if I could convince her it’s a real opportunity we might go in 2012. Or maybe it’s not?

Thanks anyway,

Keep up the good fight.

Dan Day in Tennessee (retired trucker)
Dolly says Hi

Share or Bookmark

Thank you for writing this article. Words cannot describe the frustration I feel at the lack of attention this EMP doomsday scenario is receiving. (This lack of attention is tantamount to negligent homicide by our political leaders if we are subject to an EMP attack. They have commissioned studies and conferences on this scenario and are well aware of the consequences and yet do nothing.)

To my reason for writing: I have been studying this country’s preparation for many doomsday scenarios in an effort to better prepare myself and my family. The EMP attack scenario is by far the most scary for prepared survivors, even when compared to an all-out nuclear war. (With the nuclear war scenario, we will at least have a chance at maintaining a manufacturing base, with EMP we’d better learn how to make everything by hand first in order to rebuild a modicum of manufacturing infrastructure! Imagine making everything thing by hand to get ONE manufacturing plant back on-line, much less what it would take to get the power generating facilities and conveyance on-line to get power back to the manufacturing plant! By hand! without aid of anything electrical or electronic! And how would we get the fuel to the power generating plant? It’s a nightmare scenario!)

But there is one aspect to EMP attack that a nuclear war will not have that I cannot seem to get my head around. In my thinking the two scenarios that will cause people to become unrestrained looters without regard for common decency for a sustained period of time will be nuclear war and an EMP attack. In other scenarios we should be able to present to these roving hoards at least a road to a relatively quick recovery. With nuclear and EMP, it will be so devastating that “quick recovery” won’t even be in the vocabulary. But the “downside” (in regard to my family’s safety and well being) to EMP, is that it will leave a HUGE number of people alive to roam the countryside looking for food.

And there-in lies the rub: how can I keep these huge numbers of people away from my supply without resorting to massive violence? Any attempt at deception will eventually be found out when I appear well nourished. I cannot by any means store enough for everyone. And imagine the stampede when it is “rumored” that so-and-so at such and such place has a lot of food…I couldn’t live far enough away to prevent a migration to my front door. (And that is not to mention if an EMP attack is followed up by a conventional attack by a hostile country or countries…how could I feed and defend myself against an army or militia?)

I know that it is a bit more complicated than a simple email exchange can allow, but I’m at a loss here, so any direction/suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you! And I love your magazine (I just cannot afford a subscription YET!)

John M.

Share or Bookmark

I just read the article written by John Silveira called Why I’m nice to telemarketers and I had to write you a quick message to thank you. I work as a outbound call centre agent (which is what we telemarketers like to call ourselves haha) almost a year ago, and unless you’ve worked as one yourself I’m not sure you understand how much we appreciate people like you. We talk to a lot of unhappy people every day, and we truly do appreciate those who let us finish our little speech and politely decline. My coworkers and I actually brag to each other about the nice people we talk to.

So thank you for being nice to telemarketers and for writing an article about it.

Sincerely,

Rebecca

Share or Bookmark

Regards,

Jeff Yamada

Share or Bookmark

I am another long time believer in removing marriage licenses. However, I see the compromise, as the states are highly unlikely to change tax code, would be to offer a state “civil union” status that would accept any interested adults who meet criteria (same address, shared expenses, etc) and offer the same tax breaks and status as married couples have currently. I am married, but I feel that the union is a matter of religion, as marriage has always been a religious custom around the world that has stepped into popular use in secular custom. As we see a move in our culture away from traditional marriage, separating the state from that union is increasingly important. My Christian brethren will probably accuse me of wanting a world where marriage has been defiled, but if we let our governments define a God-defined entity, then we already have done so. I’m not sure if there are a lot of others who believe in removing marriage licensing (I know most state comptrollers would argue against losing the revenue stream) and most of my friendly debates on the issue result in the similar “But we need the government to control marriage for no explainable reason” rebuttal.

It’s gladdening to know that there are at least a few others out there that agree with this viewpoint, hopefully with both conversation and articles like yours, we’ll see a few more join the ranks.

Sincerely,

Justin LaFee

Share or Bookmark

Just read your editorial Getting the state out of marriage and you are dead on.  In fact this is something I have been known to pontificate myself.  So there are at least two smart guys left in this country.

I think marriage actually started as a legal thing, not religious.  It was more about keeping track of who owned  what land and such.  I believe it became associated with the church because those were the guys who could read and keep records.  But then, as things go now, something that gets started as a practical matter gets blown out of proportion and taken over.  So, yes, for a long time it has been in the realm of religion.

Thanks,

Howard Peer

Share or Bookmark