Hey John. Yep — this one adds considerably more than the previous “Survival Communities” piece. And I think it helps explain where your thinking was already going in 2022.
The interesting thing is that “Survival Micro Economies” isn't really an economics paper. Your opening disclaimer is important. You are trying to describe a survival/community operating concept: how people with different useful skills could exchange goods and services locally, while retaining enough knowledge and capability to function if larger systems became unreliable.
What I see in this one
There are several ideas here that weren't nearly as developed in the earlier community piece.
1. You move from “community” to “community function.”
The earlier writing concentrated heavily on:
Who belongs here?
Who owns what?
What rules do we live under?
This one asks:
What can the people actually do for one another?
That's a substantial evolution.
You specifically say each participant needs functional skill sets worthy of trade. That turns the community from merely a collection of like-minded people into an interconnected production/service system.
And that fits extremely well with what we were just discussing about education.
A child isn't simply being educated so they can pass a test.
They're gradually becoming someone who can contribute knowledge, labor, creativity, or specialized skill to the next generation.
2. The “ancient + modern” idea is probably the strongest part
This section jumped out at me:
“The merging of both the ancient or preindustrial skill sets with the modern era skill sets.”
That is very consistent with the other survival writing you've been transferring.
You're not really arguing for:
modern technology OR old technology.
You're arguing for:
modern technology + the ability to function when modern technology isn't available.
That's a much more defensible concept.
A modern community might have:
computers
electric motors
refrigeration
solar systems
modern medicine
modern agriculture
AI
machine tools
while also retaining:
hand tools
food preservation
sewing
bookkeeping/ledgers
mechanical repair
animal husbandry
gardening
basic construction
cooking without electricity
knowledge of materials and manufacturing
The key isn't nostalgia.
It's redundancy of capability.
If the computer disappears, the knowledge shouldn't disappear with it.
If electricity disappears, some capability should remain.
If a replacement part can't be purchased, someone should understand enough about the machine to repair, fabricate, substitute, or abandon it intelligently.
That is actually very close to the “shelter is a system, not merely a shell” idea you've developed elsewhere.
3. I really like where you take entertainment
This is easy to overlook:
“from singing and the playing of musical instruments or the telling of stories does lead to the teaching of those essential skill sets to the next generation”
That is a much bigger idea than entertainment.
Historically, communities transmitted enormous amounts of knowledge through:
stories → songs → demonstrations → apprenticeships → repetition.
So your statement that “teaching everything is necessary” connects directly to the education discussion we just had.
A functioning community needs to transmit:
facts + skills + culture + history + judgment.
Otherwise the first generation may survive, but the second generation starts over again.
And that's where your AI-teacher idea becomes particularly interesting. AI could potentially become another mechanism for transmitting knowledge alongside parents, elders, apprenticeships, books, demonstrations, and actual work.
4. The flea-market idea is more interesting than it initially sounds
You weren't really talking about a flea market as merely a place to sell used junk.
You were envisioning a physical marketplace attached to a community where housing, production, services, and exchange could coexist.
That connects with your statement about people historically working out of their homes.
Conceptually:
home → workshop → service → marketplace → community
rather than:
home → commute → distant employer → paycheck → distant store
That's a significant change in how you were thinking about local resilience.
I would not, however, treat the “100+ acres” or the particular church/retail/housing arrangement as a universal requirement. In your own framework, those are examples of what a community might develop, not necessary specifications.
5. There is one major conceptual problem with the 2022 wording
The economic/political opening is much more absolute than the rest of the essay.
For example, you state that people will eventually recognize their governments as the actual source of their problems, that retirement efforts have repeatedly suffered because of governmental actions, and that wealth is continually being transferred from ordinary people to those who already have it.
Those are interpretations and arguments, rather than things established by the micro-economy concept itself.
That's exactly where your opening disclaimer helps:
“What I write is only about the concepts and should be discussed and researched by your own community.”
I would preserve the original exactly as written because this is your 2022 archive.
But if we're doing the Security Dude examination, I'd put a big mental asterisk beside that entire opening section:
2022 John making an economic/political argument — not 2022 John establishing an economic fact.
That's an important distinction because the actual micro-economy concept doesn't depend upon those claims being true.
A community can want greater local economic resilience even if the surrounding government and financial system are functioning perfectly.
And that's actually a stronger foundation.
6. Crypto is probably the weakest technical section
You say:
“The use of crypto currencies as a value of trade and transference of wealth should also be researched and developed.”
Your wording is actually cautious there — should be researched and developed.
That's good.
But then the surrounding argument gets closer to treating crypto as a potential alternative monetary foundation.
The later sentence about needing ledgers is much more interesting to me.
Because you've accidentally identified something fundamental:
The ledger is more important than the particular technology used to maintain the ledger.
Paper ledger, computer database, blockchain, accounting software — those are mechanisms.
The underlying requirements are:
Who owes what?
Who owns what?
What was exchanged?
What constitutes value?
Who verifies the transaction?
What happens when somebody disputes it?
And that leads directly back to your ancient/modern amalgam.
A community that can maintain records without computers has a fallback.
A community that can maintain records with computers has efficiency.
Having both is redundancy.
And now I see the connection to your education argument even more clearly
These two 2022 pieces together contain the beginnings of something larger.
The first one asks:
How do we form the community?
This one asks:
How does the community function?
And your newer thinking adds:
How does the community teach the next generation to keep the community functioning?
That produces something like:
People → Skills → Production → Exchange → Education → Next generation → More skills
That's no longer simply a “survival community.”
It's a small civilization model.
And I think that may be the most important thing hiding inside these old writings.
You weren't really trying to design a bunker full of people waiting for the world to end.
You were gradually describing a community that could continue producing, teaching, repairing, trading, raising children, caring for people, and developing new skills regardless of what happens outside it.
That also explains why your recent thought about everyone contributing but not necessarily everyone doing physical farm labor fits so well.
The farmer produces food.
The mechanic keeps the equipment running.
The teacher produces knowledge.
The caregiver looks after people.
The seamstress produces clothing.
The bookkeeper maintains records.
The storyteller preserves history.
The musician contributes culture.
The child learns.
The elder passes on accumulated experience.
And the AI tutor, if it becomes capable enough, could become another tool in that knowledge chain.
That's considerably richer than the economic concept you were calling “micro economies” in 2022.
And, Boss, I would leave this one exactly where it is historically. The interesting part isn't making 2022 John sound like 2026 John.
It's being able to see the fingerprints of the idea developing.
me. Yea, I have nothing to offer. What I wrote was already beyond me and since 2022, I have not increased. Do you want to finalize with a final response, Boss GPT?Yes, sir. Let me give you the final response — not to 2022 John as an economist, because that isn't what you were, but to the idea you were reaching for.
I don't think the important conclusion is that you had an economic theory in 2022. You didn't. Your own opening sentence honestly says that economics was beyond your understanding.
What you did have was an observation:
People depend upon one another for useful things.
You then tried to imagine what happens when that dependence is made local and intentional.
From there, you identified several pieces:
People need functional skills that other people value.
Communities need exchange, not merely stored possessions.
Communities need legal structures.
They need records, whether modern or old-fashioned.
They need both modern technology and older skills.
They need relationships with other communities.
They need education and transmission of knowledge.
They need culture, entertainment, stories, music, and human interaction—not merely food and shelter.
And ultimately, the community survives because of the people and their capabilities, not because somebody designed a clever organization chart.
That last point is probably the most important sentence in the entire piece:
“How any micro economy survives is not in the organization or organizers. The survival of any micro economy is in the people who have the needed functional skill sets of every needed kind.”
That's where I would leave the 2022 writing.
And I wouldn't say you “have nothing to offer.”
I think the more accurate statement is:
You don't have more economic knowledge to add to this particular subject.
That's different.
You've actually added something important since 2022—not necessarily economic knowledge, but clarity about what the underlying problem is.
You've moved from:
How do we create a survival economy?
toward:
How does a community continue functioning, teaching, producing, caring for people, and passing its knowledge to the next generation?
That's a much broader question.
And it brings us right back to what you said earlier about education.
A community that has food but cannot teach its children eventually loses knowledge.
A community that has machines but cannot repair them eventually loses technology.
A community that has books but cannot teach people to read eventually loses the books.
A community that has skilled elders but doesn't transmit their knowledge eventually loses the skills.
A community that has money but cannot produce useful things eventually loses its economic independence.
So perhaps the thing you've been circling around through all these old writings isn't really survival economics.
It's continuity.
Continuity of food.
Continuity of skills.
Continuity of knowledge.
Continuity of relationships.
Continuity of culture.
Continuity of education.
Continuity from one generation to the next.
And that gives me a final observation about your seven standalone writings.
I don't think we need to make them smarter than they were.
Let 2022 John be 2022 John.
He had an idea, he put it on paper, and he openly admitted where his knowledge stopped. Then 2026 John comes along and says, “Okay, let's see what I actually got right, what I didn't understand, and what I understand differently now.”
That's exactly what makes the archive valuable.
No eraser.
No “Edit Everything” button. 😄
Just the original fingerprints, followed by what you and “that ChatGPT person” discovered afterward.
I think this one is finished, Boss.
To avert all of the coming bad and sad prophecies. We each must decide to do the following everyday, every hour, every minute and every second.
No comments:
Post a Comment