Getting prepared for the chaos that is coming to America in the years ahead is not that complicated. Help is out there – if you know where to look. And it doesn’t have to be expensive either. In this article, I have put together a list of 122 of the best prepper websites on the Internet that will teach you how to prep for free. The great thing about the prepper community is that there are always highly skilled people that are willing to freely share their knowledge and experience with the general public. As the publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog, I am constantly being asked about what people need to do in order to get prepared for the hard times that are coming to this country. And when I am asked, I do my best to encourage people to build up their emergency funds, to store food and supplies, to put together bug out bags and to do everything that they can to become more independent of the system. But sometimes people need a lot more than that. Sometimes people need to have someone give them some real hands on practical advice about things like canning food or setting up home defense systems. So in this article my goal is to connect you with some of the top experts from all over the nation for free. I think that this list is going to be a great resource for people that they can reference again and again, so don’t forget to bookmark it.
Do you want to know if the stock market is going to crash next year? Just keep an eye on junk bonds. Prior to the horrific collapse of stocks in 2008, high yield debt collapsed first. And as you will see below, high yield debt is starting to crash again. The primary reason for this is the price of oil. The energy sector accounts for approximately 15 to 20 percent of the entire junk bond market, and those energy bonds are taking a tremendous beating right now. This panic in energy bonds is infecting the broader high yield debt market, and investors have been pulling money out at a frightening pace. And as I have written about previously, almost every single time junk bonds decline substantially, stocks end up following suit. So don’t be fooled by the fact that some comforting words from Janet Yellen caused stock prices to jump over the past couple of days. If you really want to know where the stock market is heading in 2015, keep a close eye on the market for high yield debt.
Secretary of State John Kerry did his part to help explain the Obama Administration’s pivot toward “normalized” U.S.-Cuba relations Wednesday by saying the only party the U.S. was hurting, as it turns out, was itself.
In a statement Wednesday, Kerry offered this:
I was a seventeen year old kid watching on a black and white television set when I first heard an American President talk of Cuba as an “imprisoned island.”
For five and a half decades since, our policy toward Cuba has remained virtually frozen, and done little to promote a prosperous, democratic and stable Cuba. Not only has this policy failed to advance America’s goals, it has actually isolated the United States instead of isolating Cuba.
Since 2009, President Obama has taken steps forward to change our relationship and improve the lives of the Cuban people by easing restrictions on remittances and family travel. With this new opening, the President has committed the United States to begin to chart an even more ambitious course forward.
Aside from repudiating more than 50 years of U.S. policy, Kerry also may have forgotten his own past, as The Weekly Standard’s Jeryl Bier observed Thursday.
Saying the plan would simply be too expensive to implement and operate, Vermont Gov. Pete Shumlin, a Democrat who very much wanted to see it succeed, has announced the state will not attempt to implement a hybrid form of state-controlled, single-payer health insurance.
Shumlin, who had promoted a single-payer system in principle, never could reconcile his ideal with his reality. He had planned to steer his proposal to a 2017 start date, but was continually cowed by financial exigencies. He even called his own plan, once the numbers had been crunched, “detrimental to Vermonters” and said it would have imposed unacceptable tax increases on small business and individuals.
“The model called for businesses to take on a double-digit payroll tax, while individuals would face up to a 9.5 percent premium assessment,” POLITICO reported Wednesday. “Big businesses, in particular, didn’t want to pay for Shumlin’s plan while maintaining their own employee health plans.”
Abandoning the single-payer plan was a rueful but realistic decision for Shumlin. Single-payer had been “the centerpiece of the Democratic governor’s agenda,” according to the Burlington Free Press, “and was watched and rooted for by single-payer health care supporters around the country.”
Plumber Mark Oberholtzer of Texas City, Texas was surprised to learn that a work truck he sold three years ago had become the center of attention on the viral Internet. Yet Oberholtz himself confirms that the truck in the photo that’s been making the rounds on Twitter is, somehow, the one he used to own. Its new owners are Islamist militants, and they’re using the truck as a mobile gun mount in Syria.
— جبهة أنصار الدين (@ansardeenfront) December 15, 2014
Oberholtzer, who owns Mark-1 Plumbing, told local news outlets in the Galveston area that the truck was his at one time, but that he had traded it at the AutoNation Ford dealership in Houston three years ago. No one at his business has any idea how it ended up being used as a war machine.
“We had no intentions or no idea that this would even happen,” his son, Jeff, told KHOU News. “To think something we would use to pull trailers, now is being used for terror, it’s crazy. Never in my lifetime would [I] think something like that.”
American academia has provided an especially safe harbor for progressive intolerance of late, what with the proliferation of campus rape tribunals, gun-free zones and social injustice-fueled pleas to overlook subpar student performance. So it’s natural that one University of Michigan professor should feel emboldened to invite others to literally “hate” Republicans in a recent opinion piece.
“I can’t stand the thought of having to spend the next two years watching Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Ted Cruz, Darrell Issa or any of the legions of other blowhards denying climate change, thwarting immigration reform or championing fetal ‘personhood,’” communications professor Susan Douglas wrote for These Times magazine, in a column originally headlined “It’s Okay To Hate Republicans” (it’s since been changed to the less-inflammatory “We Can’t All Just Get Along.”)
The article has been updated online with and editor’s note distancing the “hate” version of that headline from Douglas. Yet the very first line of the piece Douglas herself penned begins with this flat declaration: “I hate Republicans.”
Free speech is free speech; it’s fine that Douglas hates Republicans and wants you to hate them, too.
Yet contrast the free-speech liberties she’s able to enjoy with those of another, presumably conservative, professor: now-suspended Marquette University professor John McAdams.
Hello. I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. And I’ve got good news! A federal judge has just ruled that Barack Obama’s executive action on amnesty for illegal immigrants violates the separation of powers and is, therefore, unconstitutional. Glory hallelujah! We’ve finally found one judge in all of America who actually recognizes the law and is brave enough to enforce it.
But in our country and our republic it’s not just the legal court that matters; it’s the court of public opinion that finally determines winners and losers. Unfortunately, the court of public opinion is Obama’s “home court” because he is a master salesman who understands that “facts tell, but stories sell.” Emotional personal stories are always necessary to close the sale. If you want to sell anything from a used car to stocks to a dishwasher to public policy, there is no better way than telling a great, emotional and compelling personal story, preferably a tear-jerker.
Is waterboarding torture? The truth is most Americans don’t care how you define the word. What they care about are the results from it.
When the Pew Research Center took a poll of Americans asking whether CIA interrogation methods following 9/11 were justified, only 29 percent said they were not. More than half, 51 percent, said they were. The other 20 percent, or 1 in 5, said they didn’t know.
The Pew survey was taken just days before we learned about the Taliban’s slaughter of more than 130 schoolchildren in Pakistan. I bet if that same survey were taken today, the number approving those “enhanced interrogation techniques” would be substantially higher. It’s hard to argue that we can’t support aggressive interrogation when jihadist crazies will gloat about shooting children in the head at point-blank range and burning teachers to death in front of them.
The news out of Peshawar, Pakistan, is indeed disgusting. One of the more incredible headlines I read was this one on CNN’s website: “Taliban try to justify slaughter of children.” The Taliban said the children were fair game because most of them were the sons and daughters of military personnel. There’s no way to reason with fanatics like this; the only way to be safe from them is to kill them or imprison them.
In December 1777, Gen. George Washington and his Patriot forces were smarting from recent defeats at Germantown and Brandywine, and lamenting the fact that Philadelphia — the new nation’s capital — had subsequently fallen into British hands. While British Gen. William Howe and his troops were preparing for the winter in relative comfort in and around Philadelphia, 20 to 30 miles away the Patriot forces were stamping about in the wilderness, shifting positions in the area around the city.
The week before Christmas, Washington informed his troops that they would be building their camp in the wilderness and would not be going home for the winter. The commander of the Pennsylvania militia, John Cadwalader, had recommended the troops not be allowed furlough because they — and the people of Pennsylvania — “were disappointed” that Washington had not been able to keep Howe out of Philadelphia. Removing the American army from Pennsylvania would be seen as a sign of fatal weakness, Cadwalader told Washington. Plus there was a danger that if the troops left they would not return in the spring.
If you were about to take a final exam, would you have more hope or more fear if you didn’t understand any of the questions and you had not prepared for the test at all? I think that virtually all of us have had dreams where we show up for an exam that we have not studied for. Those dreams can be pretty terrifying. And of course if you were ever in such a situation in real life, you probably did very, very poorly on that test. The reason I have brought up this hypothetical is to make a point. My point is that there is hope in understanding what is ahead of us, and there is hope in getting prepared. Since I started The Economic Collapse Blog back in 2009, there have always been a few people that have accused me of spreading fear. That frustrates me, because what I am actually doing is the exact opposite of that. When a hurricane is approaching, is it “spreading fear” to tell people to board up their windows? Of course not. In fact, you just might save someone’s life. Or if you were walking down the street one day and you saw someone that wasn’t looking and was about to step out into the road in front of a bus, what would the rational thing to do be? Anyone that has any sense of compassion would yell out and warn that other person to stay back. Yes, that other individual may be startled for a moment, but in the end you will be thanked warmly for saving that person from major injury or worse. Well, as a nation we are about to be slammed by the hardest times that any of us have ever experienced. If we care about those around us, we should be sounding the alarm.
““Praise be to the Lord, the God of Israel, because he has come to his people and redeemed them. He has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David (as he said through his holy prophets of long ago),”
Baby steps: that’s all we’re talking about here. More helpful solutions to the abusive government practice of civil forfeiture would involve abolishing it outright across all “enforcement” agencies, regardless of their scope and, in a perfect world, the IRS itself.
But a bipartisan bill introduced by two House members this month is a step in the right direction: It takes aim at the IRS by imposing a two-week probable cause discovery period on the agency anytime it seizes a person’s financial assets as part of a collection attempt. That’s a lot better than the open-ended liberty the agency currently enjoys, a liberty that has ruined small businesses and the lives (and livelihoods) of those caught up in the practice.
One of the most notable examples of how the current law aggrandizes the government while trampling on the rights of individuals comes from Iowa, where the owner of a small restaurant had her assets seized as part of an IRS investigation into why the proprietor was making large numbers of small cash deposits without notifying the government.
‘Tis the season for people with nothing better to do to argue over whether religious holiday displays like as Nativity scenes have a place on public property. But according to the results of a recent poll, a majority of Americans have no problem with the displays.
Polling data out from Pew shows 44 percent of Americans feel that Christian holiday symbols should be allowed on government property, even in instances where they are not accompanied by other religious holiday fixtures. Twenty-eight percent report that they are fine with Christian holiday displays as long as other religious traditions are celebrated on the public grounds as well.
Just 20 percent said all religious displays should be banned from government property.
The high level of support for Christian religious displays in America can be explained by another statistic Pew observed:
[M]ost Americans believe that the biblical Christmas story reflects historical events that actually occurred. About three-quarters of Americans believe that Jesus Christ was born to a virgin, that an angel of the Lord appeared to shepherds to announce the birth of Jesus, and that wise men, guided by a star, brought Jesus gold, frankincense and myrrh. And eight-in-ten U.S. adults believe the newborn baby Jesus was laid in a manger.
The president and first lady recently told People magazine stories of what they feel were “racist experiences” they have endured being black in America. But while it’s undeniable that there are all manner of examples of a lingering equality deficit when it comes to certain race-related issues in the United States, some Americans might have a tough time taking the Obamas seriously.
Michelle Obama told the magazine how she became offended when no one recognized her as the first lady while on a shopping trip at a Target store.
“The only person who came up to me in the [Target] store was a woman who asked me to help her take something off a shelf. Because she didn’t see me as the first lady, she saw me as someone who could help her,” she told the magazine.
Obama added, “Those kinds of things happen in life. So it isn’t anything new.”
So, the first lady went on a shopping trip to Target and was forced to endure an interaction with another human being who needed help getting something off a shelf.
A small Tennessee town has deployed a new tactic in the ongoing effort to shield elected officials from scrutiny and criticism: force anyone who works for the city to promise not to say anything bad about its leaders on Facebook and other social platforms.
The five-member city commission of South Pittsburg, Tennessee, voted earlier this month to adopt a social media policy that, according to the Chattanooga Times Free Press, forbids city workers, elected officials and contractors from saying “anything negative about the city, its employees or other associates… Examples include posted videos, blogs, online forum discussions, Facebook and Twitter, Commissioner Jeff Powers said.”
The commission approved the policy on a 4-1 vote. Commissioner Paul Don King cast the single opposing vote, saying the city can’t tell people what to say on their own time.”[W]hat we [the board] are trying to say is that if I’m a city employee, you’re trying to tell me what I can say at night,” he told the paper. “I call that freedom of speech. I can’t understand that.”
“I hope I’m wrong, but I am afraid that Iraq is going to turn out to be the greatest disaster in American foreign policy — worse than Vietnam, not in the number who died, but in terms of its unintended consequences and its reverberation throughout the region.” — Madeleine Albright
Quoting Madeleine Albright makes me queasy, but it shows even the progressives sometimes get it right. And as we look back upon Iraq, it can only be seen as an unmitigated disaster that has built up for a dozen years.
Following 9/11, President George W. Bush wanted Baghdad to be another Venice with the Tigress River as its picturesque canal. A dozen years later, American intervention has led to ethnic cleansing and the rise of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Sunni leader of the Islamic State (ISIS), whose terrorist army has murdered tens of thousands of people in Iraq and Syria and who may yet set the Middle East ablaze.
“But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.””
The next presidential election is still nearly two years away, and yet the mainstream media is already telling Americans who they are supposed to vote for. Now that Jeb Bush has all but officially declared that he is running for president, a “dream matchup” between Bush and Hillary Clinton is being touted as “inevitable”. But is this what the American people actually want? Most liberals seem to truly dislike Clinton, and most conservatives can’t stand Bush at this point. And yet when the time comes, the big money donors will line up behind them and they will get far more media coverage than the other candidates. Yes, there is still a chance that another establishment candidate such as Mitt Romney could jump ahead of Bush on the Republican side, and there is also a chance that Hillary Clinton may decide not to run at all (more on that below). But when it is all said and done, it is virtually certain that Americans will have a choice between establishment candidate #1 and establishment candidate #2 on election day 2016, and that is absolutely sickening.
We have already had 20 years of Bush/Clinton, and if it is Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton in 2016 we will be guaranteed another four years.
A federal judge in western Pennsylvania declared portions of President Barack Obama’s immigration executive actions unconstitutional in an opinion handed down Tuesday.
“The Court holds that the Executive Action is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution,” wrote Judge Arthur Schwab.
Schwab’s opinion, the first addressing Obama’s immigration expansion, says that the president went “beyond prosecutorial discretion,” which the White House had previously said gives the president to act on immigration laws.
The Obama administration’s application of prosecutorial discretion in differing immigrant deportations, the judge argued, could allow future presidents to differ prosecutions in other matters.
“President Obama has stated,” Schwab wrote, “that he is constrained from issuing an Executive Action/Order on immigration because such action would exceed his executive powers… While President Obama’s historic statements are not dispositive of the constitutionality of his Executive Action on immigration, they cause this Court pause.”
The judge also noted that Congress’s inaction on immigration didn’t alter Obama’s constitutional authority.
“Congress’s lawmaking power is not subject to Presidential supervision or control. … Perceived or actual Congressional inaction does not endow legislative power with the Executive.”
New projections out from the Census Bureau show that the U.S. is on track to be a “majority minority” nation by 2044, with white Americans making up just under half of the population.
According to Census, the number of whites in the U.S. will increase modestly through 2025 before experiencing a gradual decline into 2060 due to an increasingly aging population and fewer births.
The year 2044 will mark a tipping point where whites make up 49.7 percent of the U.S. population with the nation’s remaining population being 25 percent Hispanic, 12.7 percent black, 7.9 percent Asian and 3.7 percent biracial.
Over the next 46 years, Census expects the rate of growth for the nation’s Asian and Hispanic populations to double, 129 percent and 115 percent respectively.
A Brookings Institution analysis of the Census numbers contends that the shifting racial numbers likely won’t have a big impact on perceptions of racial disparity:
[C]ontinued racial disparity across generations will occur because of the exit of whites from the younger ages as both old and new minorities take up the slack. Between 2014 and 2060 the minority share of the youth population will rise from 48 percent to 64 percent. While the senior population will also become more diverse, in 2060 whites will still comprise a majority of the age 65 and older population at 55 percent.