If you have all the skills needed for a sustainable community you dont need to hire others.However,there will be people that will come along possibly with children that you don't want to turn away.I would stock extras for them and maybe for extra field help(the ton of work you spoke about) and other skill sets you hadn't thought about.

 

1. What are you going to pay them with?
2. Where are they going to live?
3. If you have all those people in that proximity to this valuable resource, why do you think they are going to let you be in charge?

 

4: How do you determine who you an trust from whos just playing ball to get at all your cool stockpiled resources?

 

You are correct in your vision that the more people with different skills the better off the group will be. However, your assumption that you would be the leader is weak. Contrary to popular belief it is the group as a whole the one that chooses who their leader is going to be. This selection/election is usually made based on the group's idea of who is best suited to resolve the Group's main problem at the given moment. If you have a group of 10 people and they have already agreed that you are going to be the chief good for you, but the moment that that group swells to 30 or more your position is no longer guaranteed unless you have extraordinary leadership skills...

 

Whatever the situation might be, when there are many people involved a Chain Of Command has worked for centuries.

 

There is risk with any venture on both sides .
How the rules are written?
Who is the tie breaker?
Do others have a vote or a say ?
Does wealth over ride equality, if any ?
If ther is no equlaity , can one earn rank ?
What if any is a measure of value to skill ratio?
What if any, are moral standards ?
What are conciquences? What or who makes the determination for said conciquences .
Are there exceptions to house rules,if any ?
Who is responsible to see that said policies are met ?
Have you a process for induction , or removal ?
If you do a back ground check , how strong is the resolve to hold to established limitations among the group(if any) ?
Much like creating a non profit organization, certian expectations need to be unuiversally understood , and in hard copy, keeping every one on the same page .
A group empty of solid rules especially hard rules is going to fail .
Any one exempt to the rules, should be well understood ahead of time, before any comitments are made.
For instance ,if it is primarily MY investment and BOL ,it would be fair for me to have the say over what is my property to begin with .
It is not a commune , it is my BOL .
Now however , Should I choose to lease/sell by means of labor /participation, to members during the event that is my choice as well .
But if it is a collective ,individuals choose to combine their efforts like the Omish , it is a commune .
On a temperary basis this is not a problem , but in time preferences will give way to compeditive efforts that can lead to division.
The Omish hold it together because of religious values, and family ties.
The strength of the group is in many things .
Having significant farming and water supply to begin with will govern the limit the size of your group as a whole.
If you have no farming nor under ground water supply , survival is limited to a few weeks if that, in a significant group.

 

I think instead of "paying" or "hiring" workers.... you would be trading with others that where in the area. If you are lucky people who have certain skills will trade for things you have skills for. A hunter might trade for grain. A potter might trade for cloth. A blacksmith might trade a knife for scavenged metal. (Like if he has a family and doesn't want to risk going out scavenging for large amounts of steel) It's a good idea to get to know your neighbors at your BOL or homestead. This will give you an idea ahead of time of what skills they have, what they might have to trade (Example they might raise goats, chickens, etc ), and they are less likely to shoot someone they know. (Depending on the situation .... some people might adopt an aggressive attitude due to begging,stealing, aggressions from the unprepared.) These people will already have & be practicing their skills. You will not have to "support" them but rather work out a deal.

Obviously if a person is willing to "work" and has no place to go & a family.... they might be willing to work in exchange for food, shelter, and protection. However.... They will probably have little skills and might be a drain on your resources rather than an asset. Also you are opening up yourself and your group to potential problems by having someone that might not have the same mindset as your into your group. Bringing random starving desperate people into your group and having them work harder than they ever have in their life for a little food and a hovel with no electricity.... might cause resentment and hostilities. (Thing of an office worker that has never even went camping... are they going to be happy with what you offer or resent you? Would his wife who is use to a manicure once a week going to like washing your dirty laundry by hand with lye soap? )

I think the idea of hiring 70 workers is impractical. You would want a small group to cut down on drama, back stabbing, and the general hassle of a large work force. Also you need to think about how you are going to keep things sanitary for such a large group. Sanitation will be a major concern with no power or "running water". This would be a matter of survival and in a large group there are always those that don't want to do their fair share of work but want their fair share of profits/harvest. My personal opinion is to learn as MANY SKILLS as you can and practice them. Don't count on being a bow hunter if you have never shot a bow in your life! Don't count on a garden if you have never grown one. Each piece of land is different and it is a good idea to "test" what grows best in the climate & soil conditions on your area. Having a bunch of seeds in a can doesn't make you a farmer. (Many of the survival seed banks that are purchased online have no instructions on when to plant the seeds, depth, or spacing. You better know that info because you won't be able to "google it" )

Neither I or my hubby would want the hassles of being a boss to a large group.

 

Ok, here is an interesting idea to toy with...

Nah... Not really.

 

I wouldn't change anything about the number of people heading to out BOL. It took a long time for our group to come together, prove that we could trust each other at the level required, and prove that we can work together like a unit. Anything that changes that group dynamic is not worth it. Besides, I don't like people. It was hard enough to learn to like those in the group.

If there was some way to have others there to lend a hand that I didn't have to interact with, maybe. Otherwise, a resounding no.

 

This was my thought too. I am behind on preparing a group. There are only about 5 of us. I have a few more people in mind. But I definitely don't want to be trying to recruit post SHTF. People will say anything if it means they can come inside your safe compound, eat and sleep, and be safe. When it comes time where they disagree, you could be looking at a totally different person with your own weapons pointed at you as they leave with your car.

I don't trust or like many people as it is, but I definitely want to have my entire group ready before the SHTF... Speaking of that, I should go talk to some people.

 

I think there's a potential security issue with stocking for a larger group - more chance that your preps will a target for someone to take them from you. Yes, you can say that your group is smart, and armed and will keep that from happening, but the fact is there is always someone who is better armed, or smarter, or both.

Besides, I've got to go with Mike on this one. If you don't like people (and there are many I don't care for), the chances are greater that you'll end up with someone truly annoying in your group if you let more people in. Then what? It's like having a stray dog - it's easier to turn them away before you start feeding them.

 

Many great thoughts and ideas here, Thanks!

I tend to agree with many of you that pulling in unknown people into the fold could easily be recipe for disaster.

When I think of my group, I know already that the more you add, the more likely you'll run into social issues in the future. One of the members in my group is a head strong vocal guy who can come off wrong if you don't know him. He's from a family of "yellers" and fortunately we know and understand this about him. He has a habit of getting loud when confronted. Another guy in our group is the polar opposite, he is quiet and on the verge of timid. While the quiet guy wont necessarily back down from an argument, he will simply stay quiet until his ideas and opinions can be heard. These two guys get along fine, but if it weren't for me, they would have probably never talked to one another in their lifetimes.

Now, using this simple social condition, you can see how throwing in strangers into the mix could be troublesome. A new guy somewhere in the middle, might feel threatened by the loud guy, or may try to walk all over the quiet guy. Either one could lead to unwanted consequences...

But, let's say this guy has a desired skill that you desire. Yes, I understand that you should have all the skills that you need prior to teotwawki... blah blah blah, and in a perfect world you will.

A good example might be a trained veterinarian. You may have a doctor in your group, a nurse, EMT or combat medic etc. But, as I know, none of those are specifically trained in the care of animals. Animals are very different than people and have different needs etc.

For those groups without a veterinarian tending to sick of injured livestock may be an issue. Sure we can do what we can for the animals but a Vet would know exactly what to do. What do you do for a horse who decides to chew on the bark of trees, and swallows a bunch of air? can't a horse just burp up the air like we would? How about birthing a breached fowl... I don't know to many EMT who have experience with that. Giving birth sure... but birthing a fowl? Kinda different.

I guess my point is, more minds and more heads can be a very valuable thing. You could easily switch around my scenario above to fit your group, and there are likely holes in specialties. We can try to be jacks of all trades, but sometimes you need that master of one.

It would totally suck to survive a pandemic that crashed the economy and spawned a world war just to die 5 years later from an abscessed tooth that didn't get pulled right and infection set into the bone and went into your blood and on to your brain... Anyone got an oral surgeon in your group?

Back in the day people died of simple crap like that all the time. You could get a hernia from chopping wood that never healed right and end up bleeding out through your bum! Not likely to happen in today's world... but after teotwawki, it just might happen. Do you have anyone you trust with a pair of hemostats and a scalpel down there?

 

As far as order is concerned, that should most definitely be setup and understood at the core before you ever think about expanding.

IMO, surviving teotwawki is going to take order and discipline. That needs to be well established in the beginning, and should be easy to see by anyone who comes along. A hierarchy should be established before adding new members to it.

Now, the hierarchy doesn't necessarily mean that what ever I say goes... It means that if it comes down to it, I will make the necessary decisions, and I will live (or die) with the consequences. Anyone who knows how to lead understands the responsibilities of leadership. Small groups simply wont survive without a strong and compassionate leader. I relate it to the biblical principle of the head of the house. The head of the house doesn't just tell everyone in the house what to do. It's his job to care for the family... He has their health, and their needs in mind whenever making a decision. Being in leadership is a selfless job. When it becomes evidently selfish, those under you will either abandon or mutiny.

That being said, when new members enter the fold, the hierarchy needs to be clear, and understood as well as excepted. New members need to feel apart of the group, and as though their are valued as equals in the sense that they have a valuable contribution to the group and are therefore valuable to the group just like any other member. New members need to see that the entire group understands and respects the hierarchy. This will curb them from immediately trying to challenge it. If once settled in the group they decide to challenge it, maybe it should be challenged...

With the hierarchy well established, it will be clear the consequences of trying to break up the group as well as the consequences for trying to take from the group.

It's like a well oiled machine. If a part doesn't work, it gets fixed or replaced and is no longer part of the machine...

 

Payment for new members into a group joining up are simple.

You work, you get paid... payment = a hot meal and a safe place to lay your head (most nights).

Everything else will be negotiated in with time and effort...

In a post teotwawki type environment, this is likely the best pay you will ever be offered.

 

If things are set up to do so, I think it a good idea. But it means having larger amounts of equipment and easy housing, and significantly larger amounts of consumables. A charter of some type describing the organization of the group, leadership hierarchy, among other things, including how additional members are brought in, what their responsibilities are, and what they get in return is mandatory. You can't just wing it and have things turn out well.

If it is just an ad hoc idea, that might or might not be done, without serious preparations, then no, it isn't a good idea.

Just my opinion.

 

Being the "Boss" of People, requires Leadership Skills. If you don't have a "Command Presence", and are not confident in your ability to delegate Responsibilities, you might not be the "Boss" for very long. Just a thought.

 

And leadership can come across just as easily as being an insult to somebody elses dominance. The same 'presense' that give you authority in a workplace comes across as insulting to someone whos ego is up to be challenged. Taking charge requires numbers, weapons, and the ability to maintain control. The rest is butter and icing.

 

You really need to watch the movie Defiance with Daniel Craig. Based on a true story from WW 2.

Other than that, in the event of TEOTWAWKI, people will eventually come, whether or not you even survive to make it to your BOL.

Speculations and assumptions abound in these hypothetical theories all over this forum.

Like rolling dice man. And it's also divine intervention. Only time will tell.

Your intentions and reasonings sound moral and reasonable. But not all people are either of those two. So, plan according, prepare for anything. Especially mentally and emotionally. Faith will be your greatest advantage and most powerful tool.

 

Try to put yourself in a starving persons shoes post teotwawki.

You and your family (if you have one) are at the brink of death and wonder upon a small community of survivors. Unlike many groups these people are good people and they don't try to kill you, or force you to flee. Instead, they offer you two things. Food and water (meager as it may be) and a place to lay your head at night that isn't the forest floor. You would get these things in exchange for basic labor needs, and skilled labor as it's needed.

I think most of you (including myself) would take it.

Here is what I envision when writing this post. My group is setup from our preparing, we setup the homestead, and most everything is going as planned. Then over time, stragglers wonder our way.

Now, we don't have the means to fully stock for 100ppl and I don't think most people would. But... we could pretty easily stock up the bare essentials for many more people to survive.

We could use the livestock barn to house people. Bales of hay could be fitted for cots (not an uncommon bed) and there would be constant access to water.

We could provide a grain based meal or two every day with a daily multivitamin. Obviously, depending on availability, meats, and greens etc could be offered as well.

The basic Idea is, you do the work that is requested of you that day, and you get the food that is promised, and the room for the night.

In my mind, that's a fair trade. It may not be the most comfortable living, but it sure beats starving to death or risking being killed wondering the earth...

The more an individual provided, the better they could make life for themselves.

For example, if at the end of the work day (probably something like 8 to 12 hours) they could set traps or gather wild fruit or vegetables. This would be their, and they could add it to their meals, or possibly barter with it.

They could even start work on building a home of their own to eventually get out of the barn.

I know this idea is a bit far fetched, but it's fun to think about anyway.

 

Try to put yourself in a starving persons shoes post teotwawki.

You and your family (if you have one) are at the brink of death and wonder upon a small community of survivors. Unlike many groups these people are good people and they don't try to kill you, or force you to flee. Instead, they offer you two things. Food and water (meager as it may be) and a place to lay your head at night that isn't the forest floor. You would get these things in exchange for basic labor needs, and skilled labor as it's needed.

So you wait until night, grab some rocks, beat them to death, and now ALL their stuff is yours for FREE. Think of how long your family can now survive!
...is the reason why trusting in the good of others cant possibly end well.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuj2yuoC3PY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU7v1Cs-Bc4&list=TLnMBLO1ITaM0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSwrIy4IwoU&list=TLMRsr9ZoxoiQ

 

I think it's a fabulous idea to stock up for more than just your immediate family. You never know what sort of things are going to befall your extended family and friends. It's very generous to think of them.

We're struggling to find the room just to have a few months for ourselves here in our tiny apartment. Our house is under construction right now. I can't wait! It's definitely in our plans to have at least a year worth of food for ourselves and to stock up enough to be able to take care of family or friends if the need arises. We've had to depend on family and friends before during hard times. I'm very thankful for their help. I'd love to be able to pass that along someday.

As far as leadership. Pfft. All these hokey "the world is ending" scenarios are just a joke. When we had help from family, we were at their house. THEIR house. We followed their rules, or we left. If you are asking someone for help, you better be ready to swallow your pride and accept to abide by their rules. It's the same thing for anyone who plans to ask us for help - they either act right or they can move on. There's no democracy about it.

I think it's very unhealthy to focus on the end of the world scenarios and how you'll be awesome and boss everyone else around. Want to be a leader? Step up now. Help your loved ones, your community, strangers. A true leader, one that people will follow readily, isn't someone who lives in a secluded fantasy world and aspires to greatness during times of enormous upheaval. A true leader is there through the good times, too.

Put your money where your mouth is.

 

NectarNook,

I almost hit "thanks" for your contribution but... It ended up being rather condescending and not very helpful.

While I agree that in a short term personal SHTF scenario, it is agreed that you abide by the terms set by the person you are living with. That's just proper manors and etiquette.

However, the thought behind this thread is being the "boss" at your homestead post TEOTWAWKI. The core of the conversation is about hiring locals to work at your homestead in exchange for a place to sleep and food to eat.

Whether you feel it "healthy" to focus on end of the world scenarios or not, is not a part of this conversation. The thread even has "Post TEOTWAWKI" right in it, so if you disagree with talking about it, you probably should have just left your thoughts and comments to yourself.

Hopefully (especially for your sake) the world doesn't drastically change suddenly or you my friend, may find yourself up a creek without a paddle.

Truth be told, there are a plethora of significant events that could change the world as we know it, and we are on the verge of several of them.

Yes, if it does happen, and there are people like us who have safe havens setup for ourselves, we will expect those who survive with us to follow the same rules. However, there will be plenty of people who simply refuse to follow those rules for whatever reason, and they will indeed challenge those rules.

A good example might be a group of "survivors" who decide that the new rules include 18hr hard labor work days, and your wife and daughters are now their property in exchange for a bowl of cream of wheat.

In conclusion, you are more than welcome to disagree with anything in the thread, and you are encouraged to add your reasoning, but please don't just discredit an entire thread because you don't like it... If you don't like it, stay out of it.

The X in the top right corner of your screen should suffice.

 

The voice of reason shouldn't be silenced, love. Thank you for suggesting that I bugger off, but I'd rather inject a bit of "Whoa there!" wherever I can.

There are a lot of threads here that can use a tap on the brakes. I know I'm not the only one who sees that and interjects.

If a person can't take a rational challenge to their idea, how good is their idea in the first place?

My question to those of you who have the Supreme Leader complex is this - what are you doing now to lead those around you?

 

My question to those of you who have the Supreme Leader complex is this - what are you doing now to lead those around you?

That is a great question. I've done a bit of study regarding apocalyptic thought in a religious context, and survival seems pretty much the same. An apocalypse isn't really about destruction, it is about how everything (supposedly) changes afterwards. The last shall be first, the weak shall be strong, the poor shall be rich, etc. etc.

The problem is that in most human endeavors, the more things change the more they stay the same.

A disaster will make leadership important for bare survival. A disaster will make the ability to enforce your leadership difficult since you won't have the mechanisms for control that modern society has developed. Yet people who've never so much as coached a Little League team or been an assistant manager at McDs seem to think that they will suddenly rise up and take charge from people who have those experiences or better.

If you are a shrinking violet now, you will be a shrinking violet after The Big One.

 

Folks not in my group today will not be in it post teotwawki.
We planned for extra supplies, but not for extra folks.
The focus is more on skill sets and work ethics, not political positions.
Folks thinking they can be chiefs tomorrow should focus on what they are doing today in that aspect.
This thread reminds me why a smaller group would be better than an ever expanding one IMO.
I think a large group will experience many changing of power.
And it may not include folks who think they should run the city.

 

I think we are wondering off topic...

Do you think it would be worth the risk to higher people to work your retreat, if you could afford to pay them?

The question of the OP is simple. If you had the means to pay people post teotwawki to do extra work for you, would it be worth the risk?

This is not really about being the boss over the people at your homestead... It's not a leadership discussion (though I understand why it can branch there) but a discussion if it would be wise to higher people from outside to help out.

It's kind of like hiring people to help work your fields or orchards. Or maybe hiring a full time vet to take care of your animals. Except, in this thread, it's post teotwawki and these people are willing to work for bean soup and a cot...

 

I think we are wondering off topic...



The question of the OP is simple. If you had the means to pay people post teotwawki to do extra work for you, would it be worth the risk?

This is not really about being the boss over the people at your homestead... It's not a leadership discussion (though I understand why it can branch there) but a discussion if it would be wise to higher people from outside to help out.

It's kind of like hiring people to help work your fields or orchards. Or maybe hiring a full time vet to take care of your animals. Except, in this thread, it's post teotwawki and these people are willing to work for bean soup and a cot...

*a visible attempt shall be made to stay within the parameters of the topic*

Hiring people should be based on necessity. If its to make something you can already do easier, risk > reward. If its to do something you need but which you cannot do yourself (hiring someone on who knows how to treat injuries and illnesses on a level you simply dont for instance, and noone else in your group does), reward > risk. The biggest risk there would be extortion. "Ill leave if i dont get X, then you wont be getting Y!"

 

In a way, if you have to ask this question, then it won't work for you.

Some people, if by luck or birth or training, just seemed to be obeyed. If random people constantly ask for you assistance, if random people obey your commands instinctively, and when there is an emergency, people naturally turn to you for leadership, you won't have a problem maintaining leadership while adding small numbers of new people to the group.

It's not just being the Alpha leader, since Alpha work to maintain their position, I'm talking about the kind of leader that people follow even if that person doesn't want to lead.

If you are not this kind of leader, people will constantly be angling for positions within the group, and looking to take your place.

 

This is an outstanding topic.

Maybe a starting point would be determining if you are currently a good boss, leader, or diplomat in today's world. Managing people well, especially here in the USA, is an artform that can take years to master (pun intended). A good manager knows what makes individuals motivated and in the case of larger groups how to selct people to motivate other individuals. There's a reason successful corporations spend millions on HR and Management training. Beingthe "Boss" will be hard work if done right. Keeping everyone positive, especially the wives and GF's, is going to take a lot of diplomacy and patience when in a stressfull situation.

Hiring folks will take that to a whole new level because you are going to have to figure them out fast.

 

Let me think being around a lot of distraught people I don't know is why I am leaving town so no large groups of people I don't know. So for me anyway it's just myself and close family members. There was 1 other couple but they were recently un-invited because they talked too much and invited other people.