I started reloading in the 60's with my dad. I always enjoyed reloading with him. He thought it was a great way to save money on hunting loads. We were loading paper shells back then, with waxed and fiber wads. Times evolved, and prices went up. In 1995 I was still reloading shotshells for $.10/round with components bought at the local gunshops whenever I stopped in for a visit. When components were everywhere, it never dawned on me to buy in bulk.
Then things changed. Primers became scarce, lead shot became scarce and the new precious metal, gunpowder became hard to find, etc. Local gunshops stopped carrying wads, powder, and soon all reloading components and accessories, etc.
But I still reload 12, 16 & 20 gauges. I can tailor and make any load in any combination that I want. That's why I do it.
Cheap factory shells today are cheap for a reason. Brass washed steel bases instead of brass are tough on chambers and reloading equipment. The low antimony shot they use often make for inferior patterns. Unless you opt for a quality plastic shell, most of the cheap shells are also inferior to reload with. Are the cheaper factory loads okay for impromptu hand-thrown clay bird sessions? Sure they are. Can you hunt with them? Sure you can. Can you break clays from the 16 yard trap line or Station 4 on a skeet field; of course you can. Then again, no Olympic shooter that I know of is using factory Remington Gun Club's today.
If you don't hunt, are only an occasional shooter, don't have a need to make 2 1/2" shells for your old doubles, don't have a need to roll 3/4 oz. 20 ga. loads to save money, don't have a need for 7/8 oz. 12 ga practice loads, don't have a need to make your own buckshot loads or don't have a need to make a heavy 16 ga. pheasant load; then it may not make much sense to reload.
Wakeman's take on quality shells is a good read:
I would argue that periods of time where growth stalls or retracts are caused by bad economic policy not just a cyclical foregone conclusion. Prior to the 80s and back to the great depression the recessions in growth where a few to 5 or 6 years apart.
Horses have four legs but everything with four legs isn’t a horse. It may be that policy swings and resulting consumer sentiment has cycled with a 5 to 10 year period. But that doesn’t mean the period doesn’t change or that its not possible to go much longer periods of time without a contracting economy.
Don’t know. I’m not a financial analyst. I’m a technologist. Want me to look it up?
I said that back in January, in the WuFlu thread. The issue isn't the virus, it's the hype/fear and economic fallout from sensationalized reporting, and the reaction to it. Similar how the media blows mass shooting way out of proportion, compared to other, everyday deaths.
It might, if the negative economic effects are bad enough. If enough people are hurting in their wallets come November, Bernie's freebies will sound really good!