Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even if people don't survive on their own, there could be co-ops of conservatives that band together.
They say you only have to make it through the first 90 days, after then there will be fewer people and less need to protect what's yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
I do consider it far more likely that an Asteroid Impact would trigger such a collapse than some economic disruption. This is an example of lone survivalist paranoia to prepare for the most unlikely event instead of working to keep the economy afloat.
If society breaks down to the point that gangs are stealing food, I would think joining, or better yet, running a gang, would be much more effective than sitting and waiting for your cache to be discovered.
I do consider it far more likely that an Asteroid Impact would trigger such a collapse than some economic disruption. This is an example of lone survivalist paranoia to prepare for the most unlikely event instead of working to keep the economy afloat.
If society breaks down to the point that gangs are stealing food, I would think joining, or better yet, running a gang, would be much more effective than sitting and waiting for your cache to be discovered.
I think such a situation is very unlikely. But if if did happen, you'd probably be right that it would be easier (at first) to form gangs hellbent on raping, pillaging and plundering. I'd have to follow some other path against the odds...probably not as a loner.
Still, I think everyone should put a little aside for hard times...not because society as we know it is going to break down, but to make life less painful through the more common 2-3 week emergencies/disasters.
I think they're saying that others would form gangs, pillaging the weaker targets, and that a lone "survivalist" wouldn't stand much of a chance against them.
IMO, this whole "total breakdown" scenario seems very unlikely.
I think they're saying that others would form gangs, pillaging the weaker targets, and that a lone "survivalist" wouldn't stand much of a chance against them.
IMO, this whole "total breakdown" scenario seems very unlikely.
I agree, I think it's going to be a different kind of breakdown. More along the lines of what happened when the Soviet Union broke down. A splitting apart.
Until the Swine Flu wipes out the Mexican farmer who grows more than half our food. Until SARS or similar sickens the farmers and grocers, along with half of the US. Until the Saudis decide to quit selling us oil, crippling the food distribution network in the US. Until the power grid fails and there is no power for a week or a month.
Nutty? Nutty is relying on somebody else to take care of you without a backup plan. I'm not a survivalist in any sense of the word. I have always been prepared for at least 30 days. When I lived in CA, it was the fear of a major earthquake. For my short year in TX, it was the tornado. I don't have to worry about too many natural disasters now, but regional disasters can affect me 1000 miles away. Load up on canned goods. Rotate them. Get a few 5 gallon pails of wheat berry and some pinto beans. Have the supplies needed to sterlize water. Ramen noodles are cheap, and packed with calories. Get a shotgun to keep the nuts who did not prepare at bay.
If it takes the govt. much more than 30 days to restore order after a major disaster, I guess we are all doomed. But for that first 30 days, I can lock the doors, load the shotgun, and bunker down.
I think they're saying that others would form gangs, pillaging the weaker targets, and that a lone "survivalist" wouldn't stand much of a chance against them.
IMO, this whole "total breakdown" scenario seems very unlikely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
Banding together can always help -- or where is the kumbaya attitude we're so used to seeing?
Trading of resources, helping each other protect property -- that is what banding together can do.
Anyone that thinks a Lone Ranger is more powerful than a group has been watching too many "Rambo" movies. There is a reason humans have been and are pack hunters. The lone gunman can never cover his own back and would not last very long if confronted by an slightly organized pack.
We stock up on stuff, food and water...finally found a reason to buy canned food (besides cat food and soup)...but I won't go whole hog Grow-Your-Own-Food-Totally-Independent because not many people can do that and if things get that bad I'd rather have someone shoot me for my well water and get it over with. We stock up for a short term emergency(week or two).
Personally , I don't think anyone can survive on their own...maybe years ago when there were less people clogging up this country but not now.
You would be surprised how many people can survive on their own, no matter the population. In fact, it can be done quite well if one knows what they are doing.
Yes, that's why I think the breakdown will happen along state and local government lines. If the federal government collapses, we still have states and local governments.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
