This morning I stumbled across another debate about where it will be best to live in the event of a Peak Oil-induced collapse or depression. This time it's over at Anthropik. The debate is always between the big city and your own small farm out in the boondocks.
I responded to the Anthropik debate with this:
I find these debates over where it will be better to live during a collapse fascinating. They can be found on several of the top Peak Oil sites. Most people agree that the city will be a better place for survival due to the increased probability of finding work.
This is where the logic falls apart for me. My mind immediately asks, "What city-type work will be left in a bona fide collapse?" Think about that for a minute. Most of the work performed in cities consists of little more than shuffling paper--both actual and virtual. In a state of collapse, where people must refocus on the basics of survival: shelter, food, water, and safety, most of those big city job skills will become worthless over-night.
So what if you were a "master of the universe" Wall Street banker before the crash? If I control access to food, you may not have much to barter with after you have sold off all your furnishings and art at firesale prices in the initial stages of collapse.
The people who will survive will most likely be the ones with basic skills such as knowing how to grow/hunt food, repair generators, and salvage photovoltiac systems and other necessities.
A major currency in an energy-induced collpase will be your energy. If you need food but lack money to pay for it, then hop aboard that stationery bike connected to a generator and peddle for an hour to keep the merchant's refrigeration systems running.
One more point: this debate always makes it sound as if the choice in residences is between Brooklyn and some isolated farm 30 miles outside of Hootersville.
Why not something in between these two extremes? Last summer I chose a small city of 165K people near prime agriculture country. This city is about 100 miles north of Seattle and 60 miles south of Vancouver. It's an affluent hippie place so the people are to my liking.
If things get really bad, one of these farms may want to hire an extra hand with my business experience. If things become truly desperate, I'd happily work for food and a bunk-bed in lieu of a paycheck.
A year ago I watched Ron Howard's Cinderella Man. From what I have read people who lived in the Depression say that the film offers a very accurate portrayal of life in a large city during the early 1930s. If you haven't seen it, that life was harsh consisting of lack of work, constant hunger, and regular shut-off of your utilities for falling behind on payments.
Finally, during the depression people first migrated to the cities from the farms after being foreclosed by the banks. But as the depression deepened, there was a second migration back out into the country from the cities as people realized that access to food was the top priority.
Since, a Peak Oil induced depression will most likely be a permanent one (followed by a collapse of society, as some predict), why not just go straight to where your personal chances for survival will be greatest?
Recent Comments