SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ron who wrote (318539)9/11/2019 8:57:22 AM
From: Wharf Rat1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Ron

  Respond to of 362557
 
I edited a bit.



To: Ron who wrote (318539)9/11/2019 3:00:49 PM
From: Sam2 Recommendations

Recommended By
abuelita
Cogito Ergo Sum

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 362557
 
In a world without electricity, how could rural areas not be better than urban? The heat would be magnified by the urban heat effect, how would grocery stores keep their food safe -- other than canned food of course; but how would those be supplied if gas was limited? How much would there be? Would there be plumbing in the cities? How would we have enough potable water? Heat it up--using what heat source? It would be too hot for humans but not hot enough to purify water.

As for living like many of our grandfathers or great grandfathers--they were trained how to do that from when they were young. Most of us--the vast majority of us--weren't. And we not only don't have the tools or the knowledge to do it, most of us don't have the space. People who do have the space could easily be overrun by refugees from other areas and I am not talking about other countries, I am talking about urban folks heading out to the country looking for land and water and foraging for food.

I can't see how a world like that wouldn't be a total disaster over time. Fine for a few weeks, maybe (big maybe) even a few months, but over time--disaster.

But it would be a quick way to solve the population problem.