SHTF and Boats

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by skipperpete

Singapore has no actual food production, no cattle ranches no vast cereal crops maybe a few fruit trees , not much in the way of fishing or sea farms and bugger all fresh water. Without external food chains this country would collapse in very short order. Singapore is a poor choice.

Actually better said - an extremely poor choice.

Singapore imports almost all it's energy and over half it's water supply; the other half of the water supply is dependant on the power grid. Put a wall around Singapore and it would collapse within days (or a week or two at the most). No power, no water and quickly no food. Almost 6 million dead in a week or so.

Population density is 8,109/km2, the third most dense in the world. Only exceeded by Macau and Monaco.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Actually better said - an extremely poor choice.

Singapore imports almost all it's energy and over half it's water supply; the other half of the water supply is dependant on the power grid. Put a wall around Singapore and it would collapse within days (or a week or two at the most). No power, no water and quickly no food. Almost 6 million dead in a week or so.

Population density is 8,109/km2, the third most dense in the world. Only exceeded by Macau and Monaco.

You forget the power of arms and money City states not only survived but prospered precisely because they had the wealth to create armies and simply take over the surrounding sources of food. Such power enabled them to raise taxes in such subject regions.

Venice ruled an enormous area of the then known world as a result.

The key is a sufficient mass of organised people including the necessary doers and thinkers. Add in wealth , and you’re up and running

The poor sods in some mountain compound in Montana don’t stand a chance. Prepping is such a misguided first world outlook on things ( ie my stuff won’t get taken from me ) the key to survival is greater numbers and access to remaining wealth ( not necessary money by the way)

Rural food producers have no economy if their market is removed so they are entirely dependant on access to denser populated areas. This makes then incredibly vulnerable to external coercive forces.

A Singapore post SHTF , would be armed to the teeth , process a considerable army and would simply take what resources it needs from the hinterland.

The longer term issues are the conflict between successful city states and or regions. This led in most cases to national unifying forces creating countries.

Wealth and control have never come from dispersed rural communities.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Wotname

And if you are planning to ride the horse, the best way to survive is to ride low in the saddle and in the middle of the posse. Just the opposite of the intentions of preppers and boaters.

Indeed it’s how most people survive civil unrest and upheaval. “ they keep their heads down “ it’s a wise decision in the vast majority of cases”

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

You forget the power of arms and money City states not only survived but prospered precisely because they had the wealth to create armies and simply take over the surrounding sources of food. Such power enabled them to raise taxes in such subject regions.

Venice ruled an enormous area of the then known world as a result.

The key is a sufficient mass of organised people including the necessary doers and thinkers. Add in wealth , and you’re up and running

The poor sods in some mountain compound in Montana don’t stand a chance. Prepping is such a misguided first world outlook on things ( ie my stuff won’t get taken from me ) the key to survival is greater numbers and access to remaining wealth ( not necessary money by the way)

Rural food producers have no economy if their market is removed so they are entirely dependant on access to denser populated areas. This makes then incredibly vulnerable to external coercive forces.

I concur totally and power of wealth and armies wasn't forgotten. The post was a rebuttal of David Ess's claim the native carrying capacity of Singapore is something like 8,109/km2; see post #203. Ring fence Singapore and the carrying capacity would be bugga all. Singapore depends entirely on it's neighbours for energy, water and food and the wealth the local citizens can produce through banking and global trade.

[GordMay]

... Research indicates the Carrying Capacity of humans on the North American continent is around a million souls ...

I guess those many millions of indigenous/native americans, were soulless.

Research by some scholars provides population estimates of the pre-contact Americas to be as high as 112 million in 1492, while others estimate the population to have been as low as eight million. In any case, the native population declined to less than six million by 1650.

➥ https://uwpress.wisc.edu/books/0289.htm

[wolfgal]

just to say that, although i haven't taken the time to read from A to Z (need to put that on my to-do list), i really appreciate this thread.

to know that there are others who dare consider humanity's trajectory on this ever-smaller planet is reassuring.

i find that, although folks are starting to wake up and see how the foundations of our systems are totally under stress, these types of exchanges are rare (where i am, at least).



wolfie

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by wolfgal

just to say that, although i haven't taken the time to read from A to Z (need to put that on my to-do list), i really appreciate this thread.



to know that there are others who dare consider humanity's trajectory on this ever-smaller planet is reassuring.



i find that, although folks are starting to wake up and see how the foundations of our systems are totally under stress, these types of exchanges are rare (where i am, at least).







wolfie

Everyone has a view on the planet. The problem is no one has any consensus on the solution

[wolfgal]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Everyone has a view on the planet. The problem is no one has any consensus on the solution

agreed and nicely put

and, in any case, your perspective/input is much appreciated!

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by skipperpete

Singapore has no actual food production, no cattle ranches no vast cereal crops maybe a few fruit trees , not much in the way of fishing or sea farms and bugger all fresh water. Without external food chains this country would collapse in very short order. Singapore is a poor choice.

Thanks.

[hpeer]

I will add my concurrence that we have no solutions.

Yet we do have a pretty good idea that the way we are headed is making things worse.

There are many things that, while not solutions, would help the problem. Kind of like how loosing weight helps many medical issues.

The human diet plan would reduce the population and our energy consumption per capita. It is best done over a longer time. Crash dieting is not fun or healthy. Nor is starvation.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by hpeer

I will add my concurrence that we have no solutions.

Yet we do have a pretty good idea that the way we are headed is making things worse.

There are many things that, while not solutions, would help the problem. Kind of like how loosing weight helps many medical issues.

The human diet plan would reduce the population and our energy consumption per capita. It is best done over a longer time. Crash dieting is not fun or healthy. Nor is starvation.

The current population is sustainable with modern and ECO friendly agricultural methods the issue being of course that such food can be expensive and not well or evenly distributed

The overriding issue is the “ west “ needs to get poorer and have a smaller share of resources and developing countries need to get a bigger share.

We had our zenith , now for a slow decline !!!!

[hpeer]

Goboating,

The above is a statement of belief, not fact.

The simplest rebuttal is that we are currently using 2-1/2 times the Earths ability to sustain life, digging deeply into the bank account.

Worse is that is being done using irreplaceable resources: oil, water, soil, etc.

Replenishment rates for the “renewable” is 10-40 times our consumption rate.

And we are deeply damaging Earths ability to sustain life through pollution and econsystem destruction.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The current population is sustainable with modern and ECO friendly agricultural methods the issue being of course that such food can be expensive and not well or evenly distributed

The overriding issue is the “ west “ needs to get poorer and have a smaller share of resources and developing countries need to get a bigger share.

We had our zenith , now for a slow decline !!!!

Around here, the "deprivations" of COVID lockdowns led to an increase in the use of parks and an upsurge in cycling, and similar healthy, yet low-cost pursuits. I'm now more optimistic that most of us would easily adapt to (and might even welcome) a less-overheated economy, especially if it gave us more time for family and personal interests. This would require a more equitable distribution of wealth, though... which is a nonstarter for many.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Around here, the "deprivations" of COVID lockdowns led to an increase in the use of parks and an upsurge in cycling, and similar healthy, yet low-cost pursuits. I'm now more optimistic that most of us would easily adapt to (and might even welcome) a less-overheated economy, especially if it gave us more time for family and personal interests. This would require a more equitable distribution of wealth, though... which is a nonstarter for many.

Yes the key to sustainability is to harmonise consumption , and of course diminish wealth disparities.

This of course isn’t going to happen.

COVID does kinda point to a potentially better future , but I’m not sure of these patterns are aberrations or are long term changes

[David Ess]

Originally Posted by skipperpete

Singapore has no actual food production, no cattle ranches no vast cereal crops maybe a few fruit trees , not much in the way of fishing or sea farms and bugger all fresh water. Without external food chains this country would collapse in very short order. Singapore is a poor choice.

Thank you for corroborating that 'carrying capacity', is a bogus concept. So singapore is a rich place, just as Manhattan island is, as well as Switzerland. It's the same as the land surrounding you own house doesnt have a carrying capacity. Do you really think Manhattan island should only have a few people on it and grow their own food?