For a minute there I thought I had to get off my couch, when all the while the fact is we don't have to do anything much but keep things afloat for just a few decades more! In fact, we'd best shut up about PO, because if our offspring finds out we knew about it all along, they'll turn and wring our necks come 2036!
Joined: Jun 21, 2006 Posts: 1205 Location: Burgundy, France
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 7:56 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
vision-master wrote:
davep wrote:
I chose isolated village.
People know how to fix things, and are generally manualy adept as well as being able to grow stuff.
And they're all armed to the hilt (yes, even here in Euro-weenie France).
Number one priority is don't piss off the neighbours.
Because you don't have the money or resouces to buy replacements (parts) instead, so ya have to keep fixing/ patching up the old junk.
I earn just shy of $***k, so that shouldn't be a problem
I was thinking more of the post-peak resourcefulness of the rural population. _________________ All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think we become. - Buddha
Last edited by davep on Fri May 16, 2008 8:47 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Sep 14, 2004 Posts: 6143 Location: Rural Virginia
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 7:59 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
Revi wrote:
I was just down near NYC. It looks like it's just fine. Meanwhile up here the economy is falling apart. We need to heat our houses and drive long distances to get things. People in my county make as much as people in Alabama. The heating season runs at least 6 months. People seem to be leaving. Wouldn't you? I think about it sometimes. If I didn't have a job here, I don't know if I'd hang out.
I think a smallish town is great if you have a pension or some kind of income. If you have to work for a living, it's a different story.
Have you checked out the prices in a Manhattan grocery store? (Or a Brooklyn one, for that matter?)
How about the apartment rents in Queens?
NYC is a 100% artificial economy supported by vast imports of money and everything else.
Just because it has great public transportation doesn't make NYC remotely energy independent, either. Its electrical bill is staggering. Then there's infrastructure maintenance---staggering, continuous costs.
We'll see where it stands in 20 years, esp. with rising sea levels and a collapsed global economy. _________________ "Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog
"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---Me and my brother
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 12:02 pm Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
A few pertinent things about NYC(and large cities in general) needs to be mentioned.
One is that a major metropolis like NYC will always get first priority to energy and other resources simply because many of the nation's elites live here. The elites will ALWAYS get their cut first, and the rest of us can live off the crumbs from their table. This cannot be repeated enough.
The second point is that, there are many economic opportunities here for those with the skills and/or initiative. The population density is so high, that there is always going to be a significant service sector present.
Lastly, living standards vary greatly depending on a person's skills/income level. Most people live rather badly here(60%), a significant portion lives under horrible 3rd world conditions(30%). A small percentage lives better than they would if they were outside of the city. An even smaller percentage lives vastly better than just about anywhere in the country. Ultimately the rest of the city serves the smallest, wealthiest demographic sector. Depending on where a person falls in this spectrum, one's environment can range from incredibly posh/luxurious neighborhoods with plenty of polite police protection, to basically ghettos with frequent utility failures, occasional riots, and routine police brutality.
Joined: May 06, 2008 Posts: 54 Location: The hills of Northeast Iowa
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 12:57 pm Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
jivah wrote:
AnIowan wrote:
I picked isolated village.
From where we live, we have at least two different self-sufficient organic farmers (one animals, the other produce), we live in a river valley ringed with trees, animals, and we have a small spring fed stream within a tenth of a mile.
For my money, rural areas will suffer short term as they adjust to the loss of materials, food, and so on because of the lack of transportation. However, long term, the sense of community and the ability to create new from old will create small burgs all over the country who are almost entirely self-sufficient.
I would say you were right, I am keeping one foot in the city and the other in the country and then watch which way the cookie crumbles.
Thankfully, my wife and her sisters own 160 acres near a smallish town, so if the isolated village part doesn't work out, we can bug out to that safe house.
That scary part of that statement, the fact that I've been thinking that's a pretty good Plan B, so what's Plan C?
Joined: Sep 14, 2004 Posts: 6143 Location: Rural Virginia
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
xerces wrote:
A few pertinent things about NYC(and large cities in general) needs to be mentioned.
One is that a major metropolis like NYC will always get first priority to energy and other resources simply because many of the nation's elites live here. The elites will ALWAYS get their cut first, and the rest of us can live off the crumbs from their table. This cannot be repeated enough.
The second point is that, there are many economic opportunities here for those with the skills and/or initiative. The population density is so high, that there is always going to be a significant service sector present.
Lastly, living standards vary greatly depending on a person's skills/income level. Most people live rather badly here(60%), a significant portion lives under horrible 3rd world conditions(30%). A small percentage lives better than they would if they were outside of the city. An even smaller percentage lives vastly better than just about anywhere in the country. Ultimately the rest of the city serves the smallest, wealthiest demographic sector. Depending on where a person falls in this spectrum, one's environment can range from incredibly posh/luxurious neighborhoods with plenty of polite police protection, to basically ghettos with frequent utility failures, occasional riots, and routine police brutality.
Right now, I'm doing very well in the city. It's economic opportunities and abundant supplies of willing labor forces and resources will keep me here for the medium term.
I think it's a myth that the elites are invulnerable. They've been wiped out before, as in revolutionary-era Russia. Or in Germany's hyperinflationary period. Or in ancient civilizations that collapsed. In the end they are as dependent as anyone---more, even---on the status quo, which is deeply threatened in an entirely new way. _________________ "Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog
"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---Me and my brother
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:06 pm Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
What makes you think the elites plan on staying in Manhattan? I'm sure that at the slightest hint of privation they will be helicoptered to a secure compound in Vermont, or Bermuda or wherever. I don't think they'll hang out in NYC when things get nasty. After 9/11 a lot of them got out. What makes you think that the world's elite spend much time in New York, anyway? Most of them are in Tuscanny already. They may have an apartment in NYC still, but they are only there for a couple of months a year.
Hedge fund traders and people like that are only in NYC until the financial scam moves on.
The last time I was in NYC I got the feeling that most of the people in the city were recent immigrants. That's the story of NYC. My grandparents came into NYC from Sweden. There used to be a Swedish neighborhood on the upper East Side. All gone now.
NYC will hold on longer than a lot of places, but I don't think it's going to be a great place to be for the vast majority of it's residents. _________________ Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:19 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
Heineken wrote:
xerces wrote:
A few pertinent things about NYC(and large cities in general) needs to be mentioned.
One is that a major metropolis like NYC will always get first priority to energy and other resources simply because many of the nation's elites live here. The elites will ALWAYS get their cut first, and the rest of us can live off the crumbs from their table. This cannot be repeated enough.
The second point is that, there are many economic opportunities here for those with the skills and/or initiative. The population density is so high, that there is always going to be a significant service sector present.
Lastly, living standards vary greatly depending on a person's skills/income level. Most people live rather badly here(60%), a significant portion lives under horrible 3rd world conditions(30%). A small percentage lives better than they would if they were outside of the city. An even smaller percentage lives vastly better than just about anywhere in the country. Ultimately the rest of the city serves the smallest, wealthiest demographic sector. Depending on where a person falls in this spectrum, one's environment can range from incredibly posh/luxurious neighborhoods with plenty of polite police protection, to basically ghettos with frequent utility failures, occasional riots, and routine police brutality.
Right now, I'm doing very well in the city. It's economic opportunities and abundant supplies of willing labor forces and resources will keep me here for the medium term.
I think it's a myth that the elites are invulnerable. They've been wiped out before, as in revolutionary-era Russia. Or in Germany's hyperinflationary period. Or in ancient civilizations that collapsed. In the end they are as dependent as anyone---more, even---on the status quo, which is deeply threatened in an entirely new way.
Of course, I don't think that anyone is invulnerable. Otoh, the urban elites have much greater means of acquiring vital resources than just about anyone else. And by resources, I mean natural, human, and technological. It's not simply a matter of directing food or gasoline to the city. There are specialists in many fields who are needed to maintain this entire state's technological infrastructure, and through one channel or another, most of the specialists are controlled(corporate, education, funding) by the elites. Can the entire system crash? Yes, but it's unlikely. More likely than not, we'll simply degrade into a miserable 3rd world standard of living. The elites of Bombay and Bangalore are doing quite well, the last time I checked. _________________ http://backtowilderness.blogspot.com http://grown-up-permaculture.com
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:49 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
Revi wrote:
What makes you think the elites plan on staying in Manhattan? I'm sure that at the slightest hint of privation they will be helicoptered to a secure compound in Vermont, or Bermuda or wherever. I don't think they'll hang out in NYC when things get nasty. After 9/11 a lot of them got out. What makes you think that the world's elite spend much time in New York, anyway? Most of them are in Tuscanny already. They may have an apartment in NYC still, but they are only there for a couple of months a year.
Hedge fund traders and people like that are only in NYC until the financial scam moves on.
The last time I was in NYC I got the feeling that most of the people in the city were recent immigrants. That's the story of NYC. My grandparents came into NYC from Sweden. There used to be a Swedish neighborhood on the upper East Side. All gone now.
NYC will hold on longer than a lot of places, but I don't think it's going to be a great place to be for the vast majority of it's residents.
This is just my humble opinion, but I think there are valid reasons for why elites tend to stay in mega-cities long term over places like Bermuda or Vermont. And by elites I don't mean movie celebs or professional athletes, but those who actually makes their wealth through business/politics/military...etc.
For one thing, any of the ultra-rich will need access to diverse resources, specialists, and labor to maintain their base of power and influence. And the first two are necessarily found in large cities due to centralization of transport channels and specialization of knowledge inherent in densely populated areas.
The accumulation and long term storage of wealth also favor large cities. Cities are vastly superior as places to store wealth than a resort somewhere. Gold or cash inside of a vault under a beach mansion can be devalued or outlawed. But inside of a city, there exist the means of quickly converting money into other forms of wealth that are much more persistent. Large numbers of low-cost workers(illegal immigrants) or infrastructure or technology or local political influence(through corrupt officials), all of these can be bought very quickly in a place like NYC for example.
Finally, I feel that urban people are simply easier to control than their rural counterparts. This is just my personal observation( as someone who grew up in the country).
For one thing, most of the civilian population in NYC are disarmed, so people pretty much do what the police and military tells them to do. Now at times, the police brutality becomes outrageous(like the recent murder of Sean Bell by the NYPD), and people will make loud noises but won't do anything. When contrasting this response with my recollection of rural PA, I realize that the cops back home are far more polite simply because every one was as well armed as them. But it also strikes me that the people in rural PA are more unruly and independent minded as a result. So obviously, a pliant and orderly labor force is preferable for the ultra-rich than a disobedient population with some firepower in their hands. _________________ http://backtowilderness.blogspot.com http://grown-up-permaculture.com
Joined: May 15, 2008 Posts: 2 Location: Vienna, Austria
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 2:17 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
Hi everyone!
I just checked up on my posting and thanks for the huge number of votes / replies!
I'm South African born and South Africa, similar to the US, has a lot of cities and towns that sprung up in the last century (during the oil age so to say). Big cities which are very dependent on cars to get around and which are often located far from an environment that could actually sustain large populations. Johannesburg for example is hundreds of kilometers from a proper source of fresh water and fertile farm lands.
I now live in Austria and villages, towns and cities here are located in places where they have been for hundreds of years. People a few hundred years ago chose the location because of the fertile land and the availability of other essential natural resources. This happened well before the oil age and before the industrial revolution of the 18th and 19th century.
Although many European cities are also unsustainable in a PO world, they are nonetheless situated in a healthier environment capable of sustaining at least a part of the population, which often cannot be said of "new world" cities.
In an European setting I would personally opt for the smallish town as in my mind this sort of living arrangement is a good middle path between unsustainable, potentially chaotic big cities and potentially desolate little villages which could very well lack the sort of expertise required to run a scociety.
Today's big cities require a huge input of food and energy from the countryside to be able to exist the way they do. I also think that once oil to drive industrial farming becomes scarce and more expensive, that a lot of people will have to become rural again to sustain local food production. With time, a lot of big city service industry jobs will become worthless occupations and people will have to focus more and more on jobs that really matter.
Joined: Sep 14, 2004 Posts: 6143 Location: Rural Virginia
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:14 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
Austria is a wonderful place---I remember it as a sort of fairyland. But it too is experiencing unprecedented pressures. For example, many areas of Austria are dependent on meltwater from mountain snows and glaciers, which as we know are steadily disappearing. In a couple more decades the glaciers will be gone. Global warming could also have a big negative impact on Austria's timber industry. Then there is the problem of immigration, especially from "undesirable" groups like the Turks. _________________ "Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog
"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---Me and my brother
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12009 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:30 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
I tend to think that immigration will become less of a problem as transportation becomes even more unaffordable for the average (poor by our standards) person. It's already almost impossibly expensive for people to relocate to another country. Most people will simply end up trapped wherever they are. The wealthy may be able to relocate, but the mass of people will be restricted to where they can walk. _________________ "...powerdown so soft and fluffy you'll think you're living in a pillow..." - jboogy
Joined: Jun 13, 2007 Posts: 3345 Location: Minniesotuh
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 10:26 am Post subject: Re: Big city, smallish town or isolated village?
I have noticed in these threads that most assume that if one thing goes wrong, everything else will remain the same.
When things become dire, due to loss of energy sources, this also means that when part of the city catches fire, there, most likely, will not be sufficient energy available for those fire engines.
Rail worked in the past, but there has to be fuel to get the harvest to the depot, and from the depot to the distribution points. Then, the populace has to be able to get to the distribution points, then, they must be able To Try to get back to their home base without being attacked by those unable or too lazy to go to the distribution point.
Add in two to three feet of snow/ice-you aren't going anywhere.
Brownouts/blackouts-you are going to get cold.
Live in the south or southeast? That first hurricane is going to seriously affect aid.
Nope, I can't see any reason live in a large city. _________________ "RRrrruuuunnnn!!!" ~Apocalypto
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
