This prompts a certain cynicism on my part. A while back, I started thinking about the rigging of elections (since lately, the loser has a habit of claiming voter fraud) and thought to myself "You know, even if they are totally loaded? It's a matter of retaining the veneer of legitimacy". Same deal here: sounds like a great scam to me. Like those victory slop buckets full of 'broken' gold.

Such an enclave would just be a temporarily comfortable prison. The global population hits 7b next year and we here in the good ol' US of A have a constitutional right to own 11,638 guns for every one of them. Not only do we exercise this right, if you follow the arms trade you know we just can't move them out of the warehouse fast enough.

The toughest Xe merc isn't going to stand up to 500 raving collapse refugees with malaria and AK47s. Real enclaves will be something like happened back on the Tiber river a long time ago; "safe" places to trade. Surviving will be about having or being able to organize an efficient gang. Religion may finally take on its long lost mantle of social relevance.

"We are an extremely variable species - the spectrum between cooperation and competition varies greatly not only among individuals but among groups of individuals."

Wether your going to cooperate or compete depends on environmental cues not some pre determined disposition. Individuals or groups who may originaly be cooperative can easily turn if they perceive the situation warrants it. Of course the reverse is also true.

I'm skeptical that the majority of these 2012-type "billionaire survivalists" will end up much better than the majority.

The power of money only holds as long as the social structure remains capitalist. If it retreats into neo-feudalism, older, ruder qualities become preeminent. Plus, as collapse draws near, their resources may well be simply taken over by increasingly desperate states.

Historically, collapses tended to be hardest on the elites (who fought amongst themselves or were lynched by mobs) and the underclasses (those at the margins of survival even in the good times).

There would be an even more immediate problem. How rich are the helicopter pilots? How rich are the security guards? How long would it take before these people who know how to take care of everything necessary for living began an organized takeover of these happy enclaves?

The very clear class differences won't be ignored, as they are in our present social environment. The much more powerful underclass will have a much easier time becoming top dogs in the tiny "safe havens" envisioned here.

Of course, the worker bees won't last too long once they are kings. The real-world problems -- including the ones the first commenter posted -- will certainly do them in. But the rich folks who arranged it all won't be around to see that happen.

Wealthy people can be of any type, and just because one is ambitious does not mean that one has lost a sense of humanity. A key word might be 'understanding'. I had a friend who was brought up wealthy and he was a great guy. However, he thought poor people were simply stupid because it was so easy for his family to have money without really being different than anyone else. They just had lots of stuff and a nice time of it.

Is it immoral to want to protect your family, or is a question of scale? Is it okay for me to prepare, but not if I had more resources to do so? I don't think so. Although having said that, the more you have the bigger the target. Furthermore, is there an isolated place that offers to supply all the needs of survival, without people strong enough to take it away? I don't think so. Fire is cheap. Servants get restless.

I believe that cooperative behaviour will allow success, as well as luck to be with the right folks in the right place. Hyper individuals still need to get along with others.

Can we identify forces that would send societies one direction or another, and places more or less likely to take a particular path?

This question is the stuff of great books, movies, and stupid reality tv shows. I would like to team up with an Atticus Finch type handy with tools and all manner of horticulture rather than a Wall Street banker. I think that places not so well off will ultimately be stronger and better places to live. People need to be willing to work and do so with a sense of humour. Religious enclaves scare the hell out of me as well as any people of rigid beliefs. Cities might provide economy of scale and transit options, but give me rural with friends and family. Hateful scapegoating will tear us apart and my sat radio indicates it is alive and well in all spectrums of society.

Is there a middle ground between these alternate views/strategies, for example, personal wealth being used to transform a village or town, i.e., build an inclusive lifeboat based on essential needs short of tennis courts and swimming pools?

Sure, this is self evident, but like any gift it is not yours to say how it is used once it is offered up. Furthermore, just because one bankrolls does not imply you will be the leader.

This is scary stuff and if lifeboats are needed in order to survive it will take a well rounded community to make it happen. Individualism may be the first trait to drop off. I believe our oil wealth provides pseudo individualism, really it is isolation, masquerading as individualism.

Change is life, itself, is it not?.....Paul

The only difference between the elites' approach and the typical doomer who has a rural bugout ready and waiting is scale. So it's hard to get on the moral high-horse. The main point of contention is how much any of us, rich or poor, should be obligated to try to make the world a better place rather than washing your hands of it and planning our exit strategy. I've oftentimes characterized doom as a game of musical chairs. Most of us aren't in a position to reserve our seat before the music stops, and so there is a great deal of envy and resentment towards those who already have the getaway car idling. I don't think it's possible to please everyone because in the game of overshoot, someone's gonna lose. It's just the way it works. I'm sad about it, but that's reality. You do what you can, but in the end, people are going to look out for their own selves and families first.

Living in an area where there are a lot of 'gated-and-guarded communities', I suspect that the people who think that the gates and guards will protect them from trouble are forgetting that the supplies are all outside the gates, and so is everyone who maintains their cozy lifestyle. (I think their gates should be barricaded from the outside, so they couldn't drive out.)

Gated-and-guarded to me is playing 'let's pretend', and it's trying to avoid reality. If you live someplace with a wall and guards, you can pretend that there aren't homeless people and poor people and everyone else who isn't like you.

I'm beginning to have a love/hate relationship with everything I read on TOD. I love the fact that it is helping to keep my mind actively challenged in retirement. I hate the fact that events I've been concerned about for years may be coming to fruition in my own lifetime.

In reference to this well written post, I believe that sustainable enclaves for the rich and powerful will be shortlived. The more inclusive and well planned out enclaves might have life spans of 10 years or more. Those enclaves, that try to provide a pampered life style requiring a servant class will be lucky to last six months.

What alarmed me most in reading this post is the fact that so many of the "Captains of Insustry" are thinking of preparing for a "Doomsday Scenario." Since the vast majority of these leaders of industry and finance are well educated and highly intelligent, this leads me to believe that they are well aware of the impending chaos that may result from climate change, peak oil and over-population. In fact, they may well have access to information, data and statistics that are being withheld from the general public. The more moral individuals of that class may be more egalitarian in their planning for the future than the more greedy, self-centered individuals. From my personal experience organizing and leading competitive strategy workshops, high-profile executives are not known for being good team players within their peer group.

As to Altaira's question as to what she shold do. Hopefully your moral compass will guide you through some rough seas and impassable terrain. However, please keep the lines of communication open with the self-appointed members of the ruling class. They need to understand that it in their future it will be more important to know how to milk the cow, till the garden and fix the septic lines than it is to know which apertif to serve before certain gourmet dinners.

I don't buy the unstated premise of a temporary crisis, from which survivors will emerge to rebuild. How long will bad times last, with what resources will this rebuilding be accomplished, and most importantly how can a smaller, less complex society extract resources that a large, complex one couldn't ? That is not to say that rich people are not building wilderness retreats, but rich people buy a lot of expensive, impractical things.

It makes more sense to invest in simple, sustainable technologies and make them widely available, so that life in the city remains comfortable for those with money and bearable for the rest. It wouldn't require billions to develop these either, just a willingness to develop useful solutions for the long term that aren't necessarily profitable right away.

I'm not aware of any philanthropic groups funding 'appropriate decline technology'. There are cleantech Angel and VC funds, but they are still based on the quick-profit investment model. Many state to entrepreneurs at the outset that they expect a 1000% profit with 5 years. That pretty much filters out proposals with potential to work in a steady-state economy.

So the 'lifeboat' i would suggest is a portfolio of sustainable technologies, supporting the following criteria:

Powered by decentralized solar/wind
Maximize local and recycled materials
Manufactured using a minimal set of machine tools and equipment.
All training and design information made openly available.
Includes 'systems thinking' in all aspects of design, aiming to achieve negative feedback loops in human/technology interactions.

Why am I having images of medieval castles while reading this? That is the primitive response being offered, and the Middle Ages are about as far back as today's educated person can go in terms of a fortress mentality. Maybe they will dig moats and stock them with gators. With all the global warming predictions, that should work well in upstate New York.

I think the reality will surprise us. Think city-states, with each metropolitan area surrounded by agricultural land. Railroads and trolleys would link smaller cities and agricultural communities in a hub and spoke configuration. (That is an effective means to insure the hub city dominates the city-state.) We depend too much on "Mad Max" Hollywood images in imagining a dystopia.

Those who follow the "generational" concepts of Neil Howe and William Strauss in The Fourth Turning recognize our current circumstance. Humanity has been here before. The next several years will likely see changes that overturn our entire frames of reference, just as the Great Depression/World War II or the War Between the States did. This time, however, the change will likely relate to energy depletion, the end of government entitlements, a new social contract, and a new way of work, socializing, and viewing the world. We will be poorer materially and richer spiritually. Unfortunately, if we fail to choose wisely many of us may also be ill, impoverished, or even dead. And right now I cannot see a single political leader on the national or world stage who understands even dimly what we face.

I suggest going back to the original post in the archives and reading the comments.........it was all covered quite well.

Funny that this is the Campfire topic today...just Friday my client at the government agency where I work brought this company to my attention:

http://www.bomb-shelter.net/

Their products range from 5-10-person shelters to custom interconnected module complexes which costs many millions of dollars. My client claimed that sales have been doubling every year for the past five years...true? Who knows...

The Earthcom Dome 60 is developed to meet the need for more CAT 25's and a longer term food storage volume for business continuity programs for the financial, government, and insurance industries for approximately 200 people.

If you like a little 'Doomer Porn' their site provides it...you can fantasize about making your own 'Dr. Evil' hideaway compounds...complete with dual diesel generators and fuel for five years of power, and food storage for five years for your clan, and fancy extras such as 'Bat Cave' modules to park '6 large SUVs' in , complete with vehicle elevator, and a 50-foot telescoping boom which can contain a periscope, visible light and infrared video camera, Ham, satcom, etc antennas, radar, microphones, weather sensing equipment...etc.

I have to wonder about these folks, though, when they put this statement about their shelters on their web site:

Shelters are EMP transparent since they are made of composite plastic and do not attract electric or radio frequencies.

Yikes..I hope they know their mechanical engineering better than they do their knowledge of EMP effects...

I agree with the majority of posters who believe that insular pleasure fortresses will crumble in tandem with the rest of society.

I feel that for this idea to be in any way remotely feasible, the "client" would have to invest in an entirely self-sustaining community, not just a personal villa with guarded walls. The community would need to provide for a sizable population with clearly-defined roles, and be ready to grow with population increases and the inevitable migrations that will precede the Fall of Christendom. Population is important because everyone living there has an interest in maintaining the community, as well as defending it. Ultimately, the goal would be to establish a self-sufficient community, with a citizenry devoted to maintaining it, and ostensibly maintaining the investor and its administration.

How the investor and the investor's circle lives, be it in secluded comfort or at the center of the community's political structure, is a challenge that will require serious socio-political strategy. Who wants to put up billions to build this place if they cannot be assured that things will go well for them? You would have to design and troubleshoot what amounts to a wild social experiment.

The rich of today have accumulated lots of money, but it's only fiat currency. Only a very small portion of them hoard the only universal hard currency, gold, or it's stepchild, silver.

The rich have power because society deems that those with more fiat currency, however obtained, have more influence. It's up in the air how long this will continue. The Weimer hyperinflation is a good recent example of how this can break down, impacting the rich as well.

My concern is that those who have made lots of money will slowly start (as China is doing now) to dump their fiat currency in exchange for hard resources - gold, agricultural land, access to water, etc. If that be the case we will surely drift into neofeudalism.

One almost wishes for a currency breakdown so the billions accumulated by hedge funds, investment banks, and private equity groups becomes worthless.

Gee this whole post reminds me of reality on the ground today, in my native Sao Paulo Brazil.
The rich there only travel by helicopter because they are afraid they will be kidnapped if they drive around in cars... I'm sure there are plenty of places around the world today that are the same. Will it happen in New York? Who knows?

This is exactly what happens when a very small minority controls 90% of a country's wealth eventually they start to feel guilty and paranoid. The reality is that living in secluded enclosures is an illusion in the end these places become targets and a virtual prison from which the rich cannot escape.

If the rich really want to survive they will have to adapt just like everyone else. They should be putting their efforts in to preserving the natural environment. They are going to need it.

Do the highly ambitious and wealthy have a different understanding of “human nature” than the more egalitarian and communitarian minded? Are these different views the result of scientific understanding of human nature or from whom one tends to associate with?

My take on it: Many of the ultra rich are what used to be called "psychopaths" or "sociopaths", now it's been relabeled by a number of different groups, the World Health Organization has "Dissocial personality disorder" Here is the checklist (3 yes answers to qualify)

1. Callous unconcern for the feelings of others and lack of the capacity for empathy.
2. Gross and persistent attitude of irresponsibility and disregard for social norms, rules, and obligations.
3. Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships.
4. Very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression, including violence.
5. Incapacity to experience guilt and to profit from experience, particularly punishment.
6. Markedly prone to blame others or to offer plausible rationalizations for the behavior bringing the subject into conflict.
7. Persistent irritability.

Thats to say folks like this:

, he eventually proposed that a business helping the ultra rich establish “lifeboats” would be both lucrative and timely, and that I might be especially qualified.

That is one model.

Here is another:
http://solari.com/blog/?p=1718
With one of the 1st mentions I remember of the "Open Source Local Investing of the Solari Circle" mentioned here:
http://www.financialsensearchive.com/Experts/2004/AustinFitts.html

CA: [Catherine proceeds to expand on her alternative “open source” model of community equity financing … i.e. “securitizing” small business income … quoting Catherine, “I mean, why do we need a big corporation to come in and privatize our water? Why don’t we just privatize our water, create a liquid security, and get the capital gains for ourselves?” … and again, “There are tremendous opportunities to reengineer this. Because whenever you have an economy that is this unproductive and this negative, if and where you can turn it around, the capital gains opportunities are absolutely enormous.”]

JP: … So, maybe this is a grassroots movement that begins at this kind of level Catherine, because certainly large corporations today are outsourcing our jobs. And it’s really the small businessman whose local that is the creator of jobs.

CA: Absolutely. But right now, you know if you come to a Rotary International lunch , right now the local small business guys are playing with multiples of 1-5x, and they’re getting clocked by the large corporations, because they can finance at multiples of 20 and 30x …

JP: What has been the reception to this so far?

CA: Well, so far the reception has been tremendous, except from the Department of Justice and the Black Budget guys (laughter). We were prototyping 100 of these in 1998 Jim, and part of it was we had a software tool called Community Wizard, where you could dial in, say if you lived in San Diego, you could dial into Community Wizard and start to download all the data about how the money worked in San Diego. And what we didn’t realize at the time, because we were just naïve, was that that was illuminating a lot of the black budget fraud that was in the Federal mortgage portfolios. And, for example, when I was Assistant Secretary, I’d get these inventories that said we had 10 buildings on this block and I’d go fly there and I’d go drive by the block, and there’d be no 10 buildings there.

So the problem was when Community Wizard would illuminate you know the databases on what the Federal Government was doing in the mortgage business, and citizens in their community could get those numbers and police them, and see the money contiguous to the world where they walked around and drove around, and the lies came to the fore. …And now wherever I go, I get tremendous and positive response …

… You know, I’m a great believer that centralization is really nowhere near as productive as decentralization.

Advise them to toss money to the plebes in the form of establishing a timebank to localize as an example of community building on the cheap. They can play 'manage the back end of billing/office work' for the local business while taking a small cut and keeping their costs down via Open Source software like Adempiere, Asterisk, Alfresco, the stack that runs TOD - Apache, FreeBSD, PostgreSQL. If they use Terracotta and Eucalyptus along with mesh tech like openmesh - anyplace that has power in the local area can keep up data processing....no wires needed. You can have some "geek" bang out a machine pre-loaded with the business functions and be willing to give 'em away to whomever wants 'em. If they end up not wanting to run the business and have your people do 'em .... you did offer up the tools for free.
It looks like OpenBTS and Android can make your own local cell phone network. (No time to work with that toolchain - my plate is full with FreeBSD/PostgreSQL/Adempiere/Asterisk and learning Terracotta-eculiptus)
Take out the spice of John Robb - http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/ - things like open source DYI tool and die machining and sprinkle that on the mix.

For a location - look for a low spot - AKA where the watershed leads to the location and where you have a water table. Look for rail lines too. (downside - these places are usually developed) Why? So you have potable water and a way to get your refined goods to market.

The below shows the folly of the John Galt "lifeboat" model:
Comments about the "rich" and the latest in computer operated trading....
http://www.metafilter.com/94516/High-frequency-trading-crop-circles
with the winning comment being:
This confirms my suspicion that whatever purpose the markets were originally supposed to serve has been gamed out of existence.
posted by phooky at 8:42 AM on August 7 [17 favorites]
And really - that is what the 'lifeboats' idea becomes.....a gaming out of existence. Without their man-servants and people willing to exchange labor for what 'they have' as wealth - they can not exist. No "lifeboat" can protect you if the government fails as to 'keep your stuff' - you need a 'rule of law' - if things get lifeboat needing, gun toting bad - who's gonna protect your "lifeboat" from someone with guns? Got the ability to keep a .50 cal sniper team from reaching out and touching you - if not better to follow the 'build something local' model so the locals remember you were there before TSHTF.

I tend to agree with Thomas Deplume and Dark Fired Tobacco:

I think that, barring a catastrophe such as a large asteroid or comet strike or all-out nuclear warfare, civilization's adjustment to changing circumstances may be gradual. It may be a series of sharp adjustments punctuated by varying lengths of time in a quasi-stable plateau, and I do not doubt that the adjustment to some new level/paradigm will be painful at times.

Unless a catastrophic event happens...in that case, here is some more DP for your Saturday night.

Some folks spent a considerable part of their lives in a position to be post-catastrophe 'jet-setters'...I never relished the idea:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6347519...

http://www.schouwer-online.de/technik/zivilschutz_atomicattack.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_and_Survive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuity_of_government

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_survivor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_and_Homeland_Security_Pre...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REX-84

I think one important takeaway is that some governments have plans to not go quietly into the night.

Best hopes for an orderly and just transition with the consent of the people...by the people...

I think that we must differentiate between the classes. First we have the "Richer than I am" who live in the gated communities around our cities. Then we have "Richer than those guys" who live in gated, guarded communities such as Aspen, Grosse Point, Camp David, and similar locations. Then we have the 5 per cent of wealthy. These are people like the Bush family who have bought property in remote areas of South America. Then we come to the 1 per centers. These people own property in various locations, but the majority seem to favor the area around Geneva Switz. These of course are not stupid people but people who have prepared for years for the up coming event. So you can be assured that these people and their children will be among the last people standing.

swiz

I'm a member of a pretty well-to-do family. We've sat down and actually talked about having a family "dooms day" retreat should everything go to hell. We came to a few realizations:

-unless it was on an island, no fortified community would be able to withstand the attack of a large gang
-how are we going to "pay" our soldiers? Seriously, money means nothing after the collapse, so why should they do the risky work? Why not do it for themselves and their own families? Chances are, such people would form military colonies/gangs.
-if a woman and her children came to the gates of our community, starving and desperate, none of us would have it in us to turn them away. This becomes a run-away train problem.

Ultimately, we came to conclusion that the community would fail except for a few extraordinary circumstances (ultra-remote and inaccessible geographic location). So, rather than invest in such a community, we decided to invest (a much smaller sum) in self-defense and survival training and some basic supplies with the mindset that, should everything go to hell in a hand-basket, we'd have to blend in with the masses to have any chance of surviving.

I can't foresee any rampaging hordes in the near term, in fact the crime rate has fallen. It gets more difficult to commit a serious crime and get away with it each year. There hasn't even been a major riot in any cities since 1992.

In the U.S. most gated communities aren't very secure at the present, compare gated communities here to those in Brazil, Mexico, or South Africa.

It's going to be okay!

Seriously, you all just need to calm down. It's all going to work out. Repeat after me, "it's going to be okay... it's going to be okay..."

See there, now don't you feel better?

heh...

DD

Back in the 1970's, a friend of mine who has a PHD in psychology was contracted with a group whose task it was study and report on the consequence of millennial change and the impact it would have on societies. His work was financed by the government which had an interest in preparing for the millennia.
To this day, I remember a particular conversation where he advised me that if I wished to become wealthy I should create a survivalist company. He noted that the most striking thing to occur approaching the millennia and shortly after would be a sharp rise in apocalyptic thinking and scenarios, none of which would be well founded.
Since 2000, I have almost lost track of the various scenarios put forth annually, each foretelling the end of civilization as we know it.Here's a brief list: Y2K, HIV, asteroids, bird flu, smallpox, global warming, ozone depletion, Yellowstone Caldera, island collapse in the Canaries causing a massive trans Atlantic tsunami, super hurricanes, massive solar ejection, great GOM methane bubble and financial collapse, to name a few. All of the previously mentioned scenarios have had considerable media coverage with experts from all fields being interviewed and putting forth arguments for concern. These no doubt helped ratings and got some people to prepare for the "end". These scenarios exist in the realm of possible but highly improbable.
The rich are not necessarily intelligent. They only appear intelligent because they have the resources to cover their folly.
WELCOME TO THE MILLENNIUM.

I have been thinking about Peak Oil for 3 years now since reading "The Long Emergency" by Jim Kunstler. One of the problems I have with all the conspiracy theories is the idea that somehow the wealthy are pulling the strings to create the collapse everyone is afraid of. It is beyond me why a wealthy individual would think they would fair better if there were a complete collapse of society because everything we eat and consume is dependent on oil inputs. Unless they create a compound with enough land and people to farm they aren't going to have anything to eat after their supplies run out. Are they really going to be prepared to jump right into organic farming? Are they going to have enough horses and animals to create manure, a seed bank, farm tools, and enough weapons to protect all of this? Why would they even want this?

I personally believe that the best thing we can do individually is to invest in skills such as farming, medicine, basic engineering that will be useful no matter what the future holds. Wall street bankers aren't going to have any of those skills just because they have money.

I also think that in the worst case scenario the pain and suffering is going to start quickly and there will be a lot of people who won't make it. The ones who will have the best chance of survival will be those who have basic supplies of food and water (and yes weapons) to get through the worst initial period quietly and discretely. Being in a gated community or compound would only invite problems in my opinion. After the initial shock wears off then I want to believe that everyone will realize that the only chance for survival is cooperation in the biggest group possible. Money, status, 401Ks and even gold won't mean squat in a situation like that. What you can contribute and your ability to create relationships and alliances would be more important.

Altaira has posted a very serious question, and the photograph at the beginning of the post looks familiar to me. I think the mountain in the distance is Mauna Kea. If I'm not too far afield, this picture is taken from Kohala Mountain, the Northernmost dormant volcano on "The Big Island", Hawai'i.
Frankly, this is where my personal decade-long research of this question of where to find a lifeboat for my family has led. That means that Altaira is starting from a well studied position, and is probably actually in a position to assist and advise the fabulously wealthy. Many of them are already here, or have compounds here, largely on the Kona side.
This island has 170,000 people and the Kona Airport has a whole lot of corporate jets. All the rest of the Hawaiian Islands could fit on Hawai'i, with room to spare. It has steady rains, perfect climate, the cleanest air in the world and pure water. It could grow plenty of food, even without oil, but right now 90% of the food comes in from elsewhere. People here are very accommodating and cooperative.
Many of these responses belittle the possibility of surviving a societal collapse, but it is a very real issue around here, commonly discussed among "ordinary people", many of whom have traveled the world with the military, business, government, or all 3. This island is also the biggest settlement site for the Federal Witness Protection Program.
In summary, I will say that this question isn't going away. It is becoming acute, whether you deny it or try to ignore it, or anything short of suicide. This island is the best place I've found, better than the South Island of New Zealand. My bias is that I'm only fluent in English, and my professional skills and licensing depend on that.
As Altaira works with the very wealthy, she may be of service to them, because they only exist as long as they have servants. She will see those who are intelligent, those that are incompetent, but inherited wealth, and those who are sociopaths. Sociopaths are different, and they exist everywhere. They have no empathy at all, but they are usually good at reading the emotions of others, and anticipating their responses. They are completely untroubled by saying anything that serves their purposes. Guilt is not in them. They are very convincing liars, never hobbled by remorse. The smart ones become kings, and control our population in times such as we are entering. That is their service to the rest of us, to help us kill each other when the food gets short, or oil, whatever.
This is your species. When there is a millinium of women with real education, real choices, and complete control over their own reproductive choices, we will have reduced the sociopath gene pool. For the moment, find a small group that you can trust completely, in a place that you can live year in and year out without oil and electricity, and start figuring out how. You will then be free to help the rest of our species adapt.

I'd suggest reading the 'rich refuge' bit of "World War Z". I think it describes pretty well the perils of conspicuous consumption and mercenaries when things get tough.

Eric,
When I said "possible but highly improbable", I meant to infer that the events were highly improbable to cause the end of civilization, as we know it. Some of the events referenced have already occurred. Y2K, for example, was preceded by dire scenarios of power grids failing, missiles being launched, planes falling from the sky to name a few of the apocalyptic scenarios. Prior to Y2K, bunker communities were built and many people stocked up on food while creating their own shelters. Many hunkered down that New Years Eve, only to find that life goes on.
Yes, social and financial upheavals as well as cataclysms do and have occurred throughout history and many will occur in the future. The Indian Ocean tsunami for all it's biblical proportion and tragedy did not end civilization along the coast. Krakatoa blew in the 1800's, the explosion was heard and felt in London and ash enveloped the sky causing a year without summer in the Northern Hemisphere (England and New York State reported snow in late June) and the loss of crops was great throughout the world. Civilization continued and no one hunkered down. History is replete with natural and man made disasters on a epic scale. Life goes on. Oh blah de, oh blah da.

God. This discussion only reminds me what I dislike about TOD - particularly it's hysterical, survivalist, and of course, male US 'voice'. All this blather about guns and enclaves and me/us against the rest. Too many cliches from disaster movies for my taste. Besides, would I want to live in a world like that posted by so many on here? No. I'd rather die. These are the scenarios of those who have lost something of their humanity - if they ever had it.

If the future isn't about a positive vision, in spite of all the crap coming down, then there's little point continuing and certainly little point of indulging in doomer porn like this.

"Are they moral?" is a question you can only debate when you're not starving or freezing to death.

I'm not sure how useful it is at the moment to try to predict on how it is all going to play out -- or to try to organize yourself for that imagined future. But hey, you might get lucky or turn out to be truly prescient. (Personally, I'm trying to accumulate some useful skills and find a community to integrate that into. ) But that said, taking into account how elites are going to react is important. From the local mechanics of divestment (that is, how the local country commissioners are going to get their hands on your solar panels or rain barrels) all the way up to the global elites that Altaira is talking about. There's a lot to say on that subject, but the one thing I'll chip into this discussion is to note that the elites are as likely to be cutting each others throats (metaphorically and physically) as they are ours. I look at what happened in the Soviet Union in the 1990's, which in some ways was a dry-run for what the early days of collapse could look like. Individuals among the Communist elites had wildly different trajectories afterward depending on all kinds of variables - depending very much on their real control of resources (material, geographical, social, political, etc.) Things re-stabilized before regular people voted with their pitchforks, so the new elites were mostly drawn from the old elites. But like I said, imagining the specifics of our future is tough to do at this juncture.

I don't see how a rich person could pay to have a lifeboat set up and then make use of it in an emergency. Moving away from an urban center to a rural area or small town requires a huge investment in time to get involved and known within a community. I don't think in any emergency situation if the hypothetical banker manages to catch the helicopter that plonks him on his lifeboat, will be able to make a go of things. I know from my limited small town / rural experience (just over 7 months so far..), that everyone knows what everyone is up to especially if there is any significant traffic or construction activity. If there is a hint that this out-of-town rich guy that was delivered by helicopter, has anything useful that he is not willing to share, he will soon lose it.

However I would propose an alternative model:
If I was extremely rich and happy to continue to live in an urban center, I would look out for a close relative or friend (someone I could trust) who was willing to go out and set themselves up in rural area or in or next to a small town (well away from large urban centers). They would have the right to live there for life and be given a share of the property. I would then sponsor this person and their family, to set themselves up properly. They would have to as part of this process get involved and known within the community. They would do so on the understanding that one day I may appear with my family (mistress(es), love-child?) etc. to live with them. Of course being rich, there would be spare bedrooms and enough living space for myself and whatever else I had prepared. Ideally, I would visit the lifeboat and stay for a few weekends a year to make sure everything was proceeding to my satisfaction, I would even try and meet some locals.

I think this alternative could be quite workable, provided there is no serious breakdown in the relationship between the sponsored inhabitants and the rich refugees at the time of the emergency. It's a lot easier to join an existing functioning household than to put together a household where most of the inhabitants are paid employees and have no stake in your survival, outside of financial incentives.

My experience is that most wealthy people got that way by being able to organize people and get them focused on a common goal. These seem like valuable skills in a post apocalyptic world.

I would see the wealthy CEO type ending up like the feudal king living in his castle with his knights and archers manning the walls. He would eventually organize the peasants gathered outside the walls into groups to till the soil, raise the livestock and build shelter necessary for all to survive, including the King.

Even though people may envy the king, there would be no shortage of people willing to live under his influence in return for the stability of its society.

So, how many of you doomsday guys also fell for (or helped generate) the Y2K scare? Or the SARS and flu pandemics?

Seriously, haven't we survived and thrived after a number of economic and political apocalypses over the last 150 years or so? Little things like the US Civil War, WWI in Europe and the brutal after years including the Great Depression, WW2, the "collapse" of the USSR, and a few dozen others? For sure we will run out of oil someday, but to think that oil based energy is the last possible form of energy innovation is laughable at best.

As for the original post, I say if you can make a business claiming you will extract and protect the rich, go for it. Fear sells better than sex and gold - ask any successfully marketed religion. Take the money up front and don't give a single thought on delivering what you promise. Make sure you make an awesome video and PowerPoint presentation for your sales pitch with lots of scary music!

To put it simply and bluntly, there is no reason as it is described in your post that would stop those same blackwater mercenary's or any mercenary's from turning around and killing the people they were supposed to protect and loot their stores if their fears of money having no value comes to pass.
I doubt their psychopathic minds realize that to keep them loyal you need to give them a stake in your survival other then money or what would pass as money at that time.

A billionaire who is smart and does not have the psychopathic mindset that is so useful now in earning such wealth would not only make a compound but make it into a community compound. No not the happy go lucky lets all hold hands idea of some people here who seem to just as equally disregard the negative aspects of human social structure. this community would be made up of the family, extended family, and maybe close friends of those same guards. their jobs would be related to making this community run and of course keeping the billionaire in a semi comfortable life style. this would also ensure the loyalty of those same mercenary's as they now have a good reason to protect him, otherwise their family's would be left to the tender mercy's of the starving masses on the other side of the wall/walls during the die off phase.

A side effect of such a arrangement would be the reemergence of a past social structure that historically was known for it's stability(though yes i admit it was far from completely stable) and fast adaptation compared to modern mass ruled systems that seem rather short sighted and unwilling to adapt to long term situations. but to those of us who grew up in such a mass ruled system would seem rather cruel and unjust.

Well, I've been out irrigating so I'm late to the party.

I think most TODers know I'm a doomer and serious prepper. I believe the most important thing is to "buy time." People who are pushed into making a decision typically make the wrong one. In survival classes the first thing that is taught is to STOP, don't do anything. Just sit there. Then THINK about your situation.

My philosophy has never been to try to become self-sufficient but rather to be able to sit back and observe what is going on. Even a day or week could make a difference. But, the longer the better.

One way you buy time is to be sure your neighbors and friends share your beliefs. I'm in the boondocks and am fortunate that my three neighbors share a concern for the future like mine and are similarly prepared. In other words, relationships are a key component of prepping and survival. We also share a belief in defending our area.

Let me use water as an example. Between us we store about 30,000 gallons of potable water in tanks. We also have two ponds, two wells and two springs. Why the concern about water? Because while you can live without food for a long time, you can't live without water longer than about a week. Water buys time.

We've also reached out to others, although typically without success.

I believe that the best we can do, whether rich or poor, is to at least take the time to think about how things might play out. Yes, it would be nice if people also actually "prepped." And, yes, it is impossible to foresee the future with any accuracy but it is better than being caught totally flatfooted.

I'll close by again mentioning the LDS Preparedness Manual http://www.green-trust.org/freebooks/Preparedness.pdf 200+ pages.

Todd

"Will enclaves of extreme wealth be built on a massive scale? Will they succeed in protecting their inhabitants? Are they “moral?” "
They already are. If adequately armed.Of course not.
In my veiw this is the major motivation for pursuing wealth. The more wealth the more you can remove yourself from certain unplesentries of reality. The U.S. is its own enclave and there are enclaves within enclaves.The U.S. enclave is buttressed with enormous techno military power, equaling all the other nations annual spending combined.The many levels of enclaves within the U.S. are enforced by local police.The more money and power you weild the highr up the enclave ladder you may accend.Stating the obvious here.No enclaves or seprate peace can exist without enforcement.

If the "egalitarian and communitarian minded" can succeed in making the world a better place that would removed the attraction for enclaves and so excesive wealth.

Can we identify forces that would send societies one direction or another, and places more or less likely to take a particular path?

The forces i see come from within, the different aspects of human nature. Its simplistic but the lizard man vs. the noble man.These two men live in all of us somtimes the lizard gets his way and somtimes the noble, often a compromise.Many times what looks noble is just the lizard in disguise.
IMO the lizard is far more powerfull and most often the noble is only allowed to act with the lizards permission, that is if a display is made of it and others can say "oh look how noble he is"

Vanity is fundamental

I've thought about this a bit before. If we really face a collapse of civilization like this, I'd place my money on the already homeless having an overall greater chance of survival. Partly through sheer numbers, and partly because they are already living on edge and would not need much of a period to learn and adapt. Although I don't blame the super-rich trying to maximize their chances of success, this tends to be much more of an abstract thought experiment for them especially if they aren't first generation wealth. I'm sure its better for them than not planning at all, and I'm sure some hording of resources will help in some short term ways. But if we are facing a genuine civilization collapse, short term survival, while necessary isn't going to be sufficient for ultimate survival.

Instead of trying to build a "separate peace", I think it would probably make better sense to plan for a nomadic lifestyle. We are after all still genetically rooted as a hunter/gatherer species. Building "a separate peace" would really be more like a vain attempt to maintain a lifestyle which would have already been selected against in such a situation. Indeed, I think anyone trying to bunker down like that would simply be delaying their embrace of the kind of change and flexibility that such a
new world order would demand and would hence be actually lowering their longterm chances for survival.

I'd also point out that humans are successful as a species largely due to their hypersociality and anyone attempting to maintain an alienation based on the social stratification of a dying civilization are more likely to find themselves alienated from the kind of cooperation necessary for them to share in the long term survival of their own species. Certainly the collapse of previous civilizations ought to be somewhat instructive. Its always the barbarian hordes who take over, so if you really want you and yours to ultimately survive you'd probably better figure out a way to join them much sooner rather than later. Too much of this separate peace will ultimate leave you imprisoned in a dead-end obsolescence of your own making.

crossposted:
http://www.churchofvirus.org/bbs/index.php?board=69&action=display&threa...

whether it might be smart of me to acquiesce, and position myself for the “inside” rather than the “outside” of the walls being built.

If you wouldn't trust these billionaires now why would you trust them after collapse?

Such "retreats" do work now in places like Mexico, Pakistan and the USA. The wealthy live behind walls and in gated communities. In the end, however, nothing is defensible forever. Siege tactics, poison gasses, missiles change the equation. As for Blackwater (et. al) mercenaries, well, loyalty isn’t their strong suit, eh? They’ll go whichever way the wind blows.

Bottom line? It’s not the middle ages. All the wealthy have purchased in a "retreat" is a false sense of security.

That being said, I understand feeling the need to prepare against the unprepared. If I have my nice sustainable cottage in the woods set up ahead of time, I won’t welcome the starving hoards breaking into my larder either (which they will if they discover it). Does this show contempt, or a desire to survive? Should I simply give all I have away so that people who watched American Idol until the end can live another day?

As for the wealthy taking “direct control” of resources, I wouldn’t worry too much. These guys trained in an environment very different from that which will exist in a collapsing society. Don’t fear them. Fear your local sheriff, your local national guard commander, or the local motorcycle “club.” The rich fellow with the doomstead in upstate new york won’t last long against the local national guard with working military weapons operated by war vets. The grass roots leader with links to his local society and can sustain himself with local resources is the person to fear.

A more pertinent question I have about certain sets of the uber-rich:

How do they survive now?

I honestly wonder that the Wal-Mart heirs, the investment bankers of Wall Street, and people associated with AIG, Goldman Sachs, or banks like Citibank and Bank of America can live safely. I assume some of these people have guards, but on the other hand I think most of the people with $10 million plus don't continuously watch their backs. We have 9%+ unemployment with underemployment even higher, and to the extent there is fault it's pretty clear where it lies. I am amazed every day that no violence occurs. It simply does not happen. The high level bankers and CEOs live safely in our society.

The question I have is at what point do the elites have to worry about a peasant uprising? At what point do the bankers have to worry about kidnapping or assassination?

I think this is the question before all the other questions. If they don't have to worry, they don't need a lifeboat. If they do have to worry, I'm fairly sure no lifeboat will save them. For the most public members of the elite, a sudden collapse will mean near certain death as it meant to Marie Antoinette or the Romanovs. For the less public, minor elite, perhaps a "lifeboat" enclave can work.

I imagine the Romanovs thought they were safe up to the point they found out that there was nowhere they could run to. The same scenario seems likely with the elites of today; if a collapse or violent revolution occurs, I imagine they won't have the time or ability to get away. I do not think these forces are really predictable on a "useful" scale. In hindsight, it's obvious that Russia would have a revolution, but on the other hand, it's didn't happen 20 years earlier or happen after World War II, instead it came in 1917. In the fantasy of the "lifeboat", the elite escape just in the nick of time, but in reality, by the time it's realized that there is real danger it is already too late.

Speaking out loudly and clearly about what appears to exist, but is everywhere denied, cannot wait. We cannot address human-driven global challenges that knowledgeable people willfully deny to discuss. It seems to me that the children deserve more and much better than they are getting from my not-so-great generation of elders.

Somehow all of us have to help one another more adequately see how the world we inhabit actually works and, as important, how the human species more realistically fits into the natural order of living things.

As things stand now, many too many leaders are adamantly advocating and recklessly behaving as if the planetary home in which we live so well is an unbounded cornucopia and the human community has ‘inalienable rights’ to endlessly plunder its natural resources; relentlessly overproduce unnecessary stuff and pollute it; and righteously propagate more billions of the human species on Earth without regard to its actual size, its frangible ecology and its evident finiteness. Leaders are living fantasy-driven lifestyles and misguidedly expanding the global economy to the point of its unsustainability… come what may for the children, coming generations, life as we know it, and the Earth as a fit place for human habitation.

Never in the course of human events has a single generation commandeered so much for itself, left so little for others, and committed such widespread destruction on Earth. One generation appears to be destroying the very things it claims to be most ardently protecting and preserving.

Perhaps necessary change toward sustainability is in the offing.

I'm not sure what is meant by this "rich getaway strategy." I would think these situations to be so unique so as to not really be comparable as some kind of classifiable scenario.

I'd rather hijack the thread and discuss the growing polarization likely to take place when more have-nots realize they are subsidizing a world created for petroleum-powered personal-passenger vehicles.

The biggest threat to my quality of life is the rich and powerful perverting our government and our market system to consume as many and as much resources as possible.

Right now, the discretionary use of personal passenger vehicles and the costs in sustaining the infrastructure required for their operations is the greatest waste of wealth and resources humanity is likely to ever experience.

As more people find the obvious economic burdens associated with discretionary passenger car use beyond their economic means they may eventually understand the latent effects that maintaining the "fake-marketability of automobile ownership. There is another coming social divide. And its likely to take the form of "car people" against the "Peak Oil" nuts.

Maybe the descendants of these elites will become the "Eloi", and the descendants of the rest of us will become the "Morlocks".

At least our descendants will get to eat their descendants. Serves them right.

I don't know if anyone has posted it yet, but I am reminded of an article from a few years ago, about Richard Rainwater, "The Rainwater Prophecy."

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/26/8364646/

Rainwater's approach was to basically integrate himself into small town life in a farming community in the Carolinas. I do think that there is a sort of stealth migration going on, where wealthier people are moving to smaller communities in agricultural areas.

Great topic. I had no idea that many of the uber-wealthy are apparently just as worried as the "crazy" survivalists. As for whether their strategy will work, my guess is that it generally will. There is already plenty of precedent. Just look at any third world nation, where people are starving on the streets, but the wealthy manage to maintian their swimming pools behind gated compounds.
The unfortunate fact is that the majority of people fail to prepare for events like peak oil. Those who were unwilling to prepare individually or collectively later expect the "wealthy" to save the day. (By the way, the "wealthy" might one day include you if you have a few spare cans of beans). I'm not arguing against collective effort - that is almost certainly what the wealthy are doing. They are probably seeking out areas and forming networks where they will collectively interact and maintain the best life they can under the new circumstances. The wealthy who are preparing are really no different than the rest of us who are preparing - they are just doing it on a grander scale.
There is always disapproval that the wealthy should be doing more for the rest of us. OK, what are we doing to include the third world masses, or those who couldn't care less, in our own PO preparation plans? I personally don't begrudge anyone their money as long as it was earned legitimately. If people (not just the wealthy) are earning money unethically then IMO it's better to focus on stopping the means of theft rather than hating the thief.

I just read the economic stats of Greece:
economy in 2010 projected to be down with 4%,
1 out of 6 shops in Athens foreclosed,
industrial production went down by 4,5%
energy production went down by 10,5%
The rich can't hide for a doom scenario,
but they sure can resist to economic crises, better than people without financial buffers
they can buy solar panels and electric vehicles, and still travel to their job.

The wealthy are in a better position than poor people to prep.

But as for a separate peace??

I guess anything is possible. But we have to take responsibility for the world we have created. Specifically the world 'the rich' have created through their manipulation of the politicians they buy.

Remember the craze for corporate takeovers back in the 80's and 90's? A few got rich while they dismantled companies and sold them off...at the expense of the workers on the assembly lines who lost their jobs.

Fast forward to 2010 and greed, Wall street and corrupt power hungry politicians are still destroying the USA.

Now they want to get a golden parachute from it all?

I don't think the rich are planning on doing all their own grunt work in their compounds. Are they planning on having their families do all the dirty work?

For once they bring in hired help (what they going to pay them with...worthless toilet paper?) Their security risk skyrockets! Once they pay them in gold or silver, the gold sickness will push the workers to want it all!

No, peace is hard to buy no matter how much $$ you throw at it.

Here is an interesting article "The Myth of Self Reliance"

http://www.patternliteracy.com/selfreliancemyth.html

Even though being 100% self sufficient is near impossible. We can work towards preparedness for a variety of possibilities to make us more comfortable if and when trouble strikes.

For survival is also about comfort...we try to be as comfortable as possible in uncomfortable circumstances. And if we get too uncomfortable we die!

But, rich or poor, survivalist or sheeple...we ALL have to come outside once in a while to deal with the rest of the world we have created.

Do the highly ambitious and wealthy have a different understanding of “human nature” than the more egalitarian and communitarian minded? Are these different views the result of scientific understanding of human nature or from whom one tends to associate with?..

A politician's only concern is how much money can I make, how much power can I grab, who can I fudge next and how can I stay in power until they wheel me out after I take my last breath!

Questions of social ethics don't go very far in DC. Social ethics and capitalism just don't mix. They are like trying to mix oil and water. Lets take a look at on highly capitalistic company Monsanto for the low down on how capitalism works.

Monsanto engaged in "outrageous" behavior by releasing tons of carcinogenic PCBs into the city of Anniston and covering up its actions for decades Monsanto's internal memos stated "...we can't afford to lose one dollar over this."

Any social ethics here? Any ethical behavior? Even a smidgen of humanity? The health of a community is not even worth a lousy buck? (see paragraph 11)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A54914-2002Feb22?language=printer

Well, why should it be any other way to a capitalistic system? Especially one where the politicians can be bribed to only pass legislation to benefit the rich?

Money is god to a capitalist, so the more money one makes, the closer one gets to their idea of heaven. Social ethics cost money and capitalists can't even afford to spend a buck on social ethics.

And in the big picture, even if Monsanto did not break the law, why would they be accountable to lose profits to fund social ethics? They are a public company and their job is to make profits for their shareholders and give obscene paychecks to their execs.

But, capitalists do have some use for socialism. When they are losing money, ready to go bust, they like to socialize their loses to the taxpayer so they can keep reaping the profits as they rape the society that supports them.

The other questions in the OP sound like they come from some academic writing a term paper.

Sure there are all sorts of degrees of prep work. I would not get stuck in writing about preps...I'd get going doing some work in that area.

Here is a list of things that pose danger to our world as we know it.

While it has not been publicized much, the trend is for life expectancy for Americans to decline.

We have a corrupt and out of control government. Massive amount of US jobs and the cushy middle-class lifestyle of many Americans are vanishing.

So, even without any of our SHTF scenarios coming to fruition - 'just living life' can be quite a survival feat nowadays in our world that is quickly decomposing before our very eyes.

Besides Peak Oil, Peak Food, Peak Water, Peak NG, Peak Uranium, Overpopulation and a poisonous polluted world we have created here is a list of threats facing humans from S.R.T.

One person on another forum made a joke about some of the threats. My job is not to censure this list, but I just put it out as one compilation of things one might prepare for. You decide what may apply to you.

...but bear in mind what my survival mentor says: "to prepare for the unthinkable one must first think the unthinkable."

NATURAL THREATS
Natural Disasters on and from the Earth
Short Term and Regional
-Severe Storms, Wind, Lightening
-Hurricanes, Typhoons, Cyclones, Superstorms
-Tornados
-Tsunami/Tidal Waves
-Floods
-Fires - Forest/Brush
-Landslides
-Sinkholes
-Drought (Dust Bowl)
-Earthquake
-Volcano
-Animal caused famine (ie. locusts)
-Disease, Plague, Pandemics coming from nature (ie. bird flu)
Long Term / Climate Change
-Global Warming
-Ice Caps Melting, Oceans rising
-Ozone Loss/UV Damage
-Gulf stream changes, climate shift
-Global Cooling/Ice Age
-Global Pole Shift
Natural Disasters from Beyond the Earth and not caused by man
-Asteroid or Comet Impact
-Black Holes/Worm Holes
-Solar Flares/Coronal Ejections/Gamma Burst
-Alien Invasion, non-intelligent (Andromeda Strain, virus, bacteria)
-Alien Invasion intelligent life (War of the Worlds Scenario)
-Religious End of the World (Anti-Christ, Second Coming, etc.)
MAN MADE THREATS
Man-made Accidental Disasters
-Nuclear Reactor Disaster
-Chemical Disaster
-Biological Disaster
-Fires
-Grid failures, failures in technology that bring down services
-Climate change caused by mankind
-Genetic Engineering gone wrong GMO fears
-Nanobots gone wrong the gray goo, replicants, Blob scenario
-Artificial computers smarter than man Cylons, Terminator
Wars, Acts of Terrorism (Intentional Acts)
-Nuclear weapons
-Biological Weapons (small pox, anthrax, ricin, etc.)
-Chemical Weapons (never gas, mustard gas etc.)
-Conventional explosives/weapons
-Cyber attack attack by software control
-Individual levels such as identity theft
-"Fire sale" attacks which bring down the grid
-EMP attack or anything that takes out electronic hardware, computers
Government, Economic
-Progressive Loss of Freedoms to Individuals
-Big Brother fears, NAIS for humans, implanted micro-chips
-Economic Collapse breakdowns, depression, hyper-inflation
-Social or Government Collapse/Revolution
-World socialism, World Government take over, World Dictator
-Conspiracy theories coming true
-Corporate controlled World

In fact, it might be an indication that we are nearing the crisis state when world government is successful in outlawing the private ownership of firearms and confiscation thereof....

When firearms go...all goes

The writing is on the wall. All guns must be confiscated before the class wars get out of hand. As the disparity between the rich and poor escalate, the poor will start class wars as they have done throughout history when he rich crowd out their very survival through greed.

The poor have no other alternative-do they? The rich control the gov and only pass legislation to benefit the rich.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_conflict

I read some town in OH banned trash picking. If your caught digging through the trash you can be fined $500 or jailed for 30 days. People that trash pick generally are not rich. They do it trying to survive. Now the local gov has taken away the unemployed's last hopes for honest work of some sort. What is left for them to do to try and eat?

Seems to be many such trends chipping away at our very survival before the SHTF comes knocking at our door. So even if none of our SHTF scenarios come to fruition, living life itself can be a survival feat nowadays. Just look at the Individual Mandate the gov has proposed to fine the poor for not being able to afford health insurance.

I talked with a trash man the other day. I noticed he was working all alone and asked where his buddy was. He said his company keeps downsizing the crew. His trash crew used to consist of a driver and 2 men to load. Then it was cut back to a driver and a loader. Now he does it all - he drives, gets out and loads the trash then back in and drives on.

I asked if the company was worried about burning him out in the icy winter and humid summers. He said there is a line of guys a mile long waiting to take his place when he can't do it any longer. I guess if the trash company could do it by robots they would cut him out as well.

Another guy I talked with said his company converted a lot of the workforce to part time, so they did not have to offer benefits.

A lady mental health therapist said her firm was trying to encourage the higher paid senior therapists to leave, so they could replace them with younger therapists that are paid much less and can be worked longer hours.

The other day I called up toll free directory to find an 800 number. In the old days a live person answered the phone. then they got rid of most of the people and a computer answered the phone. If the computer didn't work, you had the option to talk with a live operator. Now you just talk with the computer and if the computer fails, they just refer you to their website and have dumped all live help.

I'm sure we have all talked with some workers in India trying to figure out some customer service problem we are having.

And it is not just the low paying jobs heading to India. A radiologist told me that the trend is to send the Xrays to India now via facsimile for the Indian MD's to read. Just takes few seconds to export them...so why not save hundreds of dollars so the healthcare industry can make more profits?

Even the poor parking lot attendants are not secure to make min wage. The trend is computerized self serve and dump the gate attendant.

I guess it all started back in the 70's, when China opened up and the turbo capitalist realized how much more money they could make by dumping the US workers and shipping production overseas. Maybe that was the deal Nixon made? You (China) stop trying to take over the world with communism and we will buy your crap so your people can eat?

...and pretty soon we will all be eating chicken from china.

http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUSN0143846720080201

(Actually you are probably eating Chinese chicken right now. The gov enacted a law that does not mandate country of origin data for ingredients that have been processes. Your fast food chicken parts can come from ANYPLACE!)

Guns are a populations last line of defense. Look at Afghanistan...they beat Russia with guns. And the US is still having trouble with 'the people' there from their guns. Let's look at what happens when a country has no guns. Burma was a recent example of what happens. A dictator comes to power with plenty of guns, but when it comes to the populace...they cannot be trusted with guns.

This quote was attributed to George Washington but other authorities say it is a counterfeit quote. Whomever said it...it is gospel.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon, and citizen's firearms are indelibly related. From the moment the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference; they deserve a place of honor with all that's good. When firearms go, all goes; we need them every hour."

If the future isn't about a positive vision, in spite of all the crap coming down, then there's little point continuing and certainly little point of indulging in doomer porn like this....

There is no such thing as negative or positive attitudes. What is viewed as negative to one person may be viewed as positive to another.

There are no such things as 'opinionated' - 'provocative' 'controversial' subjects.

These are only subjective and prejudicial states of mind.

Russell Cromwell tells us - "With the same material one man builds a palace and another only a hovel." So we must allow people to build as they choose.

If one sticks to: true, false or don't know in one's replies they can avoid this trap by arguing facts and not personalities.

Those that can't argue facts argue personalities.

Psychologist William James once said, "A great many people believe they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."

No doubt there are some preppers that do it as a hobby to kill time. You see it a lot with the folks putting all their effort into a B.O.B.

People being what they are, they like to work in a direction that gives them power, even if it is a small amount.

You see the same work with the religious devotees that pray to their gods to fix it all.

Mankind is predisposed to create gods...148 pages of them. roughly 5756 gods!

http://www.godfinder.org/

The majority of people run their life by wishful thinking and delusions. One poll said 98% of the people believe in a god, karma or an afterlife. Yet there has never been a shred of proof to support any of these theories.

But, getting back to our world instead of religion...we're doing something near to impossible, which is to predict the future. Tons of IF's, AND's and BUT's that could happen. We just don't know.

As futurists we try to anticipate future events and the direction the world is headed in and as survivalists we try to prepare for those circumstances.

Whenever you are confused, always look at the trend.

Things can go in 3 directions...get better...get worse...stay frozen.

This helps remove some of that confused or wishful thinking and can help settle the war raging on in your head.

But, this tool has to be used for the general US outlook to be effective.

For instance say your a rich banker and you just got your bonus of 5,000,000 dollars which is 1,000,000 more than last year. The question does not apply to your life getting better. It applies to ALL of America.

As I said, we all have to go outside in the sometimes and deal with what we have created.

None of us will be ultimate survivors, we all have to die one day. But the successful survivor extends his or her life beyond an earlier death...a death that was caused by ignorance of how to make that life last longer.

An engaging post.

it is all the stuff of science fiction really. I admire the people who are selling this stuff as it really just plays to the egos of the supposed "elites." It is like offering them immortality of a sort. In a way it is also the ultimate expression of the self-centered nature of the elites at this point in time. They want to believe that they are somehow beyond the system. Their unique and special nature has endowed them with their wealth and their special souls will continue to exist even once the system collapses.

As has been discussed above, the fact is that a crisis as vast as we are considering will inevitably break down many of the relationships that we take for granted.

In some ways I think it is hilarious that these people think that they will sit in these bunkers and, I guess, trade stocks with other people in other bunkers. It is again a sign of how far removed from reality our "leaders: have become. They have confused the "game" of the market with the reality of people actually working and creating value.

Speaking as a non-rich suburbanite: it is in my interest that you have some food and water stored up. The more other people have stocked up, the less I need to share and the more secure I am in my own supplies. Please have enough for your family/friends during the initial weeks of a large natural disaster. An earthquake here in CA will leave us isolated for several weeks; any rural retreat is useless in this situation given expected road wreckage. An even larger stash could serve you well during the initial throes of your hypothesized unfolding social disorder, giving you the freedom to react in a more thoughtful way to events as they unfold. I believe you can do quite well in a residential home, an old fashioned lot of a quarter acre being space enough for food and water storage (see Art Ludwigs book and other resources on ferrocement tanks). For those seriously concerned about these issues, I don't understand why you do not already have rooftop solar panels.

Really interesting and disturbing article - thank you.
The answer to your enquiry lies for me in an interesting place: that is community. For no matter how wealthy these people are, the life they live post-collapse will be a miserable, lonely and possibly terrifying one that will also be short-lived - unless their plan for the futire includes a community of people with a wide range of releevnt skills.
ironically - and perhaps luckily for them - there are a large number of these type of skilled people wishing to meet people with the resources to create such a life boat together.
If, as a consultant, your approach was to connect these high net worth people with the people that could collaborate with them to create an empowered community - then you would be doing a great job...rather them how to create luxury fortresses!
good luck!

Under current operating procedures, accumulating money tokens is presumed to imbue the holder with power and prestige.

After a collapse, without a marketplace willing to exchange those money tokens, holders of great wealth are no longer safe and secure.

In fact, the ones with the greatest prosperity will be those who can generate a surplus of usable goods and services, transport, trade and enjoy them.

For long term prosperity, and a refuge from money - madness, folks might consider building fortified villages, with enough diversity of skills and productive capacity to ensure their needs are fulfilled at lowest cost in resources, fuel, and transportation.

One possible refuge is the dual ring village:
http://www.ozmirage.org/anic/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=6

Oh, puhleeez. People, get a freakin clue. Do you think YOU owning a widder biddy machine gun is going to put a dent in the hierarchic system of civilisation? Are you daft and stupid? WHERE did the brass for the cartridge come from - oh, THAT'S RIGHT - a mine. And do you think people worked in that mine because they thought it was a cool idea? Hell no! They worked in the mine because they saw few if any other option. So, does using a gun alter the underlying social structure of power and domination? No.

So, GET OVER IT. The rich WILL have a separate peace, and they will do it with your willful acquiescence. How do I know this? Because you YES YOU are a bunch of gutless losers who can't even stop Google from carving up the internet, much less some rich families carving up your country in their own interests.

There are Larrys Moes and Curlies.

Moes run the show. They are the dicks who run the show. They own you. They are contemptible assholes who should be strung up tomorrow. But they won't because the Larrys are too stupid and the Curlies are too confused to do anything about it. They larrys go die in the wars the Moes start, and do it happily because they are stupid. Curlies also go die in the wars, but they do it unwillingly, because they don't trust the Moes.

And when your sorry excuse of a civilisation can be analysed as an analogue of the Three Stooges, you people are SCREWED. Me? I don't care. I don't practice what I preach, because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to.