2 ms·

Who would want to? Seriously. I wouldn't. This is what amuses me about doomsday preppers. I'm like: what are you really preparing for? Like that's just somethi

by jmyeet 5y ago

Who would want to? Seriously. I wouldn't. This is what amuses me about doomsday preppers. I'm like: what are you really preparing for? Like that's just something I'd never want to be right about to justify the time and expense of prepping. And for what? To live a little longer in a post-armageddon world? Yeah that's a pass.

prawn 5y ago
I think a lot of people like the idea of upheaval and a fresh challenge. For some, the daily grind doesn't play to their advantages whereas maybe apocalyptic survival of brawn does. I imagine the reality would never be the adventurous romp they expect when tinned food dwindles and plants aren't producing because temperatures have dropped... Probably also depends on the scale. There's the $x00k bunker with air/water filtration and shelves of long-life food, or there's stashing some tins and having a rough idea of where you might go if it came to it. The TV show Last Man On Earth does make it look kind of fun (no radiation, no zombies)...
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  Last Man on Earth works because most people died very quickly and there's no competition for the remaining resources. Post-nuclear war would be absolute hell. If you don't die of starvation you'll probably be murdered.
  - prawn 5y ago
    Yes. Probably more realistic to watch The Road unfortunately...
elihu 5y ago
It really depends on what kind of scenario we're talking about. At the moment in time someone is affected by a nuclear blast in their vicinity, it's unlikely that person knows what else is going on in the world. A nuclear blast is bad, but how bad are things globally? No way of knowing, really, at least for awhile. Maybe most of the nukes targeted at your country were duds. Maybe they were never launched. Maybe some were intercepted. If one could survive just by hiding under thick materials for a week or two then travel to an unaffected city, I think a lot of people would prefer that if they knew it was an option.

by jmyeet 5y ago

prawn 5y ago

I think a lot of people like the idea of upheaval and a fresh challenge. For some, the daily grind doesn't play to their advantages whereas maybe apocalyptic survival of brawn does. I imagine the reality would never be the adventurous romp they expect when tinned food dwindles and plants aren't producing because temperatures have dropped... Probably also depends on the scale. There's the $x00k bunker with air/water filtration and shelves of long-life food, or there's stashing some tins and having a rough idea of where you might go if it came to it. The TV show Last Man On Earth does make it look kind of fun (no radiation, no zombies)...

micromacrofoot 5y ago
Last Man on Earth works because most people died very quickly and there's no competition for the remaining resources. Post-nuclear war would be absolute hell. If you don't die of starvation you'll probably be murdered.
- prawn 5y ago
  Yes. Probably more realistic to watch The Road unfortunately...

elihu 5y ago

It really depends on what kind of scenario we're talking about. At the moment in time someone is affected by a nuclear blast in their vicinity, it's unlikely that person knows what else is going on in the world. A nuclear blast is bad, but how bad are things globally? No way of knowing, really, at least for awhile. Maybe most of the nukes targeted at your country were duds. Maybe they were never launched. Maybe some were intercepted. If one could survive just by hiding under thick materials for a week or two then travel to an unaffected city, I think a lot of people would prefer that if they knew it was an option.