4 ms·

To shake this kind of feeling, I like to "calculate" how things should go wrong for the worst case scenario to realize: if there aren't enough steps, I know wha

To shake this kind of feeling, I like to "calculate" how things should go wrong for the worst case scenario to realize: if there aren't enough steps, I know what to work on, but usually it really makes me realize that I've built enough safety nets. E.g.: right now, there are two possibilities: that I get laid off, or not. If not, everything good. If yes, there are two possibilities: that I find a job in a month or less, or not. If yes, all good. If not, I still have 2 months of savings that I can easily spread to 4 months reducing all accessories expenses. Is it enough time? If yes, all good, if not, I can buy other 6 months selling assets. Are they enough? If yes, all good, if not, I have different layers of social nets that can help me (I am not going in details here, but I have at least other 5 steps before becoming homeless, and all of them have a very low probably of failure, barring a nuclear war). So, the worst case scenario is less probable that being hit by a car while going to my current job, so not really something I should worry about

enneff 4y ago
This is a great approach. Planning out the worst case scenario is a great way to deal with rational anxiety.
globalise83 4y ago
worst case scenario is less probable that being hit by a car while going to my current job And even in that case it may be possible to buy insurance against the consequences. For example, if I am hit by a car and cannot work again, I get paid an inflation-linked sum of around 60% of my salary until my retirement date.
jacknews 4y ago
All well and good unless your 'worst case' is only a step or two away, which look plausible or even probable.
- rpadovani 4y ago
  True, but then you can build an action plan. And, OP says > I have more than a couple years worth of savings. They are definitely not a step or two away from the worst case
trashtester 4y ago
> I like to "calculate" how things should go wrong for the worst case scenario I like to calculate, too. When I bought my house, it was just far enough from the closest large city that I would probably survive if that city was hit by a typical thermonuclear bomb.... ;)
- whiplash451 4y ago
  You might want to update your model based on the latest bombs’ radius of impact. And conclude that you are safe nowhere. Literally.
  - trashtester 4y ago
    > You might want to update your model based on the latest bombs The "latest bomb" hasn't changed significantly in the last 50 years. Typical Russian strategic warheads that are actually deployed are between 250KT and 1MT. While they CAN make bigger warheads, those are not deployed in large numbers. There is also the Poseidon class nuclear torpedo (with a 100MT warhead), but I don't think my location is a very likely target for that. If you haven't seen it already, this site has a rough simulation of how far you need to be from a nuke detonation site to suffer various effects: https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ > And conclude that you are safe nowhere. Literally. I didn't say safe. I said, if one bomb detonates in the nearest city, I'm more likely to live than not (as in >50% chance to survive the blast itself).
- fragmede 4y ago
  In the event of a nuclear holocaust, the lucky ones die in the initial blast, so you may want to move closer in
  - trashtester 4y ago
    You do what is right for you. Anyway, my thinking didn't only consider a holocaust. The bomb could be part of a limited exchange, or it could be a terrorist attack.

enneff 4y ago

This is a great approach. Planning out the worst case scenario is a great way to deal with rational anxiety.

globalise83 4y ago

worst case scenario is less probable that being hit by a car while going to my current job And even in that case it may be possible to buy insurance against the consequences. For example, if I am hit by a car and cannot work again, I get paid an inflation-linked sum of around 60% of my salary until my retirement date.

jacknews 4y ago

All well and good unless your 'worst case' is only a step or two away, which look plausible or even probable.

rpadovani 4y ago
True, but then you can build an action plan. And, OP says > I have more than a couple years worth of savings. They are definitely not a step or two away from the worst case

trashtester 4y ago

> I like to "calculate" how things should go wrong for the worst case scenario I like to calculate, too. When I bought my house, it was just far enough from the closest large city that I would probably survive if that city was hit by a typical thermonuclear bomb.... ;)

whiplash451 4y ago
You might want to update your model based on the latest bombs’ radius of impact. And conclude that you are safe nowhere. Literally.
- trashtester 4y ago
  > You might want to update your model based on the latest bombs The "latest bomb" hasn't changed significantly in the last 50 years. Typical Russian strategic warheads that are actually deployed are between 250KT and 1MT. While they CAN make bigger warheads, those are not deployed in large numbers. There is also the Poseidon class nuclear torpedo (with a 100MT warhead), but I don't think my location is a very likely target for that. If you haven't seen it already, this site has a rough simulation of how far you need to be from a nuke detonation site to suffer various effects: https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ > And conclude that you are safe nowhere. Literally. I didn't say safe. I said, if one bomb detonates in the nearest city, I'm more likely to live than not (as in >50% chance to survive the blast itself).
fragmede 4y ago
In the event of a nuclear holocaust, the lucky ones die in the initial blast, so you may want to move closer in
- trashtester 4y ago
  You do what is right for you. Anyway, my thinking didn't only consider a holocaust. The bomb could be part of a limited exchange, or it could be a terrorist attack.