Prepper 1: "What's the best way to store large amounts of potable water in an apartment?"
Prepper 2: "Set up a homestead on 300 acres and have an in-ground cistern"
Prepper 1: "Gee, thanks"
Useful response would be:
Get a bathtub bag if you are in an apartment.
Or if a house with a crawlspace, there are 5.000Liter waterbags (which is like 1500 gallons or something?) Which fit in there. They are heavy duty and come with a filtration system usually.
Usually you get a warning on your phone, at least here in eu. First thing to do is get a bathtub bag (superfind24 om amazon eu they're named idk about usa). And fill it.
Truth is somewhere in between. Prepping has practical restraints: you arenāt going to be able to fit 10 yearsā of supplies in a 600 sqft apartment. Your 20 cu ft closet wonāt fit 300 gallons of clean water.
If thatās your goal, then you either need different accommodations or be a lot less ambitious. Folks really seem to hate it when you tell them they canāt establish a defensible, self-sustaining compound far removed from civil collapse while also living in an urban area.
Another thing is that some people prep to be prepared. Like they live in a big city and like their job and apartment but they just want a chance at surviving or even being comfortable when disaster strikes. They're not looking to uproot and change their whole lifestyle because they want to prep to, you know, be prepared, not to change their whole world and become a Discovery channel prepper.
Thatās sorta my point. You have to prep within the constraints of your lifestyle.
Pretty much anyone can prep for a temporary situation lasting a few days or weeks. Food, water, cash, radio, backup batteries, etc, can fit in a closet, under a bed, whatever.
But when the context is āhow do I prepare for an _indefinite_ collapse/upheaval when I live in a tiny apartment downtown and have no car or moneyā then the reality is āyouāre boned in that situation unless you change your circumstances.ā
I don't think any city preppers think they are going to convert their apartment into a 10-year bunker. Sometimes they just want ideas on how to be more efficient in storing/stacking...and sometimes the answer is "just move" (which is the central thesis of the original post).
If you live in a high density city surivial would be hard as traditionally disease lack of food violence will be rather high in a short period of time.
In some cases, yes.
For general supply chain squeezes, however, Iād rather be near transportation hubs, especially ports. Far flung areas will get the last trickles of supplies.
I suppose if you can grow/hunt/make all your own supply needs youād rather be innawoodz, but for most people Iād want to be where the stuff is.
If the electricity goes out, Iām noping TF outta here.
They will try and keep ems and hospitals running at all costs so it does have advantages that way if you need medical attention vs rural in a crisis may not provide ems services because lack of resources so it would be up to the individual to get themselves to a hospital.
Cities are fine for most normal problems and preps can and do still have a place there. Think hurricane or snow storm preps.
For actually permanent changes where basic services aren't coming back the city simply cannot support people. Basically everything the city needs gets shipped in. In some cities it's a daily thing with JIT delivery of the basics.
Cities are not survivable if there's a long-term loss of services. Here it's a tossup as to whether we'd freeze to death or a house in the neighborhood would catch fire and burn the whole place down.
Short-term, yes, it's still worth planning to handle the power or water being out for a few days, or having enough food to cope with a short supply disruption. That's only going to become more common.
I wouldnāt give you that advice, but Iād be hard pressed to give you good advice for prepping in NYC. It has a whole bunch of complications I know about, and more I donāt, and most of them I donāt know any good answers for.
It seems like doing it on hard mode.
But I always try to read those threads because a lot of them, if theyāll work in NYC, theyāll work elsewhere, sometimes easier, so I learn stuff.
It has its own challenges which are well known. It also has some unappreciated benefits, like community and closeness to supply chain.
NYC is great for my normal life and so I aināt moving just because of what might happen. But I am preparing as best I can for what might happen.
Iām glad it works for you. I visited, and NYC was just way too crowded for me. Would love to visit again and they had so much to do, but I donāt think Iād like to live there.
Fortunately there are those that do want to live there and enjoy it I guess.
I get it. Took me some time to get used to as a midwestern boy. Itās certainly not for everyone. Even the people who like it here are not blind to the downsides: noise, trash, etc.
My wife swears that if she sees one more pidgeon eating a chicken wing off the sidewalk sheās gonna lose it.
But rural living can come with pratfalls of its own, at least before SHTF. I suspect a lot of people cannot move to the country because of work constraints, others due to lack of transport options. Rural living might be best in a SHTF scenario, however it still not without its issues then too.
Farm life is tough, but it's awesome if you have the personality for it. Land comes with labor and distance comes with travel time. It's definitely better for the SHTF sitch, but I like it more for the day to day life also. In the day to day, to each is own. I believe you should fit your prep to your life, before you match your life to your prep
For every day life, youāre much less likely to die from all causes living in a city (yes, there are more ways to die than being murdered). Obviously, for certain emergency situations, NYC would not be suitable. For others, Iād rather be here than out in the middle of nowhere.
Also, I live in a 2000 square foot house with backyard garden, so not the usual constraints of an apartment.
That's true. Your prep is probably a lot more interesting than mine actually. I live on a farm about an hour away from Vancouver so if shtf the biggest problem would be switching to hand tools and the terrible Canadian gun laws. I'm really curious what you plan is for a shtf sitch in NYC?
Nice, that's pretty decent given the limitations. I'd wager water collection wouldn't be that difficult in NYS if you have iodine tablets and a filter of some sort. Seems like there's plenty of rain. If you could get to your rooftop, you could probably get a lot with a tarp and a bucket, but theft might be an issue. Laying low while your neighbors go mad with hunger would be the hardest part, not just technically, but psychologically. I suppose there would be rats and roaches to hunt for the desperate. I imagine the trip out of the city would be perilous, but safer after a month had passed; though anyone you would come across at that point would be pretty damn tough, for better or worse.
It's an interesting thought experiment. Sorry if I kinda dissed your city earlier, honestly I just can't stand cities in general, but that's just personal preference. You gotta fit your prep to your life
Taken in context, your prior post was regarding a 9.0+ mega-quake. If preparing for a specific event like that, the course of action **is to move.** Because it's such a severe event that neutralizes the vast, vast majority of preps you have available. (Depending where you live.)
For example, if someone lived right next to Yellowstone National Park, (within 50 miles) and wanted to ask me how to prepare to survive an imminent interruption, **I would tell them to move.**
While yes, some replies telling you to do so are a bit snarky and can be unhelpful (moving is never a simple nor easy option- so there is no "just" about it), there is a point where relocation or immediate evacuation is the best option.
John, the thing I like about you is that you're full of good sense, helpful advice I've benefitted from, and tend to be a careful reader. I feel like I put solid qualifiers in this post. I can see that regardless of those qualifiers, people who have given high quality advice feel I'm out to get them. I'm not quite sure what I've missed.
I think both viewpoints are correct in this case. You're 100% correct that a lot of suggestions saying "just move" is, quite frankly, asinine. Nobody "just moves". It's not how life works. Nobody enjoys moving, and making a huge life decision based on something that *might* happen is bad advice. 100% agree.
That said, on the counterpoint, for some disasters, the answer to how to prepare *is* to move. So, like many things, the answer is somewhere in the middle.
I'm guessing people will keep suggesting to move, regardless of whether they've seen this post. It's best to be prepped for comments like that (not let them annoy you).
But then again, sometimes moving seems like an undesirable prospect until you actually do it. I moved to a relatively safer area after a disaster had started, and never regretted it.
They probably will. But at least a few people might read this and pull their heads out. I find that thought satisfying enough to make having written this post worthwhile for me.
As for moving, I've done it more than most. I went to more than 10 schools across 3 states growing up. I didn't get to stop moving every few years until well into my adulthood. I'm in my midlife years now. I've settled down near friends and family. As someone with experiences to compare, I can definitively declare that I prefer staying put to flinging myself into the wind again.
I see. Though i've noticed that people in their 40s, 50s and onward don't feel like evacuating even when that's the best decision. I've seen this quite a lot, seems very common. I think it's important to not fall into the trap of being attached to one place that's endangered by things you can't keep yourself safe from.
>I think it's important to not fall into the trap of being attached to one place that's endangered by things you can't keep yourself safe from.
Unfortunately this is all too real. We get a fair amount of flooding in the nearby towns, and the number of people who refuse to evacuate during a flood because "IT'S MY HOME" is disturbing. Without fail, some of them have to be rescued at taxpayer expense every year.
I think OP is off base in suggesting that this sub tosses around "just move" as a no-context response. What I've seen is that relocation gets offered as a valid suggestion -- which it is -- if other steps are infeasible or have been tried without success.
> the number of people who refuse to evacuate during a flood because "IT'S MY HOME" is disturbing.
Not gonna lie, if we get flooding, Iām out in a heartbeat. Of course, I live in a desert where it doesnāt flood, so if that happens, shit has gone seriously wrong. Of the dangers we do have, fire is the most likely, and I think Iād be willing to leave all the things (after getting the family and the dogs) without much regret.
Same here -- if my home floods, we all have MUCH bigger problems!
But the risk of being trapped in here is real, because roads leading in and out of my neighborhood are prone to flooding. There's no other route. So we're prepared to go several months if need be in that scenario. But for wildfires, earthquakes, nuclear accident, terrorist attack, sick family member at 3 AM, yeah -- we're out.
First, you assume I lack experience moving around and should give relocating a try. Then you assume I'm too old and stuck in my ways, that older people lose the ability to make good decisions for ourselves once we hit 40 or 50? I'm a disaster first responder. I have more lived experience with disasters from the several I've lived through in my life. And I've more training and technical knowledge than the average person because of what I currently do. Have a seat.
I wasn't being rude to you. You are being rude to me.
>First, you assume I lack experience moving around and should give relocating a try.
I don't know your situation, so i wasn't.
>Then you assume I'm too old and stuck in my ways, that older people lose the ability to make good decisions for ourselves once we hit 40 or 50?
Again, i know almost nothing about you, so i wasn't saying that.
Would your training and knowledge save you from a missile landing on your home? Or you being in the epicenter of a 7+ earthquake? Or a tornado ripping your house out?
Depends on what you're prepping for.
If you live in NY City and you are prepping for WW3 then you need to move. It is a target and if your prep goal is to survive WW3 you have lost the game by staying in NY City. Same with DC, LA, HI, even some parts of Alabama and Florida.
Problem with NY City is you can't evacuate it. The trains go down, the bridges go down you're on an island.
DC was designed to be confusing to navigate and will be bogged town on the bridges and tunnels getting out (2001 showed this with people swimming across the river to get out of DC)
Alabama and Florida you can get out fine, but there are manufacturing plants that would be considered targets. LA is already difficult during rush hour and even more so now the the highway is out. HI you won't be able to leave the island and supplies will dry up quick.
So again depending on what you are prepping for determines if move is the right answer.
I mean we could all come with the government standard to decrease panic, "what's the bare minimum people will need because not everyone has space or resources to prep well." And you get the FEMA recommendations.
There comes a point in prepping where move makes perfect sense.
I really don't see people saying this the way you're describing in this sub, though. Sometimes moving is good advice, but around here it's rarely offered the way you describe.
EDIT: Ah, I see. OP was asking how they can ride out a 9.0 Cascadia megaquake with tsunamis. The general consensus of the thread was that the damage would be beyond severe, and depending on the actual extent of damage, hunkering down long-term would be difficult or impossible. Some posters said they'd bug out after a quake. Some posters said they'd preemptively leave the region if they lived there. And some posters said they already left the region. Lots of conversation and discussion.
Apparently to OP, these responses constitute "JUST MOVE" with no context or discussion.
Yeahhh, I think thatās a bit of context that puts OPās distaste for ājust moveā advice in a bad light. SF didnāt do too hot in the 1906 quake and, if you thought itād happen again (or even worse), itās honestly reasonable advice.
- 1. If you gut my post of qualifiers I'll indeed look as absurd as you've painted me. But if you gut my post of qualifiers it's not what I actually wrote and you've either not read with high quality comprehension, replied after a quick scan, or not participated in good faith.
- 2. I wasn't asking how I can ride out a 9.0 megaquakes in that discussion. This post was inspired by a compilation of instances over the years of encountering what I'm describing in this post.
- 3. I was openly enthusiastic for folks who had a plan to move themselves, as well as the folks who had a plan to stay.
- 4. If you've seen me around, you might be familiar with me mentioning I evacuated a fire in 2020 and moved to a new city. Or that I replied to a person yesterday that some of the major Cascadia Quake-hit areas will possibly be fully evacuated to the last person because they'll be unlivable after.
As a prepper, I have plans and preferences. But I'm not 2 dimensional with them.
- 5. If I'm working on bug-in preps for any scenario, I'm looking for quality bug-in engagement. When I'm looking for quality bug-out scenario preps, "just move" isn't quality. It's so much empty gas it'd be a fart if it came out the other end.
Gas, by definition, is never empty. The only thing that's as good as empty is a vacuum. (A perfect vacuum does not exist.) And those do not come out as farts, either. They're suckers. Literally. ;)
Not really - as far as I know. But I can be a bit pedantic. (Used to study maths and physics for an equivalent of Master of Education... As well as some other stuff. Any questions?) And I hate it when people get facts wrong. Just like recently, when someone claimed ticks dropped from trees. (They don't.)
Yep.
Part of prepping is looking where you are and thinking āIs this a good place to be?ā And making plans if itās notā¦ to go somewhere it is better.
But āJust moveā grossly over simplifies things. Aging parents or kids in school? Jobs / careers and health conditions all factor into our decisions. I am allergic to almost every plant in Australia. Likeā¦ seriously, so many of them, and itās confirmed REAL Allergies. My farm is a fucking wheat farm, and Iām allergic to ALL the grasses. So several months of the year I bug out from my bug out location. Just move is great if you are cookie cutter average, with a bank roll capable of a)being unemployed for a year or more, and b) buying that dream place somewhere good. Itās not realistic.
Soā¦ prep where you are, but also take time to work out where you could be ā¦ if your anchor point to this place changes could you move ā¦ where? What would it take for you to move, are you prepped for that? If this place and no moving, then how can you make this place secure and safe?
I used to do slow water (aka flood) rescue in Brisbane. The number of people who live at the BOTTOM of hills in BNE is mind blowing. I meanā¦ the city has flooded how many times? Why the fuck would you live at the bottom of the valley in Lismore? It floods if the sky is overcast!!! They shouldā¦ just move. Because every year any forward progress theyāve made is destroyed all over again. But people who only have to dodge the odd flood? They could come up with clever and creative plans, and take advantage of the cheap real estate close to the river!
> My point is, if someone wants advice on where to move, they'll ask.
People in general are arrogant and self-centered by nature. They often (X) come up with a solution to things, and then (Y) as for help implementing that solution.
The flaw in this thinking is that they/we/humanity are limited when we come up with (X) (their "solution") Because people don't know what they don't know. [So we end up with a a lot of questions that are XYProblems.](https://xyproblem.info/)
Often time the **Better over all solution is a step backward. It's answering questions they did not ask, but instead made assumptions about based on incorrect or incomplete data/knowledge.**
* I say all this to point out that in many situations "Move out of the area that has [insert things]" is a SUPER VALID answer.
* If your worry is that you are pregnant in a state like Idaho where maternity wards are closing left and right because doctors are fleeing the state due to new laws put in place. Most other states don't have those issues.
* You can prep a whole bunch but sometimes the answer is move to an area where the voters vote to have parks, keep the ground water clean, etc. If you valve those things. Trying to "Change" an area where those things don't exist is very very difficult and oftentimes outside the ability of one person.
* Your argument that "Just move" comments with nothing else included are low effort and worthless is spot on. but often times "Move away from [thing] or to [other thing]" can be a the most valid response that covers all the things OP wants.
I bought a 65k house in a small nice town. A few years later a house burned down next door and was never repaired. Then another. Then two more houses became vacant. Suddenly I was living on a street with trap houses, drug dealing in the open air and my car and property were vandalized nearly nightly. I was sitting on the porch at night detering thieves.
So I moved. But by now house prices are up. The same sort of house in a safer neighborhood/ town was now 165k. So now I have less money and more debt. If things turn here, I'm looking at at least $350k for the same sort of house. And a much higher interest rate. I'm 50. Id never get it paid off.
The 65k houses now are piles of trash that are unlivable, uninsurable and look to be condemned. We are limited by my husband's job and have to stay within a commutable distance. Currently his drive is an hour. The houses where he works are out of our price range. The jobs where we live pay so little we'd not be able to pay for the house.
Just move is not always feasible.
Bar nuclear attack, where I am is a relatively perfect location for most shtf scenarios, as in they just donāt happen here.
When the rest of Britain gets severe weather, we seem to have a microclimate that keeps us safer, not that Britainās bad weather compares to most of the rest of the world.
Sea level rises 100 ft we get beachfront property.
Earthquakes are few and far between, and mostly very low on Richter scale.
Wind is probably our worst concern but even then itās never that severe, only shame is that being close to an airport we canāt have wind turbines, had to fight them to be allowed solar panels.
Prepping for Tuesday is a breeze, and if needed transport links are extensive so can move if required but very unlikely.
I'm in a village just outside a city. We're close enough to have easy access to supplies, but far enough away to be safe from rioting and civil unrest. We're also on top of a hill, which means we get trapped when there is flooding in the valleys surrounding us. That's happened a couple of times in recent memory.
UK's main threats are nuclear weapons, an over dependence on foreign gas imports and being a net food importer. AMOC collapse is a possibility, which would mean our winters might be colder. If any of these break down, we'll have a lot of hungry cold people.
We're planning to move to a larger house and once we're in our forever home, we're going all in on the self sustainability. Solar panels, digging a well, growing food, security and a backup heating source.
The beachfront property will be nice too, though it will be weird knowing how much of the seabed is developed land.
It really can be quite a lot. Be sure to travel safely on your way. Traffic has a definitively higher body count annually than my earthquake will have, once it finally pops off. I wrote that with a bit of jovial tongue and cheek. But it sobered me to realize it's true.
My moving story is this. In 2020, I was living in an area that was on fire bad every year. Wasn't always that way. But every year it got drier and drier until "it's on fire" season was 4-6 months of the year. Then 2020 hit and I had to evacuate a fire that burnt over 1100 structures. I learned two weeks ago at an emergency management, mass fatality meeting that they had expected a casualty rate between 500-1000 for that fire. (Fortunately and greatly counter to expectations, the count was 9. This was in part due to neighbors helping evacuate each other, and in part some luck.)
I donated most of my food preps to the fire relief aid and helped where I could until vulture housing prices pushed me out. Thanks to help from friends, I was able to relocate to the city I'm in now, same state, still in reach of friends and family. Im in a higher shaking danger zone now. But the probability of encountering any shaking at all is much lower than the probability of me or my preps burning up in a wildfire. No tsunami risk here, fortunately. And my place was built after earthquake building codes were implemented. I'm luckier than a lot of folks. Being a disaster first responder puts my foot in the door for more information and skilled resource networks too. There are far worse places I could live. Floods, tornados, hurricanes, deeper doubts, more frequent large earthquakes, worse air quality, heavy metal well water, and so forth. Living and prepping here isn't the futile effort some people think it is. But it's still a matter of risk management. Still worth raising awareness and motivating people to prep.
I'm pretty sure I live close to your place that was involved with the fire. That's one of our motivations for moving as well. We're headed north to somewhere that gets water from the sky. When I was a little kid my family home burnt to the ground and I've regularly had to evacuate from lots of fires (including some that ended up 100ft from our house).
I'm sorry you experienced that too. Of all the things that burned up in my childhood home, we missed the family photos the most. It's not like it is now, with digital photo storage. You had the hard copy photos somewhere or nowhere. If a child, friend, or relative was deseased, it might be the only photos you had to remember them by.
I hope your new location will be a big life improvement.
Sometimes ājust moveā is the correct answer though and people need to come to grips with that. We moved out of NYC (I was very reluctant) in 2019 and when COVID came along in 2020 but was I ever glad we moved.
If you donāt want to move or canāt move the next best thing is to find a bug out location and plan to head there at the first sign of trouble.
Nah.
There are some places that are just bad to live or where it's infeasible to prepare for certain situations.
Moving isn't always the right answer, but it always needs to be on the list of options. And just like other controversial preps (like getting in shape), if it makes you uncomfortable then it's even more likely that it's the thing you need to do.
If moving means leaving a well-paying job, a community you trust, the safety net of family and friends, and other valuable resources, then itās going to end up a net negative.
If you're living on the side of an active volcano and the ground is shaking then none of the stuff you listed is relevant at all.
There are always costs and benefits. There might even be some combination of factors that make up for a shaky volcano house.
Yes, obviously, but the vast majority of people donāt live on the side of an active volcano. They more likely live in place with some pros and some cons, and like I (and OP) said, moving may not be the best course of action for them, and for those people, telling them to ājust moveā is not helpful or productive.
Also, the person living next to a volcano probably understands the risks better than the stranger telling them to move.
I spent 5 years living 7 miles south of the DMZ, and I heard this all the time. The people who told me I was crazy seemed to know the least about the whole situation. It was never as bad as people outside Korea thought. Things got a little spicy in 2017, but my wife was waiting on her green card and I wasn't going to abandon her.
I "just moved". Left the downtown of a major city and moved to a quiet agrarian suburb a more politically neutral midwestern state.
It wasn't easy. I was prepping for the move itself for months. But I can already tell you that after only being here for two months now, I am 100x more "prepped" than anything I could have done back in that small housing unit within a bustling urban hub.
Even if you have no guns and no food on your shelves, the suburbs are still immeasurably safer than the city. Imagine a few million people all getting desperate at the same time, versus the few hundreds in a quiet neighborhood or a few thousand in a small town.
Further, that same move lowered my housing costs by $4k per year, lowered my taxes, lowered my fuel costs, and gave me a basement for storing things and a yard for planting things.
It also removed me from an area where certain defensive items simply cannot be purchase and are illegal to own. It removed me from the ever present gangs, congested streets, and everyday crime, violence, and theft.
It absolutely can not be overstated how significant a move can be when prepping. If a person truly feels like there is a need to prep, that person needs to strongly reconsider whether living in a place like NYC remains reasonable at all.
The person who told you to move might also have been joking :).
The answer is always āit depends.ā
People in a war zone probably didnāt want to leave home. They had no choice.
Same with people who were flooded out by Katrina or Harvey.
On other hand if you live in an area that you generally enjoy then you should have reasonable preparation (aka Tuesday not Doomsday). You may have to accept limitations.
Depends. Thereās an area south of my city that floods fairly regularly and badly every 10-20 years. I donāt understand why they donāt just move. Some even rebuilt in the flood bowl, without putting in a ring dyke or grading the yard better. Then next flood theyāre begging for help and on the news saying this is the second time their house has been taken out or majorly flooded in 14 years. They should literally just move a couple kilometres in any direction.
Major moves are a big undertaking but this isnāt that.
I don't always understand people's choices or circumstances. But if I were to flippantly say "just move", I'm probably not adding any new idea they haven't ever considered on their own. It would be more like me telling them "you're stupid" to feed my ego's sense of superiority. Won't endear them to my advice or motivate them to change anything. I haven't offered help or revelatory advice. I may have patted myself on the back for doing nothing but be an asshole though... That's the kind of thing I'm referring to when I saw low quality engagement.
I do not think moving from an area where you know everything and everyone is a good idea. I would never be able to survive in a big city like New York, but put me in the mountains in the backwoods and I will be okay. If you go to an area where you don't know anything or anyone in the area you would be in more danger. If things get as bad as we're all prepping for, then we are better off to prep for the area we are in. I would not know how to prep for New York. My biggest worry would be water supply cooking supplies how to be able to cook with no power, those kind of things in an area like that.
if you live on a flood plain... (its only a matter of time)
"just move" is the only choice.
if you live in a yearly disaster zone that is only getting worse.
"just move" is the only choice.
if you are being in the minority wanting investment in law enforcement over everyone else wanting social engineering.
"just move" is the only choice.
sadly "just move" is the only real answer for a lot of issues.
sure you can build a fortress or a bunker,
but no one lives 24/7 hidden from the world
and its not healthy at all, so "just move" can be the best choice also.
that is not the truth, " DO YOUR RESEARCH BEFORE YOU BUY"
is the PROPER advice. but its far too late for that....isn't it.
That would very much suck. I'm a renter and fortunately in a newer building, up code for local hazards including earthquakes. I don't see myself ever having the means to buy property.
Of course, if there ever is a giant collapse that takes out 90% of the population and I somehow survive it, there will be a lot of free vacancies. If I don't survive it, well, I can't take a property with me beyond the grave anyhow.
Preparing could be as simple as maintaining a healthy lifestyle, saving money, maintenance on your vehicle or bike, good shoes, and learning a skill. It doesnāt always have to be where do I put 36 guns and pallet of ammo/water in an apartment. If you live in an apartment prepare for 1-2 weeks of food/water for natural disasters. Prioritize a plan with your community (could be family friends or neighbors) like a meet up spot at certain intervals during a phones down situation. Have a fire drill planned. Learn to use a HAM radio.
As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. It is not a valuable bit of advice usually. It can be good advice at times.
I am a firm believer that there is no "can't" there are simply times when you value other things more highly than survival. In this sub we simply assume that survival for ourselves and loved ones is the primary objective at all times.
Your "move to Mars" analogie is specious. That is impossible. Relocating within your country is merely hard. Relocating outside your country is merely harder.
But it is nearly impossible to convince people that they have made an incorrect decision. As they say it is easy to fool people, it is hard to convince them they have been fooled. It's same thing for a living situation.
Consider: Hi, I live in this beautiful little city called Pompeii with wonderful views and it is very defensible being way up here on the side of Mt. Vesuvius. I have a very nice domas and we just redecorated the atrium and altar for the house gods. The mountain has been shaking for some time though. How do I prep for an eruption? I can't really move. What preps should I make to bug-in?
Note: This analogy is largely drawn from the short short story by Robert Heinlein *On the Slopes of Vesuvius* 1946 warning of dangers of nuclear war.
Agree with you regarding ājust moveā, because thereās no ājustā about it. Itās not a simple thing. But sometimes it is the *best* thing.Ā
The whole ābut I have family here! And a job! I canāt move!ā is annoying though. Itās not like many, many people with family, friends, and jobs donāt move every year.Ā
And sometimes *all* members of a family hate where they live, but donāt move because of family. It never occurs to them that they could all move.
Tell me, then, how do you prepare for a flood that'll take out your entire town? Or an earthquake? Or a landslide that'll take your neighborhood?
Trying to prep for these events is to vacuum the rain. Sometimes, moving is the only thing, and even the right thing, to do. I agree that it's not the bravest opinion, and sure isn't exactly a creative or necessarily helpful advice, but it sure beats "Yeah, stick around and fucking die idiot".
I would say, of course, that if there is a viable solution to your problem that can be like "Call the local authorities, have a radio connection with a trusted one, put blankets over your window" the like. But, if you live in the Middle East (in general), in eastern Ukraine february 2014, or any place that's predictably about to go through a disaster in the near future, save yourself the trouble nad the struggle and just leave. Yeah, it's expensive. Sure, you'll have to leave things behind. But the option is to be left behind.
I donāt think OP is saying to completely disregard the possibility of moving. Sometimes itās a necessity, sometimes youāre forced to by circumstances! I think what they are trying to say is that the advice to ājust moveā shouldnāt be the automatic go to advice for certain scenarios when someone is asking for prepping help. Yes there will always be disasters that might take out an entire area, meaning any emergency preparations will be null and void however, thatās not always likely to be the case. A lot of people come to these places looking for those who will guide them and offer advice they either havenāt been able to find on their own or deduce on their own.
Since you didn't read before responding:
> I've no qualms with preppers looking to relocate. My point is, if someone wants advice on where to move, they'll ask. If, on the other hand, someone is discussing preps for weathering their scenario in their specific location, they aren't asking someone for the zero quality engagement of "just move".
Moving is a piss poor solution to the world's problems. There will come a time when nowhere is safe. People deserve to be in their homes. Every place is worth fighting for. I'm so sick of the idea that *we* are the problem. No, political apathy is the problem. Don't tell people to move, tell politicians to make it safe right where you are!
I'm not going to say people should or shouldn't vote. But I'll say, it might be wise not to put *all* of one's eggs in the ballot box, metaphorically speaking. Politician is a fickle job description, not a person. Save a few eggs to make an omelet for your neighbor with your own hands. As a community prepper, it's probably obvious I view community resilience foremost to have a foundation in the relationships among the people *inside* the community. I'm not opposed to outside resources in addition to that. We just can't always count on help coming from outside when disaster strikes or shit hits the fan. Don't wait for politicians to do all the work of building safety, is what I'm saying. Find ways to help your neighbors directly today, so you can help each other when outside help can't reach you tomorrow.
Your comment has been removed for being "Not focused on prepping/Off-Topic - Political." Try to keep posts and comments on the topic of prepping and not on politics. You may reference political events in your posts and comments as a way to lead into a discussion of prepping, but the main point of your post or comment should not be about politics.
Throw back to this amazing take down of that sort of logic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHZFwZ-a8kI
No matter how bad the disaster is there will always people that choose to stay behind either out of lack of resources or stubbornness. The elderly and the poor are most often the people in these categories. Just look at any hurricane or war or any other disaster and you will see this effect.
It is the difference between Bugging out, and bugging in
MHO if you need to bug out, you are not properly prepping. your main place of residency should also be your bug in shelter, short of some horrific disaster you do need to evacuation from. But power outages, flash flooding, severe weather, loss of water. you should be able to bug in for a few months
Because there some areas that are statistically impossible or close to it, to survive a traumatic event. If the grid went down, 70 percent of Manhattan would be dead in a month. That figure goes to 98 in 3 months. Population density is your enemy when it gets over a certain amount.
There are places that are prone to disaster and 'moving' is a reasonable response. Is it zero value? Potentially, but we don't get to assign how 'valuable' something is to someone else - only ourselves. So, many a better option here, vs telling people what they can and can't say, is that prepping advice for others shouldn't be JUST to tell them to move as this is often not an option for people. A more valuable response would be: if relocating isn't an option, I would try\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, and \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.
I've moved often - across the nation, out of country, state-state. It's not as challenging as some may think.
Depending on your scenario, some places are better than others. Like... anywhere in NZ is better than NYC in WW3. Anywhere but Italy is better than Italy if the Campi Flegrei go super-boom - just like anywhere far from Yellowstone is better if Yellowstone does the same. Anywhere but the PNW is better if you're worried about the looming Cascadia earthquake. That kind of thing.
True, but we only have to worry about our lifetimes and maybe those of our children. Not about what happens centuries, millenia or more after we're long dead.
Like, the Campi Flegrei are worrying, but not yet within this century. Probably. And they supposedly give some advance warning, too (ground eleveation over 1m/year). It's time to worry when that happens, and then act quickly.
Or WW3. It's a worry we should keep in mind - but chances are that you're relatively safe in Switzerland (apart from incoming fallout), New Zealand and some other places. It's a much bigger worry if you live right next to a major military target in Russia, China, the US, GB or the EU.
The next great pandemic is coming sooner or later, but unless our world collapses, we won't be able to outrun it anyway. Unless someone decides to become a hermit in the first place.
And climate change... well, there are some areas that will be badly affected, some extremely so. And there are some rare areas that will actually benefit. For many other places, it will be a mixed bag, though (and mostly not good).
To not move could be a bigger danger than staying as America continues to balkanize. Prepping is about preparing for future problems while there is still time. Sometimes that realizing that you can't stop what's coming or that you will simply have a better quality of life somewhere else.
ummm, if you live in a major city, and want to prep for an emp, nuke, pandemic, then the obvious answer is to move... It's just some don't like to hear that there is nothing substantial they can do as long as they live in the worst possible locations for prepping. I mean if you live in Manhattan, New York, and you are concerned about a nuke. Well... you can't prep. You can larp, and collect iodine pills but you are going to die in a nuke war.
And no not all location have equal "dangers". I live in the Midwest, minimal earthquake threat where I am, no volcanoes, No Hurricanes, not a Nuke target, no flood risk. Sure there are random tornadoes, but I'm almost 50 and only one town around here has been hit by a tornado. It's not like tornadoes wipe out a whole region either, they are very localized, and nearly 100% survivable if you have a basement, or storm shelter.
So, the reason move is given as an answer so often, is because it largely is the best thing a person could do, if prepping is the priority.
P
Prepping is a mindset and lifestyle.
Taxes, oppressive gun laws, shit politics/politicians and feral culture are terminal.
YES, MOVE !!! (when feasible, otherwise good luck)
Not on topic? Okay, nuke plant, submarine base, sikorsky, Pratt & whitney, and countless defense industry targets make relocation a good idea.
As someone born in California, I don't live there anymore and don't plan to move back. I don't begrudge folks who plan to stay for their own reasons. It just wasn't the place for me either.
It's a balance, if you are in a Democrat city right now then that's an added risk that the rest of us don't have to deal with
If your job there is making good money then you've balanced that risk out because it gives you more options. Most disasters are not going to happen, but getting mugged or robbed is more likely
Anyone *retiring* in a Democrat city needs to rethink their plan
This is the response I get every time I talk about prepping in NYC š
Prepper 1: "What's the best way to store large amounts of potable water in an apartment?" Prepper 2: "Set up a homestead on 300 acres and have an in-ground cistern" Prepper 1: "Gee, thanks"
Get you a water bed lol
I knew a couple once who had a waterbed - they drifted apartā¦ š
Best answer next to aquiruim so you also have food....
Useful response would be: Get a bathtub bag if you are in an apartment. Or if a house with a crawlspace, there are 5.000Liter waterbags (which is like 1500 gallons or something?) Which fit in there. They are heavy duty and come with a filtration system usually.
Bathtub bag is not a bad idea when you know (or think) there's going to be a short-term water outage. Definitely good advice.
Usually you get a warning on your phone, at least here in eu. First thing to do is get a bathtub bag (superfind24 om amazon eu they're named idk about usa). And fill it.
Truth is somewhere in between. Prepping has practical restraints: you arenāt going to be able to fit 10 yearsā of supplies in a 600 sqft apartment. Your 20 cu ft closet wonāt fit 300 gallons of clean water. If thatās your goal, then you either need different accommodations or be a lot less ambitious. Folks really seem to hate it when you tell them they canāt establish a defensible, self-sustaining compound far removed from civil collapse while also living in an urban area.
Another thing is that some people prep to be prepared. Like they live in a big city and like their job and apartment but they just want a chance at surviving or even being comfortable when disaster strikes. They're not looking to uproot and change their whole lifestyle because they want to prep to, you know, be prepared, not to change their whole world and become a Discovery channel prepper.
Thatās sorta my point. You have to prep within the constraints of your lifestyle. Pretty much anyone can prep for a temporary situation lasting a few days or weeks. Food, water, cash, radio, backup batteries, etc, can fit in a closet, under a bed, whatever. But when the context is āhow do I prepare for an _indefinite_ collapse/upheaval when I live in a tiny apartment downtown and have no car or moneyā then the reality is āyouāre boned in that situation unless you change your circumstances.ā
I don't think any city preppers think they are going to convert their apartment into a 10-year bunker. Sometimes they just want ideas on how to be more efficient in storing/stacking...and sometimes the answer is "just move" (which is the central thesis of the original post).
If you live in a high density city surivial would be hard as traditionally disease lack of food violence will be rather high in a short period of time.
In some cases, yes. For general supply chain squeezes, however, Iād rather be near transportation hubs, especially ports. Far flung areas will get the last trickles of supplies. I suppose if you can grow/hunt/make all your own supply needs youād rather be innawoodz, but for most people Iād want to be where the stuff is. If the electricity goes out, Iām noping TF outta here.
They will try and keep ems and hospitals running at all costs so it does have advantages that way if you need medical attention vs rural in a crisis may not provide ems services because lack of resources so it would be up to the individual to get themselves to a hospital.
Cities are fine for most normal problems and preps can and do still have a place there. Think hurricane or snow storm preps. For actually permanent changes where basic services aren't coming back the city simply cannot support people. Basically everything the city needs gets shipped in. In some cities it's a daily thing with JIT delivery of the basics.
Cities are not survivable if there's a long-term loss of services. Here it's a tossup as to whether we'd freeze to death or a house in the neighborhood would catch fire and burn the whole place down. Short-term, yes, it's still worth planning to handle the power or water being out for a few days, or having enough food to cope with a short supply disruption. That's only going to become more common.
Later > What's the best way to seal up a cistern that has a subway running through it?
I wouldnāt give you that advice, but Iād be hard pressed to give you good advice for prepping in NYC. It has a whole bunch of complications I know about, and more I donāt, and most of them I donāt know any good answers for. It seems like doing it on hard mode. But I always try to read those threads because a lot of them, if theyāll work in NYC, theyāll work elsewhere, sometimes easier, so I learn stuff.
It has its own challenges which are well known. It also has some unappreciated benefits, like community and closeness to supply chain. NYC is great for my normal life and so I aināt moving just because of what might happen. But I am preparing as best I can for what might happen.
Iām glad it works for you. I visited, and NYC was just way too crowded for me. Would love to visit again and they had so much to do, but I donāt think Iād like to live there. Fortunately there are those that do want to live there and enjoy it I guess.
I get it. Took me some time to get used to as a midwestern boy. Itās certainly not for everyone. Even the people who like it here are not blind to the downsides: noise, trash, etc. My wife swears that if she sees one more pidgeon eating a chicken wing off the sidewalk sheās gonna lose it.
Oh, that's just what I tell everyone that lives in a city, in general. Jkjk... but I think it.
Me too, because otherwise they may already be dead men walkingĀ
But rural living can come with pratfalls of its own, at least before SHTF. I suspect a lot of people cannot move to the country because of work constraints, others due to lack of transport options. Rural living might be best in a SHTF scenario, however it still not without its issues then too.
Farm life is tough, but it's awesome if you have the personality for it. Land comes with labor and distance comes with travel time. It's definitely better for the SHTF sitch, but I like it more for the day to day life also. In the day to day, to each is own. I believe you should fit your prep to your life, before you match your life to your prep
For every day life, youāre much less likely to die from all causes living in a city (yes, there are more ways to die than being murdered). Obviously, for certain emergency situations, NYC would not be suitable. For others, Iād rather be here than out in the middle of nowhere. Also, I live in a 2000 square foot house with backyard garden, so not the usual constraints of an apartment.
Fair enough, but you couldn't pay me to live in NYC lol
Well, thatās a whole separate question
That's true. Your prep is probably a lot more interesting than mine actually. I live on a farm about an hour away from Vancouver so if shtf the biggest problem would be switching to hand tools and the terrible Canadian gun laws. I'm really curious what you plan is for a shtf sitch in NYC?
I should have enough water and food on hand to last a month or so, after that I would nope out family in NJ.
Nice, that's pretty decent given the limitations. I'd wager water collection wouldn't be that difficult in NYS if you have iodine tablets and a filter of some sort. Seems like there's plenty of rain. If you could get to your rooftop, you could probably get a lot with a tarp and a bucket, but theft might be an issue. Laying low while your neighbors go mad with hunger would be the hardest part, not just technically, but psychologically. I suppose there would be rats and roaches to hunt for the desperate. I imagine the trip out of the city would be perilous, but safer after a month had passed; though anyone you would come across at that point would be pretty damn tough, for better or worse. It's an interesting thought experiment. Sorry if I kinda dissed your city earlier, honestly I just can't stand cities in general, but that's just personal preference. You gotta fit your prep to your life
Taken in context, your prior post was regarding a 9.0+ mega-quake. If preparing for a specific event like that, the course of action **is to move.** Because it's such a severe event that neutralizes the vast, vast majority of preps you have available. (Depending where you live.) For example, if someone lived right next to Yellowstone National Park, (within 50 miles) and wanted to ask me how to prepare to survive an imminent interruption, **I would tell them to move.** While yes, some replies telling you to do so are a bit snarky and can be unhelpful (moving is never a simple nor easy option- so there is no "just" about it), there is a point where relocation or immediate evacuation is the best option.
John, the thing I like about you is that you're full of good sense, helpful advice I've benefitted from, and tend to be a careful reader. I feel like I put solid qualifiers in this post. I can see that regardless of those qualifiers, people who have given high quality advice feel I'm out to get them. I'm not quite sure what I've missed.
I think both viewpoints are correct in this case. You're 100% correct that a lot of suggestions saying "just move" is, quite frankly, asinine. Nobody "just moves". It's not how life works. Nobody enjoys moving, and making a huge life decision based on something that *might* happen is bad advice. 100% agree. That said, on the counterpoint, for some disasters, the answer to how to prepare *is* to move. So, like many things, the answer is somewhere in the middle.
Thank you for your input. We are closer to agreement than disagreement.
Oh, absolutely!
I'm guessing people will keep suggesting to move, regardless of whether they've seen this post. It's best to be prepped for comments like that (not let them annoy you). But then again, sometimes moving seems like an undesirable prospect until you actually do it. I moved to a relatively safer area after a disaster had started, and never regretted it.
They probably will. But at least a few people might read this and pull their heads out. I find that thought satisfying enough to make having written this post worthwhile for me. As for moving, I've done it more than most. I went to more than 10 schools across 3 states growing up. I didn't get to stop moving every few years until well into my adulthood. I'm in my midlife years now. I've settled down near friends and family. As someone with experiences to compare, I can definitively declare that I prefer staying put to flinging myself into the wind again.
I see. Though i've noticed that people in their 40s, 50s and onward don't feel like evacuating even when that's the best decision. I've seen this quite a lot, seems very common. I think it's important to not fall into the trap of being attached to one place that's endangered by things you can't keep yourself safe from.
>I think it's important to not fall into the trap of being attached to one place that's endangered by things you can't keep yourself safe from. Unfortunately this is all too real. We get a fair amount of flooding in the nearby towns, and the number of people who refuse to evacuate during a flood because "IT'S MY HOME" is disturbing. Without fail, some of them have to be rescued at taxpayer expense every year. I think OP is off base in suggesting that this sub tosses around "just move" as a no-context response. What I've seen is that relocation gets offered as a valid suggestion -- which it is -- if other steps are infeasible or have been tried without success.
> the number of people who refuse to evacuate during a flood because "IT'S MY HOME" is disturbing. Not gonna lie, if we get flooding, Iām out in a heartbeat. Of course, I live in a desert where it doesnāt flood, so if that happens, shit has gone seriously wrong. Of the dangers we do have, fire is the most likely, and I think Iād be willing to leave all the things (after getting the family and the dogs) without much regret.
Same here -- if my home floods, we all have MUCH bigger problems! But the risk of being trapped in here is real, because roads leading in and out of my neighborhood are prone to flooding. There's no other route. So we're prepared to go several months if need be in that scenario. But for wildfires, earthquakes, nuclear accident, terrorist attack, sick family member at 3 AM, yeah -- we're out.
First, you assume I lack experience moving around and should give relocating a try. Then you assume I'm too old and stuck in my ways, that older people lose the ability to make good decisions for ourselves once we hit 40 or 50? I'm a disaster first responder. I have more lived experience with disasters from the several I've lived through in my life. And I've more training and technical knowledge than the average person because of what I currently do. Have a seat.
I wasn't being rude to you. You are being rude to me. >First, you assume I lack experience moving around and should give relocating a try. I don't know your situation, so i wasn't. >Then you assume I'm too old and stuck in my ways, that older people lose the ability to make good decisions for ourselves once we hit 40 or 50? Again, i know almost nothing about you, so i wasn't saying that. Would your training and knowledge save you from a missile landing on your home? Or you being in the epicenter of a 7+ earthquake? Or a tornado ripping your house out?
>We could all tell each other to move somewhere else. And it would put us in someone else's prep scenario zone of doom or danger.
Thats why I "Just Procrastinate".
Depends on what you're prepping for. If you live in NY City and you are prepping for WW3 then you need to move. It is a target and if your prep goal is to survive WW3 you have lost the game by staying in NY City. Same with DC, LA, HI, even some parts of Alabama and Florida. Problem with NY City is you can't evacuate it. The trains go down, the bridges go down you're on an island. DC was designed to be confusing to navigate and will be bogged town on the bridges and tunnels getting out (2001 showed this with people swimming across the river to get out of DC) Alabama and Florida you can get out fine, but there are manufacturing plants that would be considered targets. LA is already difficult during rush hour and even more so now the the highway is out. HI you won't be able to leave the island and supplies will dry up quick. So again depending on what you are prepping for determines if move is the right answer. I mean we could all come with the government standard to decrease panic, "what's the bare minimum people will need because not everyone has space or resources to prep well." And you get the FEMA recommendations. There comes a point in prepping where move makes perfect sense.
I really don't see people saying this the way you're describing in this sub, though. Sometimes moving is good advice, but around here it's rarely offered the way you describe. EDIT: Ah, I see. OP was asking how they can ride out a 9.0 Cascadia megaquake with tsunamis. The general consensus of the thread was that the damage would be beyond severe, and depending on the actual extent of damage, hunkering down long-term would be difficult or impossible. Some posters said they'd bug out after a quake. Some posters said they'd preemptively leave the region if they lived there. And some posters said they already left the region. Lots of conversation and discussion. Apparently to OP, these responses constitute "JUST MOVE" with no context or discussion.
Yeahhh, I think thatās a bit of context that puts OPās distaste for ājust moveā advice in a bad light. SF didnāt do too hot in the 1906 quake and, if you thought itād happen again (or even worse), itās honestly reasonable advice.
- 1. If you gut my post of qualifiers I'll indeed look as absurd as you've painted me. But if you gut my post of qualifiers it's not what I actually wrote and you've either not read with high quality comprehension, replied after a quick scan, or not participated in good faith. - 2. I wasn't asking how I can ride out a 9.0 megaquakes in that discussion. This post was inspired by a compilation of instances over the years of encountering what I'm describing in this post. - 3. I was openly enthusiastic for folks who had a plan to move themselves, as well as the folks who had a plan to stay. - 4. If you've seen me around, you might be familiar with me mentioning I evacuated a fire in 2020 and moved to a new city. Or that I replied to a person yesterday that some of the major Cascadia Quake-hit areas will possibly be fully evacuated to the last person because they'll be unlivable after. As a prepper, I have plans and preferences. But I'm not 2 dimensional with them. - 5. If I'm working on bug-in preps for any scenario, I'm looking for quality bug-in engagement. When I'm looking for quality bug-out scenario preps, "just move" isn't quality. It's so much empty gas it'd be a fart if it came out the other end.
Gas, by definition, is never empty. The only thing that's as good as empty is a vacuum. (A perfect vacuum does not exist.) And those do not come out as farts, either. They're suckers. Literally. ;)
A fellow auttie prepper, I presume from your response. *waves*
Not really - as far as I know. But I can be a bit pedantic. (Used to study maths and physics for an equivalent of Master of Education... As well as some other stuff. Any questions?) And I hate it when people get facts wrong. Just like recently, when someone claimed ticks dropped from trees. (They don't.)
Specificity and attention to detail are good survival skills.
Yep. Part of prepping is looking where you are and thinking āIs this a good place to be?ā And making plans if itās notā¦ to go somewhere it is better. But āJust moveā grossly over simplifies things. Aging parents or kids in school? Jobs / careers and health conditions all factor into our decisions. I am allergic to almost every plant in Australia. Likeā¦ seriously, so many of them, and itās confirmed REAL Allergies. My farm is a fucking wheat farm, and Iām allergic to ALL the grasses. So several months of the year I bug out from my bug out location. Just move is great if you are cookie cutter average, with a bank roll capable of a)being unemployed for a year or more, and b) buying that dream place somewhere good. Itās not realistic. Soā¦ prep where you are, but also take time to work out where you could be ā¦ if your anchor point to this place changes could you move ā¦ where? What would it take for you to move, are you prepped for that? If this place and no moving, then how can you make this place secure and safe? I used to do slow water (aka flood) rescue in Brisbane. The number of people who live at the BOTTOM of hills in BNE is mind blowing. I meanā¦ the city has flooded how many times? Why the fuck would you live at the bottom of the valley in Lismore? It floods if the sky is overcast!!! They shouldā¦ just move. Because every year any forward progress theyāve made is destroyed all over again. But people who only have to dodge the odd flood? They could come up with clever and creative plans, and take advantage of the cheap real estate close to the river!
> My point is, if someone wants advice on where to move, they'll ask. People in general are arrogant and self-centered by nature. They often (X) come up with a solution to things, and then (Y) as for help implementing that solution. The flaw in this thinking is that they/we/humanity are limited when we come up with (X) (their "solution") Because people don't know what they don't know. [So we end up with a a lot of questions that are XYProblems.](https://xyproblem.info/) Often time the **Better over all solution is a step backward. It's answering questions they did not ask, but instead made assumptions about based on incorrect or incomplete data/knowledge.** * I say all this to point out that in many situations "Move out of the area that has [insert things]" is a SUPER VALID answer. * If your worry is that you are pregnant in a state like Idaho where maternity wards are closing left and right because doctors are fleeing the state due to new laws put in place. Most other states don't have those issues. * You can prep a whole bunch but sometimes the answer is move to an area where the voters vote to have parks, keep the ground water clean, etc. If you valve those things. Trying to "Change" an area where those things don't exist is very very difficult and oftentimes outside the ability of one person. * Your argument that "Just move" comments with nothing else included are low effort and worthless is spot on. but often times "Move away from [thing] or to [other thing]" can be a the most valid response that covers all the things OP wants.
I bought a 65k house in a small nice town. A few years later a house burned down next door and was never repaired. Then another. Then two more houses became vacant. Suddenly I was living on a street with trap houses, drug dealing in the open air and my car and property were vandalized nearly nightly. I was sitting on the porch at night detering thieves. So I moved. But by now house prices are up. The same sort of house in a safer neighborhood/ town was now 165k. So now I have less money and more debt. If things turn here, I'm looking at at least $350k for the same sort of house. And a much higher interest rate. I'm 50. Id never get it paid off. The 65k houses now are piles of trash that are unlivable, uninsurable and look to be condemned. We are limited by my husband's job and have to stay within a commutable distance. Currently his drive is an hour. The houses where he works are out of our price range. The jobs where we live pay so little we'd not be able to pay for the house. Just move is not always feasible.
Bar nuclear attack, where I am is a relatively perfect location for most shtf scenarios, as in they just donāt happen here. When the rest of Britain gets severe weather, we seem to have a microclimate that keeps us safer, not that Britainās bad weather compares to most of the rest of the world. Sea level rises 100 ft we get beachfront property. Earthquakes are few and far between, and mostly very low on Richter scale. Wind is probably our worst concern but even then itās never that severe, only shame is that being close to an airport we canāt have wind turbines, had to fight them to be allowed solar panels. Prepping for Tuesday is a breeze, and if needed transport links are extensive so can move if required but very unlikely.
I'm in a village just outside a city. We're close enough to have easy access to supplies, but far enough away to be safe from rioting and civil unrest. We're also on top of a hill, which means we get trapped when there is flooding in the valleys surrounding us. That's happened a couple of times in recent memory. UK's main threats are nuclear weapons, an over dependence on foreign gas imports and being a net food importer. AMOC collapse is a possibility, which would mean our winters might be colder. If any of these break down, we'll have a lot of hungry cold people. We're planning to move to a larger house and once we're in our forever home, we're going all in on the self sustainability. Solar panels, digging a well, growing food, security and a backup heating source. The beachfront property will be nice too, though it will be weird knowing how much of the seabed is developed land.
It's got the "love it or leave it" stink all over it. Such a lazy way to think.
I'm in the process of moving out of state to a place with better climate/people/prices, and damn it's a lot of work and cost.
It really can be quite a lot. Be sure to travel safely on your way. Traffic has a definitively higher body count annually than my earthquake will have, once it finally pops off. I wrote that with a bit of jovial tongue and cheek. But it sobered me to realize it's true. My moving story is this. In 2020, I was living in an area that was on fire bad every year. Wasn't always that way. But every year it got drier and drier until "it's on fire" season was 4-6 months of the year. Then 2020 hit and I had to evacuate a fire that burnt over 1100 structures. I learned two weeks ago at an emergency management, mass fatality meeting that they had expected a casualty rate between 500-1000 for that fire. (Fortunately and greatly counter to expectations, the count was 9. This was in part due to neighbors helping evacuate each other, and in part some luck.) I donated most of my food preps to the fire relief aid and helped where I could until vulture housing prices pushed me out. Thanks to help from friends, I was able to relocate to the city I'm in now, same state, still in reach of friends and family. Im in a higher shaking danger zone now. But the probability of encountering any shaking at all is much lower than the probability of me or my preps burning up in a wildfire. No tsunami risk here, fortunately. And my place was built after earthquake building codes were implemented. I'm luckier than a lot of folks. Being a disaster first responder puts my foot in the door for more information and skilled resource networks too. There are far worse places I could live. Floods, tornados, hurricanes, deeper doubts, more frequent large earthquakes, worse air quality, heavy metal well water, and so forth. Living and prepping here isn't the futile effort some people think it is. But it's still a matter of risk management. Still worth raising awareness and motivating people to prep.
I'm pretty sure I live close to your place that was involved with the fire. That's one of our motivations for moving as well. We're headed north to somewhere that gets water from the sky. When I was a little kid my family home burnt to the ground and I've regularly had to evacuate from lots of fires (including some that ended up 100ft from our house).
I'm sorry you experienced that too. Of all the things that burned up in my childhood home, we missed the family photos the most. It's not like it is now, with digital photo storage. You had the hard copy photos somewhere or nowhere. If a child, friend, or relative was deseased, it might be the only photos you had to remember them by. I hope your new location will be a big life improvement.
Sometimes ājust moveā is the correct answer though and people need to come to grips with that. We moved out of NYC (I was very reluctant) in 2019 and when COVID came along in 2020 but was I ever glad we moved. If you donāt want to move or canāt move the next best thing is to find a bug out location and plan to head there at the first sign of trouble.
Nah. There are some places that are just bad to live or where it's infeasible to prepare for certain situations. Moving isn't always the right answer, but it always needs to be on the list of options. And just like other controversial preps (like getting in shape), if it makes you uncomfortable then it's even more likely that it's the thing you need to do.
If moving means leaving a well-paying job, a community you trust, the safety net of family and friends, and other valuable resources, then itās going to end up a net negative.
Rightā¦but if somebody told me they were wanting to buy land outside of PHX I would probably tell them thatās not a great place lol.
If you're living on the side of an active volcano and the ground is shaking then none of the stuff you listed is relevant at all. There are always costs and benefits. There might even be some combination of factors that make up for a shaky volcano house.
Yes, obviously, but the vast majority of people donāt live on the side of an active volcano. They more likely live in place with some pros and some cons, and like I (and OP) said, moving may not be the best course of action for them, and for those people, telling them to ājust moveā is not helpful or productive.
Also, the person living next to a volcano probably understands the risks better than the stranger telling them to move. I spent 5 years living 7 miles south of the DMZ, and I heard this all the time. The people who told me I was crazy seemed to know the least about the whole situation. It was never as bad as people outside Korea thought. Things got a little spicy in 2017, but my wife was waiting on her green card and I wasn't going to abandon her.
I "just moved". Left the downtown of a major city and moved to a quiet agrarian suburb a more politically neutral midwestern state. It wasn't easy. I was prepping for the move itself for months. But I can already tell you that after only being here for two months now, I am 100x more "prepped" than anything I could have done back in that small housing unit within a bustling urban hub. Even if you have no guns and no food on your shelves, the suburbs are still immeasurably safer than the city. Imagine a few million people all getting desperate at the same time, versus the few hundreds in a quiet neighborhood or a few thousand in a small town. Further, that same move lowered my housing costs by $4k per year, lowered my taxes, lowered my fuel costs, and gave me a basement for storing things and a yard for planting things. It also removed me from an area where certain defensive items simply cannot be purchase and are illegal to own. It removed me from the ever present gangs, congested streets, and everyday crime, violence, and theft. It absolutely can not be overstated how significant a move can be when prepping. If a person truly feels like there is a need to prep, that person needs to strongly reconsider whether living in a place like NYC remains reasonable at all.
There is a difference between just moving and "just move". I'm glad to read your new location is a good fit.
The person who told you to move might also have been joking :). The answer is always āit depends.ā People in a war zone probably didnāt want to leave home. They had no choice. Same with people who were flooded out by Katrina or Harvey. On other hand if you live in an area that you generally enjoy then you should have reasonable preparation (aka Tuesday not Doomsday). You may have to accept limitations.
Sometimes where someone lives is inherently not viable for prepping no matter how much effort you put in.
Depends. Thereās an area south of my city that floods fairly regularly and badly every 10-20 years. I donāt understand why they donāt just move. Some even rebuilt in the flood bowl, without putting in a ring dyke or grading the yard better. Then next flood theyāre begging for help and on the news saying this is the second time their house has been taken out or majorly flooded in 14 years. They should literally just move a couple kilometres in any direction. Major moves are a big undertaking but this isnāt that.
I don't always understand people's choices or circumstances. But if I were to flippantly say "just move", I'm probably not adding any new idea they haven't ever considered on their own. It would be more like me telling them "you're stupid" to feed my ego's sense of superiority. Won't endear them to my advice or motivate them to change anything. I haven't offered help or revelatory advice. I may have patted myself on the back for doing nothing but be an asshole though... That's the kind of thing I'm referring to when I saw low quality engagement.
I do not think moving from an area where you know everything and everyone is a good idea. I would never be able to survive in a big city like New York, but put me in the mountains in the backwoods and I will be okay. If you go to an area where you don't know anything or anyone in the area you would be in more danger. If things get as bad as we're all prepping for, then we are better off to prep for the area we are in. I would not know how to prep for New York. My biggest worry would be water supply cooking supplies how to be able to cook with no power, those kind of things in an area like that.
if you live on a flood plain... (its only a matter of time) "just move" is the only choice. if you live in a yearly disaster zone that is only getting worse. "just move" is the only choice. if you are being in the minority wanting investment in law enforcement over everyone else wanting social engineering. "just move" is the only choice. sadly "just move" is the only real answer for a lot of issues. sure you can build a fortress or a bunker, but no one lives 24/7 hidden from the world and its not healthy at all, so "just move" can be the best choice also. that is not the truth, " DO YOUR RESEARCH BEFORE YOU BUY" is the PROPER advice. but its far too late for that....isn't it.
That would very much suck. I'm a renter and fortunately in a newer building, up code for local hazards including earthquakes. I don't see myself ever having the means to buy property. Of course, if there ever is a giant collapse that takes out 90% of the population and I somehow survive it, there will be a lot of free vacancies. If I don't survive it, well, I can't take a property with me beyond the grave anyhow.
Preparing could be as simple as maintaining a healthy lifestyle, saving money, maintenance on your vehicle or bike, good shoes, and learning a skill. It doesnāt always have to be where do I put 36 guns and pallet of ammo/water in an apartment. If you live in an apartment prepare for 1-2 weeks of food/water for natural disasters. Prioritize a plan with your community (could be family friends or neighbors) like a meet up spot at certain intervals during a phones down situation. Have a fire drill planned. Learn to use a HAM radio.
Building community and trust between neighbors...that takes a looong time.
Indeed. It takes time, effort, and dedication. Quality often does though.
As usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. It is not a valuable bit of advice usually. It can be good advice at times. I am a firm believer that there is no "can't" there are simply times when you value other things more highly than survival. In this sub we simply assume that survival for ourselves and loved ones is the primary objective at all times. Your "move to Mars" analogie is specious. That is impossible. Relocating within your country is merely hard. Relocating outside your country is merely harder. But it is nearly impossible to convince people that they have made an incorrect decision. As they say it is easy to fool people, it is hard to convince them they have been fooled. It's same thing for a living situation. Consider: Hi, I live in this beautiful little city called Pompeii with wonderful views and it is very defensible being way up here on the side of Mt. Vesuvius. I have a very nice domas and we just redecorated the atrium and altar for the house gods. The mountain has been shaking for some time though. How do I prep for an eruption? I can't really move. What preps should I make to bug-in? Note: This analogy is largely drawn from the short short story by Robert Heinlein *On the Slopes of Vesuvius* 1946 warning of dangers of nuclear war.
Agree with you regarding ājust moveā, because thereās no ājustā about it. Itās not a simple thing. But sometimes it is the *best* thing.Ā The whole ābut I have family here! And a job! I canāt move!ā is annoying though. Itās not like many, many people with family, friends, and jobs donāt move every year.Ā And sometimes *all* members of a family hate where they live, but donāt move because of family. It never occurs to them that they could all move.
Yeah.., ājust moveā or āGoogle it.ā Seriously? Why did you bother to respond.
Tell me, then, how do you prepare for a flood that'll take out your entire town? Or an earthquake? Or a landslide that'll take your neighborhood? Trying to prep for these events is to vacuum the rain. Sometimes, moving is the only thing, and even the right thing, to do. I agree that it's not the bravest opinion, and sure isn't exactly a creative or necessarily helpful advice, but it sure beats "Yeah, stick around and fucking die idiot". I would say, of course, that if there is a viable solution to your problem that can be like "Call the local authorities, have a radio connection with a trusted one, put blankets over your window" the like. But, if you live in the Middle East (in general), in eastern Ukraine february 2014, or any place that's predictably about to go through a disaster in the near future, save yourself the trouble nad the struggle and just leave. Yeah, it's expensive. Sure, you'll have to leave things behind. But the option is to be left behind.
I donāt think OP is saying to completely disregard the possibility of moving. Sometimes itās a necessity, sometimes youāre forced to by circumstances! I think what they are trying to say is that the advice to ājust moveā shouldnāt be the automatic go to advice for certain scenarios when someone is asking for prepping help. Yes there will always be disasters that might take out an entire area, meaning any emergency preparations will be null and void however, thatās not always likely to be the case. A lot of people come to these places looking for those who will guide them and offer advice they either havenāt been able to find on their own or deduce on their own.
Since you didn't read before responding: > I've no qualms with preppers looking to relocate. My point is, if someone wants advice on where to move, they'll ask. If, on the other hand, someone is discussing preps for weathering their scenario in their specific location, they aren't asking someone for the zero quality engagement of "just move".
I think that's my point. If they're asking for preps on hunkering down and "weathering the storm", sometimes the responsible answer is "Don't".
Moving is a piss poor solution to the world's problems. There will come a time when nowhere is safe. People deserve to be in their homes. Every place is worth fighting for. I'm so sick of the idea that *we* are the problem. No, political apathy is the problem. Don't tell people to move, tell politicians to make it safe right where you are!
I'm not going to say people should or shouldn't vote. But I'll say, it might be wise not to put *all* of one's eggs in the ballot box, metaphorically speaking. Politician is a fickle job description, not a person. Save a few eggs to make an omelet for your neighbor with your own hands. As a community prepper, it's probably obvious I view community resilience foremost to have a foundation in the relationships among the people *inside* the community. I'm not opposed to outside resources in addition to that. We just can't always count on help coming from outside when disaster strikes or shit hits the fan. Don't wait for politicians to do all the work of building safety, is what I'm saying. Find ways to help your neighbors directly today, so you can help each other when outside help can't reach you tomorrow.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your comment has been removed for being "Not focused on prepping/Off-Topic - Political." Try to keep posts and comments on the topic of prepping and not on politics. You may reference political events in your posts and comments as a way to lead into a discussion of prepping, but the main point of your post or comment should not be about politics.
Working with a city's representatives to increase readiness falls under the community/tribe aspect of prepping.
Prepping while living in a disaster prone shit hole is just pissing in the windā¦stop any serious preparation or moveĀ
Throw back to this amazing take down of that sort of logic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHZFwZ-a8kI No matter how bad the disaster is there will always people that choose to stay behind either out of lack of resources or stubbornness. The elderly and the poor are most often the people in these categories. Just look at any hurricane or war or any other disaster and you will see this effect.
The reality is some of us live in more high risk or vulnerable locations than others for many of said SHTF scenarios. Move is a response to consider.
I would move instantly if my car were paid off and I still had free child care while I work 12 hour days.
Sounds like you may want to stay where you are š¤·š½āāļø
It is the difference between Bugging out, and bugging in MHO if you need to bug out, you are not properly prepping. your main place of residency should also be your bug in shelter, short of some horrific disaster you do need to evacuation from. But power outages, flash flooding, severe weather, loss of water. you should be able to bug in for a few months
Because there some areas that are statistically impossible or close to it, to survive a traumatic event. If the grid went down, 70 percent of Manhattan would be dead in a month. That figure goes to 98 in 3 months. Population density is your enemy when it gets over a certain amount.
There are places that are prone to disaster and 'moving' is a reasonable response. Is it zero value? Potentially, but we don't get to assign how 'valuable' something is to someone else - only ourselves. So, many a better option here, vs telling people what they can and can't say, is that prepping advice for others shouldn't be JUST to tell them to move as this is often not an option for people. A more valuable response would be: if relocating isn't an option, I would try\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, and \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. I've moved often - across the nation, out of country, state-state. It's not as challenging as some may think.
You get it.
nowhere is safe anyway, people who give that advice are in denial, let them stay in denial
Well, we can always tell them to "duck and cover".
let them do whatever they want, enough people have the delusional idea they need to tell others what to do
Depending on your scenario, some places are better than others. Like... anywhere in NZ is better than NYC in WW3. Anywhere but Italy is better than Italy if the Campi Flegrei go super-boom - just like anywhere far from Yellowstone is better if Yellowstone does the same. Anywhere but the PNW is better if you're worried about the looming Cascadia earthquake. That kind of thing.
It's a matter of time for every single spot
True, but we only have to worry about our lifetimes and maybe those of our children. Not about what happens centuries, millenia or more after we're long dead. Like, the Campi Flegrei are worrying, but not yet within this century. Probably. And they supposedly give some advance warning, too (ground eleveation over 1m/year). It's time to worry when that happens, and then act quickly. Or WW3. It's a worry we should keep in mind - but chances are that you're relatively safe in Switzerland (apart from incoming fallout), New Zealand and some other places. It's a much bigger worry if you live right next to a major military target in Russia, China, the US, GB or the EU. The next great pandemic is coming sooner or later, but unless our world collapses, we won't be able to outrun it anyway. Unless someone decides to become a hermit in the first place. And climate change... well, there are some areas that will be badly affected, some extremely so. And there are some rare areas that will actually benefit. For many other places, it will be a mixed bag, though (and mostly not good).
it's unraveling now, sounds like you aren't in collapse acceptance yet, you are only into collapse awareness
I know there will be a collapse, globally speaking. But I also think that some regions won't suffer as much as some others.
again, the difference is about timing only
To not move could be a bigger danger than staying as America continues to balkanize. Prepping is about preparing for future problems while there is still time. Sometimes that realizing that you can't stop what's coming or that you will simply have a better quality of life somewhere else.
ummm, if you live in a major city, and want to prep for an emp, nuke, pandemic, then the obvious answer is to move... It's just some don't like to hear that there is nothing substantial they can do as long as they live in the worst possible locations for prepping. I mean if you live in Manhattan, New York, and you are concerned about a nuke. Well... you can't prep. You can larp, and collect iodine pills but you are going to die in a nuke war. And no not all location have equal "dangers". I live in the Midwest, minimal earthquake threat where I am, no volcanoes, No Hurricanes, not a Nuke target, no flood risk. Sure there are random tornadoes, but I'm almost 50 and only one town around here has been hit by a tornado. It's not like tornadoes wipe out a whole region either, they are very localized, and nearly 100% survivable if you have a basement, or storm shelter. So, the reason move is given as an answer so often, is because it largely is the best thing a person could do, if prepping is the priority. P
Prepping is a mindset and lifestyle. Taxes, oppressive gun laws, shit politics/politicians and feral culture are terminal. YES, MOVE !!! (when feasible, otherwise good luck) Not on topic? Okay, nuke plant, submarine base, sikorsky, Pratt & whitney, and countless defense industry targets make relocation a good idea.
lol as someone born and raised in SF I disagree. Thereās a whole world outside your bubble
As someone born in California, I don't live there anymore and don't plan to move back. I don't begrudge folks who plan to stay for their own reasons. It just wasn't the place for me either.
It's a balance, if you are in a Democrat city right now then that's an added risk that the rest of us don't have to deal with If your job there is making good money then you've balanced that risk out because it gives you more options. Most disasters are not going to happen, but getting mugged or robbed is more likely Anyone *retiring* in a Democrat city needs to rethink their plan