An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
The comments on the article pointed out how this is just a scam. They can sell the same bunkers more than once, and if there is an uprising, people would just need to smoke them out by going after their vents.Bunkers only work against air attacks.A fool and his money...
I was smiling when I read it, too, thinking of someone selling timeshares. It's clearly a puff piece, but some people are apparently buying.
You'll need a bunker, a rifle, and a stash of gold and silver coins. With those essentials you'll be good to go ;)
I don't know about you guys but it seems to me that if(when?) the worst case scenario does come true, the people who stayed holed up for a year and just ran from the conflict would be the losers as opposed to the winners. Staying alive and getting to be some kind of Adam or Eve is not my idea of great end to life. If we totally ruin the potential we currently have by blowing this place up, I don't want to be around. Hard to see those who did survive as winners of anything.Life is more than just a survival contest.
Greg, the instinct for survival is strong. And when you have a family, even more so.
Right Bob, I agreeWhat I find puzzling is I think there is actually a pretty strong belief by a significant number of people ( I estimate 15-25%) that my above described scenario would be an improvement and that they would see their continued existence as a "win"I have a strong urge to survive... and fight for what I believe... but an apocalypse would be a loss for everyone. If we waste 95% of humanity due to hubris and revenge, we are losers.
From a primitivist perspective it would be a win. And from the perspective of those who are physically strong with aggressive tendencies, they may believe themselves to be more suited to a scavenger lifestyle.
Post a Comment