Logistics in the coronavirus pandemic

[Libertarian666]

The greatest threat to the average person who isn't in a high-risk category (old and/or generally unhealthy) is probably a breakdown in the supply chains for essential goods and services.

I can think of a few categories of people who are going to be very high priority in terms of keeping the supply chains working.

1. Truck drivers. They are generally older and not in good general health, so this is a big concern.
2. Doctors and nurses.
3. Other health professionals.

Who else?

[dualstow]

In that Tim Pool video kriegsspiel linked, he was saying that since we outsourced a lot of our medicine production to China, they could just turn it off.

[yankees60]

The greatest threat to the average person who isn't in a high-risk category (old and/or generally unhealthy) is probably a breakdown in the supply chains for essential goods and services.

I can think of a few categories of people who are going to be very high priority in terms of keeping the supply chains working.

1. Truck drivers. They are generally older and not in good general health, so this is a big concern.
2. Doctors and nurses.
3. Other health professionals.

Who else?

You are missing a HUGE one and I may perhaps have a bias in this area.

My father was a Turbine Operator for the Narragansett Electric Company in Rhode Island.

I remember him never missing a single day of work for being sick. And, there were ZERO "snow" days. In other words, he was definitely one of those "essential" workers.

All the ones you list above cannot do anything (along with the rest of us) if the utility workers (electric, gas, water, (now internet)) are not on the job, carrying out their duties. However, I don't know how much since my father's time either no longer requires a physical presence or can now be done remotely or has not been automated.

I'd guess that his job has been since his job was strictly to monitor all the meters and make sure that they were all within acceptable limits. I asked him many time if he'd take me to work one day to see what he did. And, he said he would. But it never happened.

Vinny

[Libertarian666]

The greatest threat to the average person who isn't in a high-risk category (old and/or generally unhealthy) is probably a breakdown in the supply chains for essential goods and services.

I can think of a few categories of people who are going to be very high priority in terms of keeping the supply chains working.

1. Truck drivers. They are generally older and not in good general health, so this is a big concern.
2. Doctors and nurses.
3. Other health professionals.

Who else?

You are missing a HUGE one and I may perhaps have a bias in this area.

My father was a Turbine Operator for the Narragansett Electric Company in Rhode Island.

I remember him never missing a single day of work for being sick. And, there were ZERO "snow" days. In other words, he was definitely one of those "essential" workers.

All the ones you list above cannot do anything (along with the rest of us) if the utility workers (electric, gas, water, (now internet)) are not on the job, carrying out their duties. However, I don't know how much since my father's time either no longer requires a physical presence or can now be done remotely or has not been automated.

I'd guess that his job has been since his job was strictly to monitor all the meters and make sure that they were all within acceptable limits. I asked him many time if he'd take me to work one day to see what he did. And, he said he would. But it never happened.

Vinny

No, you are right.
Water, power, sewer (for those people on a sewer system), and telecommunications are all tremendously important in our modern society.
I have backups for all of those other than telecommunications, and even there my short-range amateur radio transceivers will be helpful.
But most people don't, and they are going to be in a world of hurt if those essential services aren't maintained.

[yankees60]

The greatest threat to the average person who isn't in a high-risk category (old and/or generally unhealthy) is probably a breakdown in the supply chains for essential goods and services.

I can think of a few categories of people who are going to be very high priority in terms of keeping the supply chains working.

1. Truck drivers. They are generally older and not in good general health, so this is a big concern.
2. Doctors and nurses.
3. Other health professionals.

Who else?

You are missing a HUGE one and I may perhaps have a bias in this area.

My father was a Turbine Operator for the Narragansett Electric Company in Rhode Island.

I remember him never missing a single day of work for being sick. And, there were ZERO "snow" days. In other words, he was definitely one of those "essential" workers.

All the ones you list above cannot do anything (along with the rest of us) if the utility workers (electric, gas, water, (now internet)) are not on the job, carrying out their duties. However, I don't know how much since my father's time either no longer requires a physical presence or can now be done remotely or has not been automated.

I'd guess that his job has been since his job was strictly to monitor all the meters and make sure that they were all within acceptable limits. I asked him many time if he'd take me to work one day to see what he did. And, he said he would. But it never happened.

Vinny

No, you are right.
Water, power, sewer (for those people on a sewer system), and telecommunications are all tremendously important in our modern society.
I have backups for all of those other than telecommunications, and even there my short-range amateur radio transceivers will be helpful.
But most people don't, and they are going to be in a world of hurt if those essential services aren't maintained.

I thought I was going to go solar about three years ago. But, for various reason, I did not. However, just recently I thought I would for one reason (and fully casting aside all those reasons not). But it seems like that reason is not real.

That reason would be as a source of power if electricity from my provider was down for any reason.

But my understanding is that there is something put in the solar systems so that if power is not being delivered to your house then your system goes inoperative. This is to prevent utility workers from getting shocked or electrocuted when they are working on the repairing the utility lines. Do I have all of this correct?

If so, it seems like there should be some kind of switch whereby you can totally disconnect from the utility wires and be strictly on your own system.

I know that you can be further solar self-sufficient using batteries. But that seems to bring in a total different magnitude of cost associated with installing a solar system.

Vinny

[Libertarian666]

The greatest threat to the average person who isn't in a high-risk category (old and/or generally unhealthy) is probably a breakdown in the supply chains for essential goods and services.

I can think of a few categories of people who are going to be very high priority in terms of keeping the supply chains working.

1. Truck drivers. They are generally older and not in good general health, so this is a big concern.
2. Doctors and nurses.
3. Other health professionals.

Who else?

You are missing a HUGE one and I may perhaps have a bias in this area.

My father was a Turbine Operator for the Narragansett Electric Company in Rhode Island.

I remember him never missing a single day of work for being sick. And, there were ZERO "snow" days. In other words, he was definitely one of those "essential" workers.

All the ones you list above cannot do anything (along with the rest of us) if the utility workers (electric, gas, water, (now internet)) are not on the job, carrying out their duties. However, I don't know how much since my father's time either no longer requires a physical presence or can now be done remotely or has not been automated.

I'd guess that his job has been since his job was strictly to monitor all the meters and make sure that they were all within acceptable limits. I asked him many time if he'd take me to work one day to see what he did. And, he said he would. But it never happened.

Vinny

No, you are right.
Water, power, sewer (for those people on a sewer system), and telecommunications are all tremendously important in our modern society.
I have backups for all of those other than telecommunications, and even there my short-range amateur radio transceivers will be helpful.
But most people don't, and they are going to be in a world of hurt if those essential services aren't maintained.

I thought I was going to go solar about three years ago. But, for various reason, I did not. However, just recently I thought I would for one reason (and fully casting aside all those reasons not). But it seems like that reason is not real.

That reason would be as a source of power if electricity from my provider was down for any reason.

But my understanding is that there is something put in the solar systems so that if power is not being delivered to your house then your system goes inoperative. This is to prevent utility workers from getting shocked or electrocuted when they are working on the repairing the utility lines. Do I have all of this correct?

If so, it seems like there should be some kind of switch whereby you can totally disconnect from the utility wires and be strictly on your own system.

I know that you can be further solar self-sufficient using batteries. But that seems to bring in a total different magnitude of cost associated with installing a solar system.

Vinny

I have a very sophisticated system with commercial-grade inverters made by Trace Engineering, now Xantrex (http://www.xantrex.com/). When the inverters go on battery/generator power, they disconnect from the grid in a fraction of a second to prevent utility workers from being harmed by the backflow.

My system consists of the inverters, a battery bank, and a couple of propane-powered generators. My home electrical line comes from the utility connection to the house, then from the house to my backup system and returns from the backup system. All of the 110V circuits in my house are backed up by the inverters, so I have to look at the clock on my 220V stove to know that the grid power is out.

I used to have enough batteries to run the house for a couple of days but my original golf-cart batteries had a relatively short service life and the longer-lived ones I replaced them with got fried during an electrical storm some years ago. Now I have only enough battery capacity to bridge a short outage (15 minutes or so), and then I have to go start one of the generators to recharge the batteries and give power to the house.

I spent about $30k on this system 22 years ago, due to my concerns about y2k. It has come in handy a few times during ice storms but that's about it.

So far.

[yankees60]

The greatest threat to the average person who isn't in a high-risk category (old and/or generally unhealthy) is probably a breakdown in the supply chains for essential goods and services.

I can think of a few categories of people who are going to be very high priority in terms of keeping the supply chains working.

1. Truck drivers. They are generally older and not in good general health, so this is a big concern.
2. Doctors and nurses.
3. Other health professionals.

Who else?

You are missing a HUGE one and I may perhaps have a bias in this area.

My father was a Turbine Operator for the Narragansett Electric Company in Rhode Island.

I remember him never missing a single day of work for being sick. And, there were ZERO "snow" days. In other words, he was definitely one of those "essential" workers.

All the ones you list above cannot do anything (along with the rest of us) if the utility workers (electric, gas, water, (now internet)) are not on the job, carrying out their duties. However, I don't know how much since my father's time either no longer requires a physical presence or can now be done remotely or has not been automated.

I'd guess that his job has been since his job was strictly to monitor all the meters and make sure that they were all within acceptable limits. I asked him many time if he'd take me to work one day to see what he did. And, he said he would. But it never happened.

Vinny

No, you are right.
Water, power, sewer (for those people on a sewer system), and telecommunications are all tremendously important in our modern society.
I have backups for all of those other than telecommunications, and even there my short-range amateur radio transceivers will be helpful.
But most people don't, and they are going to be in a world of hurt if those essential services aren't maintained.

I thought I was going to go solar about three years ago. But, for various reason, I did not. However, just recently I thought I would for one reason (and fully casting aside all those reasons not). But it seems like that reason is not real.

That reason would be as a source of power if electricity from my provider was down for any reason.

But my understanding is that there is something put in the solar systems so that if power is not being delivered to your house then your system goes inoperative. This is to prevent utility workers from getting shocked or electrocuted when they are working on the repairing the utility lines. Do I have all of this correct?

If so, it seems like there should be some kind of switch whereby you can totally disconnect from the utility wires and be strictly on your own system.

I know that you can be further solar self-sufficient using batteries. But that seems to bring in a total different magnitude of cost associated with installing a solar system.

Vinny

I have a very sophisticated system with commercial-grade inverters made by Trace Engineering, now Xantrex (http://www.xantrex.com/). When the inverters go on battery/generator power, they disconnect from the grid in a fraction of a second to prevent utility workers from being harmed by the backflow.

My system consists of the inverters, a battery bank, and a couple of propane-powered generators. My home electrical line comes from the utility connection to the house, then from the house to my backup system and returns from the backup system. All of the 110V circuits in my house are backed up by the inverters, so I have to look at the clock on my 220V stove to know that the grid power is out.

I used to have enough batteries to run the house for a couple of days but my original golf-cart batteries had a relatively short service life and the longer-lived ones I replaced them with got fried during an electrical storm some years ago. Now I have only enough battery capacity to bridge a short outage (15 minutes or so), and then I have to go start one of the generators to recharge the batteries and give power to the house.

I spent about $30k on this system 22 years ago, due to my concerns about y2k. It has come in handy a few times during ice storms but that's about it.

So far.

But you are affirming that if in June for days or weeks there was no power being supplied by your utility that then you would not in any way be able to use 13 hours of daily sunlight to create (and use) electricity from your solar system? Or, you DO have that capability? As I'm again reading what you wrote now I'm thinking it is the latter?

Vinny

[Libertarian666]

The greatest threat to the average person who isn't in a high-risk category (old and/or generally unhealthy) is probably a breakdown in the supply chains for essential goods and services.

I can think of a few categories of people who are going to be very high priority in terms of keeping the supply chains working.

1. Truck drivers. They are generally older and not in good general health, so this is a big concern.
2. Doctors and nurses.
3. Other health professionals.

Who else?

You are missing a HUGE one and I may perhaps have a bias in this area.

My father was a Turbine Operator for the Narragansett Electric Company in Rhode Island.

I remember him never missing a single day of work for being sick. And, there were ZERO "snow" days. In other words, he was definitely one of those "essential" workers.

All the ones you list above cannot do anything (along with the rest of us) if the utility workers (electric, gas, water, (now internet)) are not on the job, carrying out their duties. However, I don't know how much since my father's time either no longer requires a physical presence or can now be done remotely or has not been automated.

I'd guess that his job has been since his job was strictly to monitor all the meters and make sure that they were all within acceptable limits. I asked him many time if he'd take me to work one day to see what he did. And, he said he would. But it never happened.

Vinny

No, you are right.
Water, power, sewer (for those people on a sewer system), and telecommunications are all tremendously important in our modern society.
I have backups for all of those other than telecommunications, and even there my short-range amateur radio transceivers will be helpful.
But most people don't, and they are going to be in a world of hurt if those essential services aren't maintained.

I thought I was going to go solar about three years ago. But, for various reason, I did not. However, just recently I thought I would for one reason (and fully casting aside all those reasons not). But it seems like that reason is not real.

That reason would be as a source of power if electricity from my provider was down for any reason.

But my understanding is that there is something put in the solar systems so that if power is not being delivered to your house then your system goes inoperative. This is to prevent utility workers from getting shocked or electrocuted when they are working on the repairing the utility lines. Do I have all of this correct?

If so, it seems like there should be some kind of switch whereby you can totally disconnect from the utility wires and be strictly on your own system.

I know that you can be further solar self-sufficient using batteries. But that seems to bring in a total different magnitude of cost associated with installing a solar system.

Vinny

I have a very sophisticated system with commercial-grade inverters made by Trace Engineering, now Xantrex (http://www.xantrex.com/). When the inverters go on battery/generator power, they disconnect from the grid in a fraction of a second to prevent utility workers from being harmed by the backflow.

My system consists of the inverters, a battery bank, and a couple of propane-powered generators. My home electrical line comes from the utility connection to the house, then from the house to my backup system and returns from the backup system. All of the 110V circuits in my house are backed up by the inverters, so I have to look at the clock on my 220V stove to know that the grid power is out.

I used to have enough batteries to run the house for a couple of days but my original golf-cart batteries had a relatively short service life and the longer-lived ones I replaced them with got fried during an electrical storm some years ago. Now I have only enough battery capacity to bridge a short outage (15 minutes or so), and then I have to go start one of the generators to recharge the batteries and give power to the house.

I spent about $30k on this system 22 years ago, due to my concerns about y2k. It has come in handy a few times during ice storms but that's about it.

So far.

But you are affirming that if in June for days or weeks there was no power being supplied by your utility that then you would not in any way be able to use 13 hours of daily sunlight to create (and use) electricity from your solar system? Or, you DO have that capability? As I'm again reading what you wrote now I'm thinking it is the latter?

Vinny

No, my solar panels can't contribute much of anything these days. They are also over 20 years old and there are leaves blocking their sunlight as well.

At this point I'm pretty much dependent on propane for backup power, although in dire circumstances I might be willing to get my steam engines running. I'd much rather not do that though because I'm out of practice and steam is very dangerous if you don't handle it exactly correctly.

BTW, apparently Xantrex isn't in the fixed power market any more, just mobile. Here's the data sheet for the current version of my inverters, now made by Schneider Electric: https://41j5tc3akbrn3uezx5av0jj1bgm-wpe ... -SW_NA.pdf

[Cortopassi]

Steam engines. Wow!

[dualstow]

LOGISTICS REPORT
U.S. Suspends Truck-Driving Limits to Speed Coronavirus Shipments
The move comes as hospitals report shortages and retailers and manufacturers strain under surging demand

U.S. highway-safety regulators are suspending rules that limit daily driving hours for truck drivers moving emergency supplies such as medical equipment, hand sanitizer and food in response to the nationwide coronavirus outbreak.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-suspen ... 1584200091

We could use some of those Tesla self-driving trucks right now. Perhaps the drivers could nap in them.
Alas, not perfected yet.

[yankees60]

LOGISTICS REPORT
U.S. Suspends Truck-Driving Limits to Speed Coronavirus Shipments
The move comes as hospitals report shortages and retailers and manufacturers strain under surging demand

U.S. highway-safety regulators are suspending rules that limit daily driving hours for truck drivers moving emergency supplies such as medical equipment, hand sanitizer and food in response to the nationwide coronavirus outbreak.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-suspen ... 1584200091

We could use some of those Tesla self-driving trucks right now. Perhaps the drivers could nap in them.
Alas, not perfected yet.

Is this not saying they are increasing the risks to both the truck drivers and all the other drivers surrounding them but that they believe the extra value gained by having these supplies will be greater than the no doubt extra harm caused by the truck drivers to both themselves and others?

Vinny

[drumminj]

With the reduced travel and traffic, I would think freight moves faster on the highways these days anyway. Is relaxing those protections actually required?

[Libertarian666]

LOGISTICS REPORT
U.S. Suspends Truck-Driving Limits to Speed Coronavirus Shipments
The move comes as hospitals report shortages and retailers and manufacturers strain under surging demand

U.S. highway-safety regulators are suspending rules that limit daily driving hours for truck drivers moving emergency supplies such as medical equipment, hand sanitizer and food in response to the nationwide coronavirus outbreak.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-suspen ... 1584200091

We could use some of those Tesla self-driving trucks right now. Perhaps the drivers could nap in them.
Alas, not perfected yet.

Is this not saying they are increasing the risks to both the truck drivers and all the other drivers surrounding them but that they believe the extra value gained by having these supplies will be greater than the no doubt extra harm caused by the truck drivers to both themselves and others?

Vinny

Yes.

[Libertarian666]

With the reduced travel and traffic, I would think freight moves faster on the highways these days anyway. Is relaxing those protections actually required?

Unless they get rid of the speed limits, I wouldn't think that the marginal throughput improvement from lower traffic help very much.

Also, if there is less traffic, letting the drivers drive longer is less likely to result in crashes.

We may see National Guard members driving supply trucks.

[yankees60]

With the reduced travel and traffic, I would think freight moves faster on the highways these days anyway. Is relaxing those protections actually required?

Unless they get rid of the speed limits, I wouldn't think that the marginal throughput improvement from lower traffic help very much.

Also, if there is less traffic, letting the drivers drive longer is less likely to result in crashes.

We may see National Guard members driving supply trucks.

But those National Guard members would have to have the proper licenses to drive those truck which I'd bet an extremely low percentage of them do.

One time my company rented a truck. And, it was going to cost so much extra $$$$$$ to not get it back by a certain hour when we no longer needed it. None of our truck drivers were available so I brought it back. First and only time I'd even driven a truck of that size (more bigger and more complicated than a UHaul truck). I'd had a lot experience driving standard transmission cars so it turned out not to be an impossible task for me. After I came back to the office one of our truck drivers was there and he said, "You drove that back? That truck requires a [license level I did not have]". That had not even crossed my mind when I decided to drive it.

Therefore I think this may also be the case with the vast majority of those in the National Guard unless their membership consists of a disproportionately high percentage of truck drivers.

Vinny

Vinny

[Kriegsspiel]

With the reduced travel and traffic, I would think freight moves faster on the highways these days anyway. Is relaxing those protections actually required?

Unless they get rid of the speed limits, I wouldn't think that the marginal throughput improvement from lower traffic help very much.

Also, if there is less traffic, letting the drivers drive longer is less likely to result in crashes.

We may see National Guard members driving supply trucks.

But those National Guard members would have to have the proper licenses to drive those truck which I'd bet an extremely low percentage of them do.

One time my company rented a truck. And, it was going to cost so much extra $$$$$$ to not get it back by a certain hour when we no longer needed it. None of our truck drivers were available so I brought it back. First and only time I'd even driven a truck of that size (more bigger and more complicated than a UHaul truck). I'd had a lot experience driving standard transmission cars so it turned out not to be an impossible task for me. After I came back to the office one of our truck drivers was there and he said, "You drove that back? That truck requires a [license level I did not have]". That had not even crossed my mind when I decided to drive it.

Therefore I think this may also be the case with the vast majority of those in the National Guard unless their membership consists of a disproportionately high percentage of truck drivers.

Vinny

Vinny

The NG would have their own vehicles they would be driving. AFAIK it isn't legal for the government to activate the NG and then tell them to operate a civilian company's vehicles.

[Libertarian666]

With the reduced travel and traffic, I would think freight moves faster on the highways these days anyway. Is relaxing those protections actually required?

Unless they get rid of the speed limits, I wouldn't think that the marginal throughput improvement from lower traffic help very much.

Also, if there is less traffic, letting the drivers drive longer is less likely to result in crashes.

We may see National Guard members driving supply trucks.

But those National Guard members would have to have the proper licenses to drive those truck which I'd bet an extremely low percentage of them do.

One time my company rented a truck. And, it was going to cost so much extra $$$$$$ to not get it back by a certain hour when we no longer needed it. None of our truck drivers were available so I brought it back. First and only time I'd even driven a truck of that size (more bigger and more complicated than a UHaul truck). I'd had a lot experience driving standard transmission cars so it turned out not to be an impossible task for me. After I came back to the office one of our truck drivers was there and he said, "You drove that back? That truck requires a [license level I did not have]". That had not even crossed my mind when I decided to drive it.

Therefore I think this may also be the case with the vast majority of those in the National Guard unless their membership consists of a disproportionately high percentage of truck drivers.

Vinny

Vinny

All of those rules will be suspended when the situation gets bad enough.
You heard it here first.

[Libertarian666]

With the reduced travel and traffic, I would think freight moves faster on the highways these days anyway. Is relaxing those protections actually required?

Unless they get rid of the speed limits, I wouldn't think that the marginal throughput improvement from lower traffic help very much.

Also, if there is less traffic, letting the drivers drive longer is less likely to result in crashes.

We may see National Guard members driving supply trucks.

But those National Guard members would have to have the proper licenses to drive those truck which I'd bet an extremely low percentage of them do.

One time my company rented a truck. And, it was going to cost so much extra $$$$$$ to not get it back by a certain hour when we no longer needed it. None of our truck drivers were available so I brought it back. First and only time I'd even driven a truck of that size (more bigger and more complicated than a UHaul truck). I'd had a lot experience driving standard transmission cars so it turned out not to be an impossible task for me. After I came back to the office one of our truck drivers was there and he said, "You drove that back? That truck requires a [license level I did not have]". That had not even crossed my mind when I decided to drive it.

Therefore I think this may also be the case with the vast majority of those in the National Guard unless their membership consists of a disproportionately high percentage of truck drivers.

Vinny

Vinny

The NG would have their own vehicles they would be driving. AFAIK it isn't legal for the government to activate the NG and then tell them to operate a civilian company's vehicles.

The President has extraordinary powers during a declaration of emergency.
I'm pretty sure that would come under the power of eminent domain.

[Tortoise]

I don’t know if this has been discussed in another thread yet, but one supply chain issue I see coming is a shortage of ventilators.

Currently, not just any company can decide to start making ventilators to help get us through this pandemic. Ventilators are medical devices, and as such are heavily regulated by the FDA.

The application process to get approval from the FDA takes many months, and that’s after the company has done extensive testing to prove that the ventilator is safe under all possible conditions.

Unless our government significantly relaxes or lifts those regulations on ventilators very soon and publicly encourages companies to crank out ventilators ASAP as a matter of national security, we may find ourselves with a severe shortage of them.

[Libertarian666]

I don’t know if this has been discussed in another thread yet, but one supply chain issue I see coming is a shortage of ventilators.

Currently, not just any company can decide to start making ventilators to help get us through this pandemic. Ventilators are medical devices, and as such are heavily regulated by the FDA.

The application process to get approval from the FDA takes many months, and that’s after the company has done extensive testing to prove that the ventilator is safe under all possible conditions.

Unless our government significantly relaxes or lifts those regulations on ventilators very soon and publicly encourages companies to crank out ventilators ASAP as a matter of national security, we may find ourselves with a severe shortage of them.

I believe such regulations would be relaxed as soon as the shortage appears.
Which is much too late to do any good.
In fact, those companies that make them should be running 3 shifts 7 days a week, but they aren't.
Why not?

Because of exponential growth. Almost no one understands what that means.

[Smith1776]

This whole situation with hoarding items from the grocery store is like a giant version of prisoners dilemma. Or perhaps a derivative of the tragedy of commons.

A lot of the buying of consumer items from grocery stores isn't from fear of the virus. It's the knowledge that everyone else is stocking up, so there may not be much left for oneself.

If somehow we could all just agree to, for lack of a better term, not be assholes and engage in unnecessary hoarding, then nobody else would have to hoard in response.

Having said all that, I am something of a prepper myself due to our earthquake risk here in Vancouver. Which I think is very real and something that is very reasonable to plan for. Should the situation somehow turn extreme, we should be okay here in my household.

[Libertarian666]

This whole situation with hoarding items from the grocery store is like a giant version of prisoners dilemma. Or perhaps a derivative of the tragedy of commons.

A lot of the buying of consumer items from grocery stores isn't from fear of the virus. It's the knowledge that everyone else is stocking up, so there may not be much left for oneself.

If somehow we could all just agree to, for lack of a better term, not be assholes and engage in unnecessary hoarding, then nobody else would have to hoard in response.

Having said all that, I am something of a prepper myself due to our earthquake risk here in Vancouver. Which I think is very real and something that is very reasonable to plan for. Should the situation somehow turn extreme, we should be okay here in my household.

My opinion is that the real problem is that most people don't think at all about what might happen if the normal supply chain is broken.

Even though it is a longstanding recommendation of every emergency management organization to be able to avoid going out for at least 72 hours, almost no one does even that much.

I don't think anything short of an epic disaster is going to change that, and maybe even that won't have long-lasting effects without a change in the culture.

[Smith1776]

Right. In a world of just-in-time inventory management and delivery, we live in a world with a thin veneer of what we call "civilization."

The division of labour might make us all more productive in aggregate, but it also seems to make us all more vulnerable in aggregate.

[Libertarian666]

Right. In a world of just-in-time inventory management and delivery, we live in a world with a thin veneer of what we call "civilization."

The division of labour might make us all more productive in aggregate, but it also seems to make us all more vulnerable in aggregate.

I'm very specialized in my occupation.
That doesn't mean I ignore the fact that bad things can happen that would require me to be able to sustain myself without the usual facilities for a time.

I think most people have much too high a rate of time preference.

[Smith1776]

I'm very specialized in my occupation.
That doesn't mean I ignore the fact that bad things can happen that would require me to be able to sustain myself without the usual facilities for a time.

I think most people have much too high a rate of time preference.

I'd agree with that.