You need to weigh six weeks worth of food up with risk analysis. What is the cost of stockpiling an amount of food? What is the likelyhood that you will require it? What is the downside of stockpiling it and not needing it? What is the downside of not stockpiling it and needing it? The 'safest' possible outcome is several decades worth of long life food, with a vast underground bunker complex that is self sufficient and self sustaining, for at least a few dozen people. When I've seen what super-power governments have made for their leaderships, at the height of the cold war, this outcome seems comparable, yet the entire economic output of a super-power seems to even underspend on this, so what likelyhood have I, as a single income earner, got to justify or acheive the several hundred million dollars of expense for this mitigation factor? Besides, I've seen all the TV shows about this. All I have to do is isolate myself from infection and survive, and then I can just take whatever I want from the abandonded shops anyway, or even from the pantries of my now deceased neighbours. Six weeks is plenty. More than six weeks starts to become difficult to store, and shelflife starts to enter into things too. More than the six weeks of food, I'd think that providing some independance of the power grid and water mains would be more important, and more useful long term if a pandemic didn't occur anyway. If you need more than 6 weeks of food to survive this, then the lights and water have also gone out. I can go out and get more food from the abandonded supermarkets, but turning the lights back on is much more tricky.
You need to weigh six weeks worth of food up with risk analysis.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the cost of stockpiling an amount of food?
What is the likelyhood that you will require it?
What is the downside of stockpiling it and not needing it?
What is the downside of not stockpiling it and needing it?
The 'safest' possible outcome is several decades worth of long life food, with a vast underground bunker complex that is self sufficient and self sustaining, for at least a few dozen people.
When I've seen what super-power governments have made for their leaderships, at the height of the cold war, this outcome seems comparable, yet the entire economic output of a super-power seems to even underspend on this, so what likelyhood have I, as a single income earner, got to justify or acheive the several hundred million dollars of expense for this mitigation factor?
Besides, I've seen all the TV shows about this.
All I have to do is isolate myself from infection and survive, and then I can just take whatever I want from the abandonded shops anyway, or even from the pantries of my now deceased neighbours.
Six weeks is plenty.
More than six weeks starts to become difficult to store, and shelflife starts to enter into things too.
More than the six weeks of food, I'd think that providing some independance of the power grid and water mains would be more important, and more useful long term if a pandemic didn't occur anyway.
If you need more than 6 weeks of food to survive this, then the lights and water have also gone out. I can go out and get more food from the abandonded supermarkets, but turning the lights back on is much more tricky.