It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What % population decrease would cause collapse of civilisation?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:17 AM
link   
hypothetical question - if people die randomly, what is the percentage at which society collapses?
Obviously if 1 person per 10000 dies, then society pretty much carries on as usual, if 90% die then we're in the creek without a paddle.
at some point between, there is a tipping point, and my guess is that it's a lot lower than most people would guess.
I would suspect that as low as 10% might be enough...
If enough people die, and stop turning up for work, things will be affected, supply chains, Air traffic control, shop keepers, hospital staff, bus drivers, etc. How many people work in a nuclear power plant at any one time? how many of those are truly necessary for it's operation? how many would have to be off work for a shutdown, or similar? what about other things like petrol stations - what if 10% of petrol stations are closed due to lack of staff - is that enough that there's then riots at other petrol stations?
I suspect parts of China are already at or above this value.




posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: CrastneyJPR

I suspect it depends on which demographic that percent die off affects 1st.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: CrastneyJPR

I would also say it depends on where the population was decreased and what level of technology was in use. 30% of the European population perished during the black death, but civilization didn't collapse because the level of technology in use didn't require as many specialists as our level of technology today does.

I suspect your question is more complex than it looks at first glance.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket
ok - if it's killing off under 10s - no collapse, straight away.
if it's killing off over 65s - no collapse straight away.

but my OP was based on it being random (which we know CV isn't).
but we could assume random on those who are contributing to society, so 16 yr olds - 65 year olds.

CV is in China at the moment - so base your answers/guesses on that, but why not also look at other individual countries.

I don't know the answer - I'm after information from the hive mind. suggestions, and reasons why.

I think China being communist, and the way it is structured, and managed, society there won't collapse.
They've built completely empty cities in the middle of nowhere - what for? maybe to relocate thousands (Millions?) of refugees? evacuees? people immune to CV all in one place - start again in a new city, with a fresh population immune to whatever is killing everyone else?

edit on 10-2-2020 by CrastneyJPR because: more info



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Doubt it would be loss of people that does it as much as the system bring crushed during the deaths that would break everything.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:30 AM
link   
In the movie Avenger: Endgame, it never explains how they, as a society, coped with half of humanity gone.

Judging from the scenes of the movie, everything is status quo still it would seem, but empty, trashed and desolate neighborhoods.

You can see lawncare and basic landscaping is ignored.
Captain America acknowledges that with a smaller population of people, animal populations started to rebound, noting a pod of whales on the way to work.

However, that's a movie in a movie scenario.

In reality, I think it'll be the same, but with increased crime and degenerancy.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Since it's usually the elder and the weaker I think civilisation can take a big number without colapsing...



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:42 AM
link   
The black death is not a very good example as though it killed thousands in an are, whole towns and villages were abandoned and those that were left just moved to better places. But more importantly everybody had nothing of value, not like today, so they were all in the same boat.
In todays society it only takes one section to destabilise a whole country and that's the electric industry as virtually all society depends on electric. Electric for lighting, heating, powering water pumps, powering diesel pumps, the list goes on.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: CrastneyJPR

I agree the number of affected people required to shift the tipping point, is much lower than we think.

In the average home, one person taking ill affects the entire household, so it is not just one person that is removed from their normal schedule.

One person being severely ill or dying, can impact quite a large number of people and factors.

I just got a text message asking for volunteers to change their schedule because the spouse of one of my co-workers is headed to hospital after a freak accident.

On the surface it seems like a small problem but we are already 3 people short. We have 4 brand new employees that are not ready to fly on their own without adequate support, and a new inexperienced Director. This may cause a operational shut down for a brief spell.

That is just because of one person and a situation that was not expected. Make that 10 people and you can see how things can expotenially go haywire.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:53 AM
link   

edit on 10-2-2020 by 0zzymand0s because: not on topic



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: CrastneyJPR

I think blue jacket is correct.

The entire population of Africa could die and civilisation would continue just fine.

Kill off all of Europe and things would be effected.

Truthfully it's not the percentage of deaths that would be the problem, it would be the percentage of people refusing to go to work that would be the biggest cause.

When money, food and fuel stop moving things will collapse.

Maybe 20 to 25 percent...



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 10:04 AM
link   
www.youtube.com... around the 18 min mark Maria Bartiromo is discussing the global economic impact.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 10:15 AM
link   
NightSkyeB4Dawn . . .


I just got a text message asking for volunteers to change their schedule because the spouse of one of my co-workers is headed to hospital after a freak accident. On the surface it seems like a small problem but we are already 3 people short. We have 4 brand new employees that are not ready to fly on their own without adequate support, and a new inexperienced Director. This may cause a operational shut down for a brief spell. That is just because of one person and a situation that was not expected. Make that 10 people and you can see how things can expotenially go haywire.


I'm in a similar situation at my work, except we lost our new employee after the recent hires and have two people doing the job of three. If one or two key people are out, I might as well bring an air mattress, a bunch of clothes and stuff, because I'll be living at work for the foreseeable future. You can be completely certain that under those conditions, my productivity and quality of work will go down the crapper after a week or two.
edit on 10-2-2020 by MichiganSwampBuck because: Added extra comments



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: LoveSolMoonDeath
Since it's usually the elder and the weaker I think civilisation can take a big number without colapsing...


Loose the elderly and the financial system will collapse. There is a lot of money tied up in investments and they own it
Imagine what would happen if their money (superannuation) left the system.

Psychological, sick people not working, having to be cared for, social security
Global illness, not just a death toll to worry about



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 11:32 AM
link   
All city people in the world die...no problem.

Country peeps die.....city peeps got 30 days tops.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Know any good buzzard recipes?



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Hypothetically, I could do without about 90% of you myself.
Not you, ATS, you know, them!

edit on 10-2-2020 by tjack because: "Them" being non ATS people, of course, to be clear.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: CrastneyJPR

its actually - a very complex question

that requires - a lot more information to answer

who dies and why // how they die - is more important than just the raw % of population

and a nother massive factor is is it a 1 time mortality - or does pop continute to diminish

to explain that - a 50% sudden cull - weould be better resisted - than an on going 4.5 % per month for a year

it takes a lot to truely " collapse society " - a new society - adapting to what it has - will evolve as a sutuation unfolds



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 12:03 PM
link   
It's a very complex issue. A few things to think about:

What if every person under the age of 18 just vanished?
What if every person over the age of 65 vanished?
After enough people vanished to destabilize society, how many additional people will commit suicide due to the stress of having to live without loved ones, or because of the added burden of survival?
If people just vanished at random, how many people will just give up hope due to the uncertainty of knowing if they too will vanish?

And that's just a Thanos variant, you're asking about dealing with the dead and that added stress of dealing with loved ones, hygiene issues, smells, the constant image of unescapable death every where. The situation gets even deeper and more complex.



posted on Feb, 10 2020 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I think it would be the other way around. If the web went down, the infrastructure would collapse and people would die from withdrawal symptoms from not being connected with their phones. And you couldn't order take out. That's a world I simply wouldn't want to live in anyway.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join