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.

 

"Safest" Places to Live in the US

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
Once and a while I see people asking on the net: Where's the safest place to live in the US(if the SHTF)?
Some people are in search of survival may want to relocate, or even have to(due to disasters,etc.)

I had recently came across a site poster's summary on the safest regions of the US to live during economic collapse, that sums up the US, not only economically, but also with weather concerns, etc. It offers in quick detail, what regions and states have to deal with.

The Northeast


A major problem with the Northeast is that it is just so darn crowded. Yes, there are some rural areas, but the overall population density of the region is so high that it would be really hard to go unnoticed for long in the event of a major economic collapse.

Another thing that is not great about the Northeast is that so much of the population lives near the coast. As we saw in Japan recently, living near a coastline is not necessarily a good thing. cont...


The Mid-Atlantic


The Mid-Atlantic is one of the most beautiful areas of the nation. Unfortunately, it suffers from many of the same problems that the Northeast does.

The Mid-Atlantic has a very high population density. For example, the area around Washington D.C. is pretty much all suburbs for 50 miles in all directions. cont..


Florida

Florida is generally not going to be a place that you want to be during an economic collapse. The housing market has absolutely collapsed down there and the crime rate is already very high. It is also very densely populated. cont...


From hurricanes, to crime. Florida, esp., southern is a sand bar, below sea-level in most spots. When I lived there, flooding happened every spring. Whereas the flooding was limited to streets and up to houses sometimes, if the flooding picks up, people may be in real danger. Future Navy maps, show almost the whole state( minus the northern most panhandle) under water. The economy is suffering, whereas jobs used to flourish. To many people still-despite the exodus a few years ago-, not enough jobs and a decaying housing market that I hear is going to get worse.

The Mid-South


cont... Where you do not want to be is anywhere near the New Madrid fault zone. The New Madrid fault zone covers portions of Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and Mississippi.

The biggest earthquakes in the history of the United States were caused by the New Madrid fault. Many are convinced that we are going to see an absolutely catastrophic earthquake along the New Madrid fault at some point.
So if you want to live in the Mid-South, it is highly recommended that you stay far away from the New Madrid fault zone. cont...


The Upper Mid-West


The Upper Midwest was once one of the great manufacturing regions of the world, but now much of it is known as the "rust belt".
Formerly great manufacturing cities such as Detroit are now absolute hellholes. Tens of thousands of our factories and millions of our jobs have been shipped overseas.cont..


The Great Plains


As long as you are far enough away from the New Madrid fault, the Great Plains is not a bad choice.

It is very, very flat out there, and it can be quite windy, but the good news is that you should be able to grow your own food.

In addition, the population density is generally very low in most areas.


The Southwest


In the Southwest there are a whole lot of freedom-loving Americans, the weather is very warm and there is a lot of space to get lost.

However, the Southwest is also very dry and in many areas there is not a lot of water. Drought and wildfires are quite common.

In addition, illegal immigration is rampant and is a constant security threat.


Access, if not mistaken, to no longer used bunkers, for purchase, can offer protection. Housing developers are building condos, etc, from the old sub-subterranean missile silos.

The West Coast


During an economic collapse, the West Coast is not a place that you will really want to be. Just take a look at the state of California already. It is an economic nightmare.

Millions of people have left California over the past couple of decades. The millions of people that have left have been replaced mostly with illegal aliens.


Wildfires, mud slides, etc, pose natural threat.

Despite those concerns, Nuclear Fallout from Japan's plants, have been a worry. Milk that tested positive of radiation*.

*Radiation levels tested throughout the US, yielded results, some lower and higher, that may or may not be a result of the already spread fallout. Always good to be aware.

The Northwest


Large numbers of freedom-loving Americans have been moving to the states of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. You can also throw eastern Washington and eastern Oregon into this category as well.

It gets cold up in the Northwest, but not as cold as the Upper Midwest. There are lots of rivers, streams and lakes and in certain areas there is plenty of rain.

The population density is very low in most areas and there is an abundance of wildlife. Housing prices are reasonable and in many areas you can grow your own food.


The downfall, while being protected by the mountains is the volcanic, some of it dormant-which can wake, activity. While not immune to natural disasters, wildfires, floods(happening right now in May) and snow disasters can happen. Not to forget the Yellowstone caldera and faultlines-which cause shaking sometimes.

Housing is cheaper, but jobs can be limited(minus logging & health care), food prices higher and sometimes taxed. Gas right now is pretty cheap in some Inland NW areas.

Nuclear Disaster wise, The NW and West Coast(minus So Ca) is pretty safe. My reply here: Nuclear sites on the West Coast

The Western US is largely replacing the Mid-West as the farming capital of the US. Great area for those in agriculture or studying to be.

Alaska And Hawaii

Neither Alaska or Hawaii is recommended. Alaska lies along the "Ring of Fire" and it is very, very cold. Also, almost everything has to be either shipped or flown into Alaska. In the event of a real economic collapse, supplies to Alaska could be cut off and shortages could develop very quickly.

Hawaii has a huge population and it does not have a lot of room. Like Alaska, most supplies have to be either shipped in or flown in. And one really bad tsunami could pretty much wipe Hawaii out. cont...


AK, coastal areas, has tsunami potential. The mild coastal areas, offer many fishing related jobs, but due to earthquakes and tsunami potential can be a risky place to live.

Sourc e: Economic Collapse, Best Place to Live US

Nuclear Disasters: Map of Nuclear Plants of the US
Hazard Mortality Map: by State County

Conclusion
Of course, as always with relocating, do as much research as possible, to decide if that's where you want to live.
Also, feel free to add details and facts of where you live to help others.

I hope something similar has not been posted(search was null), at least recently, as this as presented offer more up to date concerns.




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:28 AM
link   
nice post. however if you are really, really serious about shtf and moving as a means to survive I do not consider north america viable. The northern hemisphere is likely where the action will happen if things go nuclear. This means a lot of threat will remain in the northern hemisphere air currents. If serious about it, I would move to the lower south island of New Zealand, or Stewart Island even further down. As close to Antartica as possible is the ticket. If you can get a job at Scott Base Antartica even better!



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Jax27
 

Thanks for the reply

Sadly, as with other people I'm sure, I don't think the family and I can relocate further than Canada at the moment or in the near future... but we'll see. Canada is said to not even be safe, as it is to close!



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by dreamingawake
reply to post by Jax27
 

Thanks for the reply

Sadly, as with other people I'm sure, I don't think the family and I can relocate further than Canada at the moment or in the near future... but we'll see. Canada is said to not even be safe, as it is to close!


I wish I could go back to the 80's. Things were so simple then, you just never had to think about this crap! lol



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:37 AM
link   
I'd definitely pick the northeast, it's not nearly as populated as this writeup suggests. Especially northern NH and Maine. It's incredibly beautiful, and in the event of collapse the winter would drive people southward in an exodus. It would be a survivors paradise at that point.

There is a huge difference between japan and NE, and that is, one is part of the ring of fire, and one is not.
edit on 16-5-2011 by Tephra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:45 AM
link   
Thanks for this, it's much appreciated.

For my family, I've been seriously looking at places like OK, and, ultimately, would LOVE to choose some places in South America... if I had that option. Unfortunately does not seem to be the case for now, but... one can dream lol



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:45 AM
link   
OP this is a trick question?

If not and your trying to be serious 'bless' I'd say: The ATS server room!

Or any local McDonnalds as they are designed for American people who enjoy fast food which to me at least spells success. As your local McD's will be able to withstand all that nature can throw at her from a breakfast stampede of wandering workmen, to those lunchtime lunatics crazy for the two for one and half price specials. As we know McD's food last years without rotting and still tastes freshly made, just take a look next time at the burgers on the shelf how many years have they been waiting to be eaten.

On a serious note and I am a USA virgin 'still' so have no real knowledge of such a wonderful country I'd be looking into the caves and vaults of the Grand Cannon or a very remote smallholding in the Rockies area. If I wanted to live alone in the USA not being disturbed by those that are disturbed where is the least likely place to discover any other form of human life?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Thanks for the post....

For 3 years I have been trying to figure this out for me and my family. I have discovered many things about certain areas too that for the long run just will not work out. I look for weather patterns/rain/ underground water reservoirs and rivers, population density and ability to grow food etc.......although the western states right now seem like fine agriculture centers, they mostly get their water from rivers that are endangered. Unfortunately, many of the river systems are becoming endangered.

www.americanrivers.org...

www.americanrivers.org...

Lots of useful info here....



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   
I'm pretty confident with where I am in Western Pennsylvania. Population density is not too bad, and it is quite low in many nearby parts of PA, OH, and WV. The mountains (non-volcanic) offer a lot of terrain for protection as well as flora and fauna for food, etc. Disasters are exceptionally uncommon for this area, but flooding can be a concern. Water quality can be low, but if the SHTF I would guess much of it would decrease rapidly although a significant portion comes from abandoned mine run-off. When the factories and especially coal fired power plants shut down the rainwater would rapidly become pretty safe so smaller streams would offer a clean(ish?) water supply... Resources are otherwise abundant and travel times are on the order of hours or days on foot to numerous population dense areas if the need arises. Forests, mountains, plains, farmland, valleys, cities, just about everything but deserts are available... The other major potential downside is that the back-up American government is (one of them anyway) kept in an absolutely massive (you really have to see it to believe...) underground facility in the area... it is recognized as the most secure acknowledged underground facility to exist in the North American Continent...



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
there is no safe area as long as that "backup government" still exists.

all those fat cats in dc have their mount weathers and other secret bases while the rest of us blow in the wind.

there they are all safe and sound and the trillions spent on making it sure that they survive and the rest of us be damned.

if people can afford it buy one of the missile silo homes or any government property that has reinforced concrete

and the good news there is those facilities that have been built in every part of the us.

it really burns me most of us will die and endure hardships but those jerks will be all safe.


since cheyenne mountain has been closed thats the place id like to be shame its not for sale yet
edit on 16-5-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
I'll be 'illin in Texas, same as now. We've got pretty much everything here to be self-sustainable, else open for trade with the rest of the world. Too many guns and pissed-off rednecks around here to pay the fema camps or DHS much mind. They'll have a hell of a time taking this place over.




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jax27

Originally posted by dreamingawake
reply to post by Jax27
 

Thanks for the reply

Sadly, as with other people I'm surhink the family and I can relocate further than Canada at the moment or in the near future... but we'lthese l see. Canada is said to not even be safe, as it is to close!

I wish I could go back to the 80's. Things were so simple then, you just never had to think about this crap! lol


Princes "1999" even seems more apropo these days.

edit on 16-5-2011 by asdfgh because: added reply



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TonyBravada
 


PA has so many nuclear plants, that I would not consider it safe. Not to mention the coal fires underground.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
If I had the money, I would leave the US. I really believe this place is a disaster that has already begun..But alas, I am sick, and can not work. Husband would never leave. Being ill I could not take care of my daughter anywhere else, so here I am stuck....

It makes me sick , the PTB can just jump a jet and go where they want. They murder and get away with it.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
I'm listening right now to my subscribed podcast (coast to coast am) George Knapp's Sunday night May 15 show. His guest is this guy named Blake Sawyer. He says that the Northern hemisphere will not be a good place to live. He personally is convinced that most US people will die in the next few years. He says this is because the Globalists have targeted America for a big take down.
www.coasttocoastam.com...



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by simone50m
 

Thanks for sharing, I missed that one.
If not die, there's always NORAD, etc., that will govern what will happen to renaming people of US/CA.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   
put some brief thought into this once and think some place like inland Uruguay which has few natural disasters besides tornadoes, little pollution, rather safe from volcano and nuclear meltdown fallout, and favorable weather and natural resources would be ideal.

In the USA it gets tricky. economic collapse like the original article.. i'd prefer the northeast simple. Everything could go bankrupt whatever but we have so much infrastructure and resources that you could ride the tide for a while till exhaustion or anarchy.

but how about a true #storm scenario?
powergrid failure or similar event that could cause multiple meltdowns poisoning most of the northeast?
volcano/caldera in the west and possibly arkansas region that create similar multistate fallout zones and initial and aftershock damage?
those SHTF scenarios push you out the the extremes of survival and comfort. if your already in one of those remote areas not affected and know howto live off the land you could do well. But what if your a disaster survivor/refugee or in an area above now under more burden due to the problem created by disaster? hard to pick a good spot in my opinion and i think a good portion of the population wouldn't be bothered by being sheeped around letting others make decisions that they should at least consider when their own life is on the line.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
This thread:
San Mateo 35x background RADIATION ! has a link to an elevated levels of radiation in America. San Mateo, Ca, being the highest. Pretty concerning...error? Other issues not mentioned to the public going on, perhaps?



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Very important read, NW more contaminated than most know, more data! What does that mean for the rest of the country?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
I currently live in Florida, It has it's problems, but there is plenty of rural area and agriculture also. You can drive 30 minutes from the 3 or 4 major population areas here and not see a soul for hours or even days if you like. Additionally, much of the population here is retirees. Most on social security and medicare. I believe most of those will die off pretty quickly. Not to be cold blooded, but trying to be realistic. I think that only a 2012 or poleshift scenario would truly render central and north Florida uninhabitable.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join