View Single Post
  #17  
Old 01-06-2010, 01:08 AM
Webstral's Avatar
Webstral Webstral is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North San Francisco Bay
Posts: 1,688
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
Of course that's a death rate of 52%....

How many more would be unfit for work due to injury, illness (specifically radiation sickness), mental breakdown, or just plain being a thousand miles away from where they're needed and without transport?

I would imagine that perhaps as little as 10% of prewar numbers are available, maybe more, maybe less.
What part of the population would be capable of working by 2000 is an important matter to address. We have to ask ourselves how long those incapable of working would draw rations. Those suffering from acute radiation sickness in 1997 will be dead before 2000. The epidemics arising from poor sanitation will have run their course by 2000 simply because the unschooled will have killed themselves and their neighbors by this point. People crippled during the nuclear attacks and immediate aftermath aren't going to make it once tough decisions have to be made about who is going to get fed. The glut of dying will have run down to a steady stream by 2000 simply because those who have survived to this point are living off their own produce and have adjusted their behaviors to survive the most preventable diseases.

Of course, there is still plenty of dying to go around. Violent deaths are occurring everywhere, but not nearly at the 1997-1998 level. Less travel and trade means less opportunity for disease to spread. Cancer continues to produce casualties, but without fresh exposure to radiation the early radiation sickness survivors will either be working or dead of starvation. Everyone needing medications to live will be dead, as will lots of the elderly and, sadly, many children.

In summary, I think 10% is rather a low number. The US in 2000 can't support many unproductive people. The sick can be tended in the hopes that they will become productive again, but the chronically unproductive simply aren't going to draw rations. Even dements need to eat. The overwhelming majority are going to have to work for their food (whether by producing it or stealing it) because there is not other way for them to fill their bellies.

Webstral
Reply With Quote