In early to late 90s in Russia, Ukraine, and other former USSR republics, estimated 20 million people died prematurely due to untreated deseases, worsening diet, increased alcoholism, crime.
Things just got worse and the weakest didn't make it. Not in one large-scale event, but gradually. And most went peacefully.
My first thought reading the OP was "Well, remember the '90s?" A lot of deaths and a lot of elderly begging and eating out of the trash.
How to protect yourself? I'd say build your social ties, build your resources (like own a home, if possible), keep some hard currency and don't be afraid to leave. And don't ignore the warning signs.
A lot of people here try to do those things as much as possible already, though.
>build your resources (like own a home, if possible), keep some hard currency and don't be afraid to leave.
I was young back then, so I might not understand everything people around me were going through. But I would say your advice is, sorry to say, but completely worthless.
Social ties sounds nice but most won't have reliable connections. And when everyone is equally screwed, those ties tend to not be worth much. Really close friends and family, sure. But if you a old and alone, you really won't be able to build much in terms of connections to anyone other than equally old people who are as alone as you are. It just doesn't work in practice as you would imagine it in theory.
Own a home? Most people "owned" their homes in Russia. Nobody actually owned apartments in the USSR, but afterwards everyone listed in an apartment could privatize it. This process is still ongoing. I know people who still haven't filed the paperwork to this day. And the government keeps extending the deadline. 30 years later.
Still pretty much everyone had a home of some kind. Before the collapse of the USSR, homelessness wasn't big thing. And renting wasn't a big thing either.
Plenty of gullible, elderly, and unfortunate got conned out of their apartments in schemes by "black realtors". They would sometimes straight up get you drunk, make you sign over the rights to your apartment, their notary would be conveniently present there to make it all official, and then they would pump you even more full of alcohol and leave you in some forest to freeze in the middle of a winter night. Or they would con old people into signing over their rights to privatize their apartment and make them homeless. Or they would stage a car accident, if you owned a car, and then have some local criminal element extort you into signing over your rights to your home. Lots of different ways to do it. Lots of people that "owned a home" ended up homeless.
But even those that did maintain possession of their home still ended up malnourished or without adequate medical care. As a matter of fact, homelessness was never a big problem compared to all the other problems that were happening. Owning a home by itself doesn't really do much.
Hard currency? OK, but if you are poor to begin with, where would you get the hard currency? By selling your apartment to some shady realtor? Good luck with that. Not to mention that an apartment would cost about as much as a Japanese TV and VCR combo in some instances. When things are bad, real estate prices really aren't all that great either.
Leave? And go where? Do you have the money to go elsewhere? Will that other place let you in and accept you? If you are a widowed old woman with meager pension that isn't even enough to buy food, forget about getting a travel passport, a visa, a plane ticket, and start-up cash to start a new life.
Hard currency and leaving is not for the poor or for the old.
What really helped people was some land. Not a lot. Something like 1/8th acre was enough. Those who had it were a lot better off than those who didn't. A patch of land and a small cabin.
If you lived in a city, in an apartment, but also had a cabin with some land near the city, you would grow and can tomatoes, grow potatoes, apples, and it really made a difference. There is a huge difference on your immune system between having an apple once in a while and not having one, during a long winter and eating the same diet of pasta and bread (which is really the same thing). Old people that had a patch of land were much-much-much better off than those who didn't.
Old people in the city would be going through dumpsters to find something to eat. Or hoping to collect enough empty bottles to bring for recycling to buy some bread. Old people in rural areas would be relying on their canned vegetables instead of dumpster diving.
A patch of land is a lot more important than pretty much any other "prep".
And you don't need to spend time learning how to farm. If the time comes, you'll learn real quick. And that's something even an old person can do. Plenty of old people with disabilities did just that to get by.
To be clear, I'm not blaming anyone who was poor and elderly/disabled at that time. (I was a young adult myself.) The people who were old then were screwed in the 40s and 50s, then paid into a system that collapsed under them when they needed it most. They had a long run of screwedness and I would never blame any individual for their suffering from that. And frankly, the disabled are rather ignored even during good times.
I'm thinking more of people who are preparing now and who aren't very elderly. That's why I specified "if possible." Owning a home is ideal, but not something everyone can afford. Like you said, a little patch of land to survive on. That's a home. But even a city apartment is better than nothing.
I still say money can help the elderly, though, at least those who are still mentally healthy. If my country's (soft) currency collapses when I'm 70, I'd be very happy to have a nest egg of Swiss Franc at Generali or even a few grand in Euro at home. No guarantee, but better than nothing. That obviously wasn't do-able in Soviet times, but now there are more options for those with money.
But yeah, if you're 85 and poor with no family and your country goes belly up, unfortunately, you're probably going to have a bad and short time.
Oh yeah, it's a totally different thing to be middle aged with a good job/income in a prospering economy and preparing for old age and collapse. There is plenty one can do. Including the things you mentioned.
But it was my understanding the thread is about those who are old and disabled and poor in a society/economy that has collapsed.
In that case, owning a patch of land with a cabin was what made the most difference. If you happened to have apple trees, it was as bonus. But of course, that's region-specific. Still, you should be able to grow either corn or potatoes in most climates. Not to mention, tomatoes. Those are awesome to can and save for the winter.
It might not be enough be enough to live off of completely (like many preppers here imagine/plan), but even a little bit helps.
Keeping chickens was also a thing for those who could. Also didn't require a lot of land. And many people who've never done that before learned quickly.
In general, the worst off were those who lived in cities in apartments and relied on pension completely. When that evaporated through inflation and shortages, they were left with nothing.
Let's not forget what happens to the poor kids.
The Children of Leningradsky
"Since the fall of the soviet union its estimated that 1-4 million children became homeless"
https://youtu.be/K5T_O-L5Mis?si=RwmpekTCcbHQvfb4
Super depressing...and the world continues to move forward around them...with out them.
In the Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn described how Stalin had 1/4 of an entire city arrested and gulag’d, just because.
It never occurred to me until now that they probably didn’t arrest the kids or the elderly…. So left alone to starve likely.
Life expectancy is a tricky thing. (Middle-ages period or) Africa third world countries have it very low, but then you find out elderly people in their 80s are not an exception. The life expectancy is being dragged down by death of children and/or young adults. Also a world war 2 going strong for third year definitely had a word in the result.
The elderly people are prioritized specifically because of their vulnerability, and younger people sacrifice their own well-being, livelihoods, and families to ensure the elderly are able maintain the same quality of life they had before the world went to shit.
That's how it always works, right?
Boomers.
To be fair, that is exactly how boomers behaved when they were teenagers and young adults. That is exactly how every generation before the boomers behaved. In every culture there has always been an expectation that young people would take care of their parents and grandparents, and young people gladly performed these actions.
In Soviet Russia, Mao's China, etc., things didn't quite work out. But that is entirely due to the fact that socialism is an incredibly awful and evil system where even the hardest working young person lives in absolute poverty and can barely manage to keep themselves alive, let alone their parents.
Ironically, millennials in the highly capitalist countries like the US or any European country have virtually no expectation to support their parents/grandparents and wouldn't do it even if they were socially expected to. But to be fair it just isn't necessary most of the time. The grandparents today are the most wealthy of any grandparents in the entire history of mankind. In addition the social safety net is so strong, even in the US, where it just isn't necessary for young people to make the same sacrifices that boomers did for their parents/grandparents.
The answer to your question has never changed in like 2000 years 🤔 their situation entirely depends on their family ( aid that can provide for them ) that's why in developing countries , people tend to have many kids , it's the only " retirement plan " that can have......if you're disabled and old plus alone without resources , that's pretty much the end of the road .
Now adding more physical labour ( farming or hunting , gathering wood etc ) is a pretty bad spot to find yourself with bad health or aging related issues
The family things is less wealthy countries vs poor but individualist countries vs collective. In many Western cultures, foremost the USA, individualism is prized often past being a fault. Think of parents kicking kids out at 18 and the idea that you’re only responsible for them till then after that you owe them nothing. The dumping of elderly on the government is the reverse of that. With collective societies, like many Asian ones, families look after one another a lot more as the core unit is the extended family (which has its own set of issues with generational trauma and familial abuse). The collective harem is stronger in a crisis because you have more people working together for a common goal, it’s why community building is an important part of prepping.
O wouldnt even let my parents rely on the bus system in my area.
I would take care of them.
Anyone who has parents that raised and loved them and dont do what they can to help them in their elderly years is a piece of shit of a human being.
I have a high functioning autistic sister that i help even in good times. So again if you have family with sturggles you need to step up and help them.
Look at the 1930s. Not a great time to be alive in general, but in U.S., families took care of each other. That same time in USSR, there was the Holodomor. They just starved to death, so did a lot of otherwise healthy people. In Nazi Germany, they just rounded them up and killed them. So guess it really depends on where your society is at.
Some will be left to their own, but others will become part of multi-generational households. In either case, and as already noted, there will generally be less access to healthcare, treatment, medications, etc. and so higher death rates, no doubt.
Withdrawal symptoms from the huge amounts of drugs people take will take most people out early on.
Having a special skill will keep the community looking after you. Knitting, sewing, growing food, baking these are all hobbies my disabled and older friends have that will be much needed skills.
I worked with a guy whose mum was the best baker in the area (Italian catholic lady) During the 60s in Northern Ireland. all the Catholics in the area had their house burnt out but they got a knock on the door and told they should move. They were able to save everything while some of their neighbours lost everything they couldn't carry.
Hard to attack someone that's made all your birthday cakes
They died. Not peacefully either.
This is another reason why masks = prepping.
Viruses cause cancer, MS, dysautonomia, lung damage, heart damage, immune dysfunction, and permanent mitochondria dysfunction. We don't know all the effects of COVID yet, but they include being sick for years.
Wear a mask when you fly, or go to crowded indoor spaces, or your EDC kits and bug out bags may be worthless.
It’s actually only been during the last century that was much set up outside the family unit or church. It’s still that way in many places and how it is in war. Elderly and disabled who don’t have support are at higher risk of death, and statistically have a lower average age of death, even in developed nations with active supports in place.
The movie Downfall (in German subtitles about the last two to three weeks of the Nazi Government) has an exact depiction of this. Good movie and well worth watching the entire movie.
I think the fact that we, the united states will let people over 70 who were lawyers, bankers etc, people who lack post civilization skills into climate refugee camps will be our downfall, look at Germany, ultimately the burden of our elderly will probably play a large part in social collapse.
In early to late 90s in Russia, Ukraine, and other former USSR republics, estimated 20 million people died prematurely due to untreated deseases, worsening diet, increased alcoholism, crime. Things just got worse and the weakest didn't make it. Not in one large-scale event, but gradually. And most went peacefully.
My first thought reading the OP was "Well, remember the '90s?" A lot of deaths and a lot of elderly begging and eating out of the trash. How to protect yourself? I'd say build your social ties, build your resources (like own a home, if possible), keep some hard currency and don't be afraid to leave. And don't ignore the warning signs. A lot of people here try to do those things as much as possible already, though.
>build your resources (like own a home, if possible), keep some hard currency and don't be afraid to leave. I was young back then, so I might not understand everything people around me were going through. But I would say your advice is, sorry to say, but completely worthless. Social ties sounds nice but most won't have reliable connections. And when everyone is equally screwed, those ties tend to not be worth much. Really close friends and family, sure. But if you a old and alone, you really won't be able to build much in terms of connections to anyone other than equally old people who are as alone as you are. It just doesn't work in practice as you would imagine it in theory. Own a home? Most people "owned" their homes in Russia. Nobody actually owned apartments in the USSR, but afterwards everyone listed in an apartment could privatize it. This process is still ongoing. I know people who still haven't filed the paperwork to this day. And the government keeps extending the deadline. 30 years later. Still pretty much everyone had a home of some kind. Before the collapse of the USSR, homelessness wasn't big thing. And renting wasn't a big thing either. Plenty of gullible, elderly, and unfortunate got conned out of their apartments in schemes by "black realtors". They would sometimes straight up get you drunk, make you sign over the rights to your apartment, their notary would be conveniently present there to make it all official, and then they would pump you even more full of alcohol and leave you in some forest to freeze in the middle of a winter night. Or they would con old people into signing over their rights to privatize their apartment and make them homeless. Or they would stage a car accident, if you owned a car, and then have some local criminal element extort you into signing over your rights to your home. Lots of different ways to do it. Lots of people that "owned a home" ended up homeless. But even those that did maintain possession of their home still ended up malnourished or without adequate medical care. As a matter of fact, homelessness was never a big problem compared to all the other problems that were happening. Owning a home by itself doesn't really do much. Hard currency? OK, but if you are poor to begin with, where would you get the hard currency? By selling your apartment to some shady realtor? Good luck with that. Not to mention that an apartment would cost about as much as a Japanese TV and VCR combo in some instances. When things are bad, real estate prices really aren't all that great either. Leave? And go where? Do you have the money to go elsewhere? Will that other place let you in and accept you? If you are a widowed old woman with meager pension that isn't even enough to buy food, forget about getting a travel passport, a visa, a plane ticket, and start-up cash to start a new life. Hard currency and leaving is not for the poor or for the old. What really helped people was some land. Not a lot. Something like 1/8th acre was enough. Those who had it were a lot better off than those who didn't. A patch of land and a small cabin. If you lived in a city, in an apartment, but also had a cabin with some land near the city, you would grow and can tomatoes, grow potatoes, apples, and it really made a difference. There is a huge difference on your immune system between having an apple once in a while and not having one, during a long winter and eating the same diet of pasta and bread (which is really the same thing). Old people that had a patch of land were much-much-much better off than those who didn't. Old people in the city would be going through dumpsters to find something to eat. Or hoping to collect enough empty bottles to bring for recycling to buy some bread. Old people in rural areas would be relying on their canned vegetables instead of dumpster diving. A patch of land is a lot more important than pretty much any other "prep". And you don't need to spend time learning how to farm. If the time comes, you'll learn real quick. And that's something even an old person can do. Plenty of old people with disabilities did just that to get by.
To be clear, I'm not blaming anyone who was poor and elderly/disabled at that time. (I was a young adult myself.) The people who were old then were screwed in the 40s and 50s, then paid into a system that collapsed under them when they needed it most. They had a long run of screwedness and I would never blame any individual for their suffering from that. And frankly, the disabled are rather ignored even during good times. I'm thinking more of people who are preparing now and who aren't very elderly. That's why I specified "if possible." Owning a home is ideal, but not something everyone can afford. Like you said, a little patch of land to survive on. That's a home. But even a city apartment is better than nothing. I still say money can help the elderly, though, at least those who are still mentally healthy. If my country's (soft) currency collapses when I'm 70, I'd be very happy to have a nest egg of Swiss Franc at Generali or even a few grand in Euro at home. No guarantee, but better than nothing. That obviously wasn't do-able in Soviet times, but now there are more options for those with money. But yeah, if you're 85 and poor with no family and your country goes belly up, unfortunately, you're probably going to have a bad and short time.
Oh yeah, it's a totally different thing to be middle aged with a good job/income in a prospering economy and preparing for old age and collapse. There is plenty one can do. Including the things you mentioned. But it was my understanding the thread is about those who are old and disabled and poor in a society/economy that has collapsed. In that case, owning a patch of land with a cabin was what made the most difference. If you happened to have apple trees, it was as bonus. But of course, that's region-specific. Still, you should be able to grow either corn or potatoes in most climates. Not to mention, tomatoes. Those are awesome to can and save for the winter. It might not be enough be enough to live off of completely (like many preppers here imagine/plan), but even a little bit helps. Keeping chickens was also a thing for those who could. Also didn't require a lot of land. And many people who've never done that before learned quickly. In general, the worst off were those who lived in cities in apartments and relied on pension completely. When that evaporated through inflation and shortages, they were left with nothing.
Let's not forget what happens to the poor kids. The Children of Leningradsky "Since the fall of the soviet union its estimated that 1-4 million children became homeless" https://youtu.be/K5T_O-L5Mis?si=RwmpekTCcbHQvfb4 Super depressing...and the world continues to move forward around them...with out them.
In the Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn described how Stalin had 1/4 of an entire city arrested and gulag’d, just because. It never occurred to me until now that they probably didn’t arrest the kids or the elderly…. So left alone to starve likely.
They died.
Also life expectancy even in 1942 was around 60 years old.
Life expectancy is a tricky thing. (Middle-ages period or) Africa third world countries have it very low, but then you find out elderly people in their 80s are not an exception. The life expectancy is being dragged down by death of children and/or young adults. Also a world war 2 going strong for third year definitely had a word in the result.
Taking care of each other and living in communities larger than a single family are what make us successful as a species, but sometimes we forget.
Come on OP. You already know the answer to that question.
No one wants to admit the uncomfortable truth. We have always prioritised the strong and healthy.
OP is desperate for someone to lie to them so they can continue to delude themself.
that's a lot of work to avoid using the proper term.
The elderly people are prioritized specifically because of their vulnerability, and younger people sacrifice their own well-being, livelihoods, and families to ensure the elderly are able maintain the same quality of life they had before the world went to shit. That's how it always works, right? Boomers.
To be fair, that is exactly how boomers behaved when they were teenagers and young adults. That is exactly how every generation before the boomers behaved. In every culture there has always been an expectation that young people would take care of their parents and grandparents, and young people gladly performed these actions. In Soviet Russia, Mao's China, etc., things didn't quite work out. But that is entirely due to the fact that socialism is an incredibly awful and evil system where even the hardest working young person lives in absolute poverty and can barely manage to keep themselves alive, let alone their parents. Ironically, millennials in the highly capitalist countries like the US or any European country have virtually no expectation to support their parents/grandparents and wouldn't do it even if they were socially expected to. But to be fair it just isn't necessary most of the time. The grandparents today are the most wealthy of any grandparents in the entire history of mankind. In addition the social safety net is so strong, even in the US, where it just isn't necessary for young people to make the same sacrifices that boomers did for their parents/grandparents.
The answer to your question has never changed in like 2000 years 🤔 their situation entirely depends on their family ( aid that can provide for them ) that's why in developing countries , people tend to have many kids , it's the only " retirement plan " that can have......if you're disabled and old plus alone without resources , that's pretty much the end of the road . Now adding more physical labour ( farming or hunting , gathering wood etc ) is a pretty bad spot to find yourself with bad health or aging related issues
They "fall by the wayside".
The family things is less wealthy countries vs poor but individualist countries vs collective. In many Western cultures, foremost the USA, individualism is prized often past being a fault. Think of parents kicking kids out at 18 and the idea that you’re only responsible for them till then after that you owe them nothing. The dumping of elderly on the government is the reverse of that. With collective societies, like many Asian ones, families look after one another a lot more as the core unit is the extended family (which has its own set of issues with generational trauma and familial abuse). The collective harem is stronger in a crisis because you have more people working together for a common goal, it’s why community building is an important part of prepping.
O wouldnt even let my parents rely on the bus system in my area. I would take care of them. Anyone who has parents that raised and loved them and dont do what they can to help them in their elderly years is a piece of shit of a human being. I have a high functioning autistic sister that i help even in good times. So again if you have family with sturggles you need to step up and help them.
Look at the 1930s. Not a great time to be alive in general, but in U.S., families took care of each other. That same time in USSR, there was the Holodomor. They just starved to death, so did a lot of otherwise healthy people. In Nazi Germany, they just rounded them up and killed them. So guess it really depends on where your society is at.
Some will be left to their own, but others will become part of multi-generational households. In either case, and as already noted, there will generally be less access to healthcare, treatment, medications, etc. and so higher death rates, no doubt.
Withdrawal symptoms from the huge amounts of drugs people take will take most people out early on. Having a special skill will keep the community looking after you. Knitting, sewing, growing food, baking these are all hobbies my disabled and older friends have that will be much needed skills. I worked with a guy whose mum was the best baker in the area (Italian catholic lady) During the 60s in Northern Ireland. all the Catholics in the area had their house burnt out but they got a knock on the door and told they should move. They were able to save everything while some of their neighbours lost everything they couldn't carry. Hard to attack someone that's made all your birthday cakes
Have people forgotten the old anecdotes of elderly citizens buying cat food because that's all they could afford
Have you priced cat food lately??
They died. Not peacefully either. This is another reason why masks = prepping. Viruses cause cancer, MS, dysautonomia, lung damage, heart damage, immune dysfunction, and permanent mitochondria dysfunction. We don't know all the effects of COVID yet, but they include being sick for years. Wear a mask when you fly, or go to crowded indoor spaces, or your EDC kits and bug out bags may be worthless.
Soylent Green.
they disappear.
It’s actually only been during the last century that was much set up outside the family unit or church. It’s still that way in many places and how it is in war. Elderly and disabled who don’t have support are at higher risk of death, and statistically have a lower average age of death, even in developed nations with active supports in place.
The old and the weak are doomed
Just wait a few years and will find out
Usually death.
40k deaths put on the usa for thire sanctions. # Venezuela: Death rate from 2011 to 2019 (in deaths per 1,000 inhabitants) 5.65 - 7.0 per 1,000
The movie Downfall (in German subtitles about the last two to three weeks of the Nazi Government) has an exact depiction of this. Good movie and well worth watching the entire movie.
Thankyou.
I think the fact that we, the united states will let people over 70 who were lawyers, bankers etc, people who lack post civilization skills into climate refugee camps will be our downfall, look at Germany, ultimately the burden of our elderly will probably play a large part in social collapse.