Quote from: DreDri on June 16, 2013, 12:33:50 AM

I tend to disagree with the 'near food' argument.

I want to be near people who provide valuable services; we're still going to have a functioning economy, just not based around the USD. A higher density population means I have more trading opportunities available within x radius than in rural, crop-growing areas.

Presumably, we'd outsource the import of food just as we do now: people would be paid to make it their job to transport enough food for the urban population(s) they service.

Also, social controls are going to be more important as government falls apart. No one hears a home invasion in the middle of no where. And fuel will be too valuable to constantly travel long distances just to make normal exchanges.

(I realized my post is kinda talking post-apocalyptic US, assuming the world is on par with the States' condition. Naturally if the USD alone plummets, the answer is 'outside the US.')

Indeed. Cities developed long ago due to the efficiencies of groupings, and it's quite possible for a standard 1/4 acre lot to grow 50% or more of the food that a family of four would consume. However, the knowledge of how to grow 'victory gardens' is all but lost in America, and generations of growing nothing but fescue on poor soils, and then throwing away the cuttings, has left us with quite a challenge. IF a major currency crisis sets off a series of bad events and leads to a "world made by hand" imagined by some, or even a major economic collapse such as occurred in Russia during the 1990's; then there will be much suffering before enough of the population has both the knowledge and the resources to grow respectable amounts of food on urban plots. There certainly aren't enough horses in this country to even come close to replacing lost bulk transportation capacity if we lose access to petrol. But at least there will be plenty of unskilled labor able to do the work of gardening, if there are people willing to teach them all how to do it under such circumstances.