Not in Cities

In relation to thinking about the numbers that would be left alive after the shift and helping them to get on their feet and giving them information that they may not have had the foresight to collect - developing strategies that could be implemented on a larger scale and programs to give them what they need to make it on their own. The premise that this is based on may be faulty in that it was planning on 10% of people living in cities being alive after the shift. This was brought up on the chat about how many survivors there would be when everything is said and done. We were using numbers from cities and just cranking it through a formula to drop a zero.

Because of the nature of the beast with cities I don't think that logic works as well. We'll probably have a much lower percentage of people surviving the shift in cities. If a 30 story apt. building is toppled during the shift it isn't very likely that 10% of the people inside are going to be alive. Which means a greater percentage, relatively, of people surviving who are spaced out in the country. These people will be spread much further apart than those that would have been in cities, and they will be on foot. With people spread further apart how can we possibly draw these people together without signaling to the Service-to-Self individuals, "Here we are come, take our stuff."

Offered by John.