[carlmr]

I get where you come from. You have to see though that for a lot of people recession means losing their jobs, being unable to provide for their families, etc. The fear of recession is entirely rational for anyone without a savings account covering the next 2 years.

[ironic_ali]

Everyone should be spreading their savings around different banks.

Banks will only pay back a certain amount if they go bust - and it depends on the country how much that is.

[coldtea]

>Everyone should be spreading their savings around different banks.

Depending on the country this will not save you. You can have it in N banks, and still get back up to a fixed X amount, because the amount is per person, not per account.

And this assumes people have "savings".

Most people outside of the 10% echo chamber live paycheck to paycheck.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/09/shutdown-highlights-that-4-i...

https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/22/pf/emergency-expenses-house...

https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/financial-security-...

[skybrian]

For the U.S. it's $250,000 so most people in the U.S. won't have to worry about this.

[mschuster91]

> Everyone should be spreading their savings around different banks.

Which savings? 60% of the US population has less than 1.000 $ in liquid savings per [1]. In Germany it's 33% per [2].

When the recession hits (not if but when) people are going to get fucked. The 2008 crisis wiped out what many people had and its aftermath left them unable to rebuild their savings, and social security institutions have been wrecked since neoliberalism took over - I certainly expect (food) riots once recession hits. The Yellow Vests in France are an example what a still relatively rich but angry population can do, and extrapolating from that reveals a not very nice future.

[1]: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-couldnt-cover-a-...

[2]: https://www.focus.de/finanzen/news/finanzen_news_armut_in_de...

[TheSpiceIsLife]

How deep, how rapid, and where, does recession need to be in order for there to be food riots?

[carlmr]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britain-four-meals-away-f...

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Firstly, if you’re going to post a link it’d be helpful if you elaborate why you believe the content of the link supports or refutes your claim.

Secondly, the link you provided states “in the event of a catastrophe that stops the supply of food”.

Is a recession a food supply halting catastrophe?

[carlmr]

I didn't make a claim, so I don't need to support or refute it. But back to the point. Not having money is functionally the same as stopping your supply of food. So if the recession is deep enough that enough people can't buy food anymore there may be riots and looting.

Above posters said that 60% of Americans don't have meaningful savings. That would mean in the event that they can't afford food, more than half of America might start a revolt. (Of course depending on the size of the recession).

[mschuster91]

> Is a recession a food supply halting catastrophe?

It can very easily turn into one, look at what is happening in Venezuela or in Russia. Or what may happen with Britain and the Brexit, with the additional difficulty there that warehouses have been replaced by trucks which means that food supply is endangered in case of unplanned border controls.