[robocat]

I think you are overplaying things.

Most first world countries have hardened, resilient, and distributed infrastructure that takes little resources to maintain. The more your economy revolves around non-essential goods and services, the more headroom there is for dealing with failure.

The second order effects of breakdowns in supply chain are real. But they are most effectively dealt with by JIT and connectivity. The US is changing significant parts of it’s economy to deal with this shock: and it looks to be effectively redeploying resources without any leadership at the top.

Look historically at whole countries hit by war or disaster, and see how they managed.

Imagine if tomorrow all medicines are unavailable, and all hospitals destroyed? Many people would die, but the vast majority of the economy would keep running and the vast majority of citizens would remain healthy. Sure, we all could have stocked up on some resources better, but there are heavy costs associated with over stocking and over planning.

[sm0ss117]

The yugoslav wars had a total death rate of < 1%, and saw most of the cities still standing. 3-4 Million ppl were displaced, ~15-20% of pre war population and there are 5-6 countries where there used to be 1. It doesn't take much to change a lot.