[lettergram]

To answer your question, I recommend actually taking traditional investing advice. But assets that make money, so a farm or rental property. These increase in value and you can lease them for revenue. It’s common to invest in stocks, but due to financing rules & policy since 2008, I think there’s a decent risk of a massive bubble bursting. Land is always valuable (baring pollutants) and it’s a limited commodity.

Diversity is key though. I have a farm, rental property, stock, bonds, crypto, gold/silver, etc.

Regarding the sentiment, It feels like there is a cult of self-destruction (note, these may be true, but sensationalized):

- global warming is going to kill us all

- covid19 will kill is all

- inflation is soaring, better learn to eat bugs

- normalizing abortions

- mass shootings regularly on TV (though rare)

- highly addictive opioids prescribed wildly and having FDA approval (claiming they aren’t addictive)

- Castration of children without parental consent

- etc etc

I wrote this back in 2015 and it seems relevant: https://austingwalters.com/an-essay-on-wealth-and-freedom/

Freedom is only obtained through owning land. Without owning the means of production, you’re nothing more than a slave. To your point, owning land you can live off of is a protection against all form of “dooms-day” scenarios.

[cle]

> owning land you can live off of is a protection against all form of “dooms-day” scenarios

In doomsday scenarios I doubt people will respect ownership rights very much. In that scenario, "ownership" isn't as much of a protection as your ability to defend and maintain control over whatever valuable resources you have on the land.

[lettergram]

Guess what we mean by doomsday, but I’d 100% prefer to own a rural property if say the electric grid fails than a city. A lot of farms are installing solar, grow their own food, etc.

In terms of protection, I guess it’s possible people will come to try and take your land, but that really depends on the scenario. In either case, if you live more rurally you’re going to probably need a gun. If you have roaming bands of criminals you’re still going to want to own your own land as opposed to a massive complex or something.

Regardless, this person was asking about financial advice. You’re still better off owning land in most cases as opposed to stocks or gold if it hits the fan. If you’re really worried about it hitting the fan, invest in guns and ammo.

[lhorie]

You don't even need a doomsday scenario. The Landless Workers Movement[0] has existed in Brazil for decades and it basically consists of large groups of people forcefully occupying private land. It ain't pretty when it gets violent (and it does).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landless_Workers%27_Movement

[emteycz]

Owning land is the first step in securing control over that land (and establishing other infrastructure) while you still have the option to use capital and global economies of scale to your advantage.

[abstractbarista]

Absolutely, you'll need to own guns and be willing to use them. As some decide to not respect your right to life, you either to learn to reciprocate, or perish.

[the_only_law]

I feel like you need more than guns, as there are already groups preparing for this sort of thing are not only well armed, but appear to be well armored as well. Ofc, the sort of thing I imagine would counter that well could probably land you an open file with the FBI if you do too much research into them.

[TheCowboy]

Agree with this. It's common for preppers/survivalists to believe that somehow the chaos isn't going to devour them.

I'm really fine with being prepared for disasters, human-made or natural, but in a complete upheaval of global civilization you need more than property and a castle loaded with ammo to thrive. Looking at foreign countries ravaged by civil war, can you really imagine riding that out because you bought a farm?

[CameronNemo]

Do you really own land? Or do you have an indefinite lease on it from the state? If it turned out there were valuable mineral deposits under your farm, kiss your farm goodbye.

[kcplate]

Or if a property developer wants it and can convince the local governing authority that they will grab more tax revenue by forcing you sell it to him at a shitty price.

[Miraste]

All of those are transitory cultural issues, backed by the increasingly sensationalist media, except covid and global warming. Covid has already spent its wrath for the most part. Climate change (global warming, as a term, doesn't cover the multipronged destruction of ecosystems throughout the world) is legitimately catastrophic; if anything it's undersold. The only question is the exact timeline of its effects.

[lettergram]

Definitely agree on this. My biggest peeve is that carbon emissions is a misdirection or at least not anywhere near the #1 issue. US has produced less CO2 (almost) every year since 1990.

The real concern are the pesticides that have reduced insect populations. They build up in the ecosystem and can take many years to flush out.

[jjnoakes]

> owning land you can live off of is a protection against all form of “dooms-day” scenarios

I imagine that global warming, if it hits some threshold/tipping point that changes the climate enough to wreck the land, might be the one counter-example here. Though I don't know enough about farming to know if it could sustain through a wide range of climates and potential consequences of severe temperature/climate change.

[regularfry]

Rough rule of thumb: if you're in a temperate climate now, you're probably ok. Crops that will grow well will change, but as long as the water doesn't dry up, you'll be able to grow something.

If you're in a hot climate now, move.

[exdsq]

> normalizing abortions

Wait, what? This isn't a view I'm familiar with in England

[revscat]

What good is owning land if there is no more rainfall? Or if your beach-front is now submerged?