[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

You're good for starting a discussion with a long arse post. So here goes.

A pandemic wouldn't have a devastating effect because there are behind the scenes measures to prevent certain things from getting too out of hand. There are deserts with subsocieties waiting to be populated, and underground nations in preparation, so that we can have some refuge and recreate society. At least that's what the movies tell us so it might be true, right?

Now the only end-all and be-all is the Apocalypse. Then humans would have no say in the outcome becomes Jesus has returned to take us believers Home.

Okay.

Well, I couldn't explain it without it being so long.

Well, look at the Roman empire that was hit by a plague with a similar death rate as the 14th century plague. I know it happened around 170 AD which is a different time period from today, but still the effects of it caused a downward spiral towards collapse. So why the difference? In the 14th century, Europe was a feudal hierarchy in which more than 80% of the population were farmers. Each death removed a food producer, but also a consumer, so there was little net effect. In a hierarchy, no one is so vital that they can't be easily replaced. The Roman Empire was also a hierarchy, but with a difference. It had a huge urban population, not equalled in Europe until modern times which depended on small farmers for grain, taxes and soldiers. Population decline effected agriculture, which effected the empire's ability to pay for the military, which made the empire less able to keep invaders out. The invaders further weakened the farmers and agriculture, and a high morality pandemic could trigger a similar result now. Think about it. Fewer consumers, and loss of personnel in key industries would really hurt us.

Pass the crack pipe pleeeze. lol