The U.S. should incentivize residents and businesses to relocate away from cities, so there will be fewer casualties from nuclear missiles landing on cities
Posted by flopsyplum@reddit | CrazyIdeas | View on Reddit | 18 comments
notwalkinghere@reddit
This is actually what the US did in the 50s-80s. The result has been >100,000 people injured or killed on the road every year. No nuclear casualties have occurred, obviously making this policy a complete success.
Unindoctrinated@reddit
The U.S. should incentivize residents and businesses to relocate away from the worst flood, storm, and fire prone areas. A nuclear attack on the U.S. is incredibly unlikely, but frequent disasters caused by climate change is not.
Dhegxkeicfns@reddit
Part of that incentive could be ultra high speed cheap transit. That would naturally spread cities and make those disaster prone areas unnecessary to reside in.
2friedshy@reddit
Found the true crazy idea. USA is run by oil lobbying. We ain't getting no high speed rail
Unindoctrinated@reddit
Like the decade late, $100bn over-budget, high-speed rail in California?
Unfortunately, I can't see America ever creating quality public transport, or the people embracing using it. I hope I'm wrong.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your post was automatically removed because it contains political content, which is off-topic for /r/CrazyIdeas. Please review the subreddit rules and guidelines.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
garnet420@reddit
It's time to re-wild Florida
Automatic-Section779@reddit
I moved to Houston to marry my wife. After several years, and a hurricane, I cannot convince her to move back to Michigan, where my family owns a small farm with an empty house we could be for cheap.
But I feel Houston is both a potential nuke target and hurricane target, and also just screw this heat.
Malalang@reddit
There's a lot of Montanans who discourage people from moving here. But the job market is fantastic, and housing is extremely cheap. Please, come fill up our dying small towns.
smp501@reddit
But are the jobs in the tiny small towns, or all concentrated in 1 area that’s super expensive?
Malalang@reddit
There are jobs everywhere. My town has a population of 2000. I run my own business and gross 350k per year.
llynglas@reddit
If there is a nuclear war, it probably does not matter where you live, just how fast you die. I've heard some folk say that getting atomized in a nuclear blast would be preferable to a much longer death from radiation poisoning or starvation in the nuclear winter.
PerAsperaDaAstra@reddit
The U.S should do the opposite, so there will be fewer people contributing to the massively disproportionate climate impact of rural and suburban areas. Climate change is a real apocalypse we've yet to avoid rather than a hypothetical one.
Dhegxkeicfns@reddit
I love your enthusiasm, but humans are definitely going to hit a critical threshold before they do anything significant. We already know about it. Most people don't care, even if they pretend they care about their children they are blissfully going to condemn them to apocalypse.
xombiemaster@reddit
Nukes are actually likely to hit the Dakotas and Nebraska first because that’s where most of the the nuclear missile silos are located:
https://nuclearforces.org/country-profiles/united-states
H_is_for_Human@reddit
That's why the silos are built there. To be a nuke sponge away from population centers.
jimmy_dude@reddit
my word