WI: North America in 2020 is ISOTed to 30,000 BCE?

I have seen this multiple times in this thread and it has me laughing.

Current data shows that covid originated sometime in early November in China. Moreover, review of coroner reports and hospital records in Seattle (I think) suggest that some deaths and severe cases attributed to influenza and severe pneumonia were early covid-19 cases.

So, like as not, North America is dealing with covid on top of glacial maximum.

I also tend to think people here and on AH love to just say "government collapse" especially when it comes to America, while disregarding how robust the system truly is.

America doesn't rely on a highly centralized federal government for a reason. A failure of the central government to act is covered by the states acting independently, as we have seen. The states fill in that gap in leadership. I hate to break it to you chicken littles, but the US government is extraordinarily stable despite the mess Trump likes to make around him.

Would Canada fail? Sure. It's fucking unlivable. Mexico and Central America? Sure, there isn't a stable government in the entire region except maybe Panama.

So that said, I'd like to pose a couple questions to the thread:
  1. How would Trump's impeachment hearing go? It was an ongoing process at the time but I can see it going one of two ways:
    1. The Democrats drop it entirely in the face of the crisis. Frankly, this is the more likely. They just drop it after impeaching him in the house as the "fuck you" it is and focusing on the crisis. The public wouldn't be able to stand watching lawmakers do
    2. The GOP essentially capitulates and votes trump out. They are fully cognizant (IRL) of how bad he is. I can certainly see them just deciding to stick with Pence and having a reliable head in the middle of a huge crisis.
  2. The more pertinent question, in my mind, is if this whole deal basically replaces 30,000 BC!NA with modern!NA what the hell happens with all the ice?
    • Do we just find ourselves suddenly encased in ice in clavier covered areas? If it is, Canada is just gone as everyone is immediately killed. The same goes for New York, Chicago, Seattle, Salt Lake, Michigan, most of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Dakotas. Let's also not forget that the Mauna Kea observatory is also gone too. Yes there was a glacier there. So, no refugee crisis. But....
    • Does the earth just lose something like 15% or more of its surface water? I'm not sure I can even guess at this. It's a shitshow.
    • Or is it that the ice just slowly comes back and we ignore the problem? The real question here becomes how long does it take to reaccumulate? That is what will really determine the nature of the crisis.
      • If it takes hundreds of years to accumulate, the crisis will chiefly economic in nature as the US is cut off from all meaningful international trade. There is likely a steady move of people south. Likely an invasion or annexation of most of northern Mexico or all of it because the warm latitudes are suddenly at a premium.
      • If it reaccumulates quickly, then the crisis becomes way more than an economic one.

 
The ice that is already present (a significant amount, as the planet has been cooling since at least ~32,000 BC, but not as much as it would be as the ice doesn't reach maximum coverage until ~25,000 BC) disappears into the ether, replaced by the troposphere from 2020.

Some of this lost water will be replaced by the water brought along with the continental shelves, but I sincerely doubt that will be enough to offset the loss. Exactly how much global water will be disappeared I am uncertain, enough to be measurably significant I suspect, but without doing a whole lot of math I can't be sure.


There will definitely be some knock-on consequences of this, though said consequences are unlikely to be very relevant in the short-term.



e: The most recent glacial remains from Mauna Kea in Hawaii apparently date from 40,000 to 13,000 years ago, so the cooling might actually have started earlier and progressed further than I initially estimated, which would translate into a greater loss of water.
 
Last edited:
Note the last glacial maximum was ~26000 years ago. We're just past the start of the ice sheets forming.
That is some serious supposition. Even just the Wikipedia article on it gives a nearly 15k year possible range for the last glacial maximum. (One thesis states it is anywhere between 26.5kya and 19-20kya with a start of advance around 33kya. Another paper listed in the same Wikipedia article puts the maximum anywhere between 31kya and 16kya)

The first paper that Wikipedia cites states this:
Clark et al. said:
Within uncertainties, the earliest maxima were reached by several ice sheets (or sectors of ice sheets) sometime between 29 to 33 ka (Fig. 3B and figs. S2 and S3). This early re- sponse included large and small ice sheets at mid- and high northern latitudes, as well as the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) in the South- ern Hemisphere. Over the next 2500 years, the remaining ice sheets [and sectors of the Laurentide Ice Sheet (LIS)] continued to grow, so that by 26.5 ka, nearly all ice sheets had attained their maximum extents,

What this means is that the ice sheets didn't extend from the poles down, they grew up, out, and filled in. By 30k BC there was a boatload of ice covering much of North America.
 
Climate change generally effects the areas near the poles more than it effects the areas near the equator. In ecosystem/climate/agricultural potential terms Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean are in a much better position to survive this scenario than the United States and Canada; they'll suffer some desertification but it's probably going to be relatively minor compared to how more-or-less everything north of the Mason-Dixon line is probably going to become Siberia-like marginal land. If the United States handles the situation badly Mexico might be the center of civilization when the dust settles. If people handle the situation well Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean might come out of this fairly well, becoming the new breadbasket region of North America.

The flip side of that is the nightmare scenario would be the United States goes fascist and secures a food supply by basically implementing Generalplan Ost on Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. A country with a deficit of food and a surplus of weapons is a situation that might get very ugly very quickly.
 
Last edited:
Tools in the short short term might not be a problem, depending what's in show rooms and dealerships and so forth - but USA does little of her own production, these days, so in anything other than the short term, there's a significant problem, there, too, for supplying the farmers. That would exacerbate the "succeed on your own or fail" problem, as shortages would cause price spikes and price gouging. And if there's enough of a shortage that people begin attacking the supply chain so as not to starve...that starts adding even more supply, equipment, and stability problems on top. And the higher those piles get, the more chaos you get out of them in a vicious cycle. Transportation just makes things worse. It's been so cheap for so long to ship something across the country that you're not likely to have any sort of tool production near where it's needed, nor are you likely to have the supply necessary to create those tools anywhere near where the tools are being created, etc. Things start falling apart into smaller pieces, and even if you have an appropriate tool-shop (tractor factory, what have you), you don't have anything to supply it with, and you still don't have the tool in question.

NO. I keep saying this but for the love of god people. It's not like America doesn't manufacture enough locally to continue operations. See previous posts on how the absolute volume of American manufacturing hasn't been shrinking and with a sudden massive drop-off in demand the US will have plenty of manufacturing capacity leftover, from boutique chip-set fabs to tractors. Last I checked their were 10 Steel mills in the US producing 34% of US demand per-transference and we have plenty of empty shut-down steel mills to reactivate and their use and operation is still in living memory. In short industrial short-falls are not the worry. Demand will sharply drop off as everything outside NA disappears and a great recession starts-- a stong and quick federal government assuming Trump somehow puts on his big-boy pants or is replaced can be put that to use. There need be no down-teching and it is in fact counterproductive unless the fabric of local societies are too fundamentally damaged to continue to operate. Which barring massive die-offs from food insecurity is very unlikely. NA as a unit has all the requisite parts for modern society to function. Machine shops can custom build parts for producers lost in the reset. The US builds and maintains its own tractors. Etc.

Also wasn't COVID deliberately not brought along in the transference or did I read the prompt wrong?

But anyways on the manufacturing front NA is fine. Lifestyles pre-transference are torpedoed but what can you do.

Fite me. I'll go dig up my undergrad papers on the topic if need be.
 
Last edited:
NO. I keep saying this but for the love of god people. It's not like America doesn't manufacture enough locally to continue operations. See previous posts on how the absolute volume of American manufacturing hasn't been shrinking and with a sudden massive drop-off in demand the US will have plenty of manufacturing capacity leftover, from boutique chip-set fabs to tractors. Last I checked their were 10 Steel mills in the US producing 34% of US demand per-transference and we have plenty of empty shut-down steel mills to reactivate and their use and operation is still in living memory. In short industrial short-falls are not the worry. Demand will sharply drop off as everything outside NA disappears and a great recession starts-- a stong and quick federal government assuming Trump somehow puts on his big-boy pants or is replaced can be put that to use. There need be no down-teching and it is in fact counterproductive unless the fabric of local societies are too fundamentally damaged to continue to operate. Which barring massive die-offs from food insecurity is very unlikely. NA as a unit has all the requisite parts for modern society to function. Machine shops can custom build parts for producers lost in the reset. The US builds and maintains its own tractors. Etc.
The biggest issue is going to be computer parts, as we lack sufficient extraction for several of the rarer components. Mostly rare earth metals. This will get fixed, but expect the tech industry to fall back for a decade or two while we tool up the parts of that supply line that don't currently exist in significant amounts in the US.

Naturally that's 21st century tech - everything below that is fine.

And all critical stuff either exists internally or can be quickly retooled from no-longer-relevant factories.

I expect there will be starvation to some degree, simple fact of not knowing the weather patterns/arable land well enough and having sufficient cold-resistant crop seeds ready by the first spring. I expect this will basically be over by the second or third year, regardless of the competence of the government response.
 
Last edited:
The biggest issue is going to be computer parts, as we lack sufficient extraction for several of the rarer components. Mostly rare earth metals. This will get fixed, but expect the tech industry to fall back for a decade or two while we tool up the parts of that supply line that don't currently exist in significant amounts in the US.

False! the US produces Rare-earths as well! 20.000+ Metric tons per year and then factor in recyclying efforts. Only reason we don't produce more is because it doesn't make economic sense to compete with China's production but we know where the deposits are. We just don't exploit them because its not financially viable without government incentive at the moment.

Actually I just checked it was at 26,000 Metric Tons in 2019 so even higher than I thought. FITE ME. :p

Edit:
A lot of Information Age tech is going to be at least temporarily lost because the extremely complex manufacturing chains for it no longer exists, or only exists in minimum.

Barring a complete and total breakdown of society at every conceivable level and a regression to the old European days of burning all the libraries for funsies, the basic information and knowledge will be still be retained. Once things have settled down a bit, after a decade or two (maybe longer, depending on the scale of the breakdown), reclaiming the Information Age will be relatively simple, though sufficiently expensive that the actual recreation of things like the satellite network may take even longer.
(On the bright side, SpaceX came along for the ride, so re-establishing a basic satellite network for important things like GPS and communications will be much cheaper and easier than it would be otherwise.)
A lot of it is going to stop being produced over the short-term. But if it's something you see and rely upon in everyday life it isn't about to be lost. Come the apocalypse there are boutique chip-fabs who do custom orders for parts that are out of production and really everything else. The knowledge won't be lost and if it's important well NA has a lot of surplus manufacturing capability as it goes through a literally unprecedented recession. Edit2: Software should be mostly fine if completely unsupported in a lot of cases and in others the source code may be lost but this doesn't make it unusable. Everything else isn't as at risk of being lost surprisingly. We aren't going to forget how to build apple-watches. We'll just repair the ones we do have and put setting up a new production line for them somewhere very low on the docket of other things that need to be addressed. The patents and engineering knowhow are in the US along with most other hardware examples that you might shake a stick at.
 
Last edited:
False! the US produces Rare-earths as well! 20.000+ Metric tons per year and then factor in recyclying efforts. Only reason we don't produce more is because it doesn't make economic sense to compete with China's production but we know where the deposits are. We just don't exploit them because its not financially viable without government incentive at the moment.
I said sufficient! It takes time to expand mines. As I said, it wouldn't be a long-term deficit, but would be sufficient to take them off the shelves for awhile while we put together an entire NA supply line.

Basically we don't lose anything except run into short-term issues with many supply lines, which will have to be prioritized as there will not be sufficient resources to bootstrap everything all at once.
 
Last edited:
I said sufficient! It takes time to expand mines. As I said, it wouldn't be a long-term deficit, but would be sufficient to take them off the shelves for awhile while we put together an entire NA supply line.

It is! Consumption in the US is 13,000 Metric Tons per year in 2019 according to Statista.

www.statista.com

U.S.: rare earths consumption 2023 | Statista

In 2023, the apparent consumption of rare earths in the United States amounted to an estimated 8,800 metric tons.

Edit:
I probably should have written that in as part of my AHHA! moment earlier in the thread but I checked. and here is the link.
 
Last edited:
Neat. Though that number would shoot up if we had to do all our own manufacturing, as we would in this scenario.

See I'm not sure about that. A lot of demand will dry up overnight and without warning. I've been working under the assumption that NA is headed towards massive recession a lot of consumer demand might just up and disappear and the US certainly isn't going to need to build new fighter jets anytime soon. It might actually be enough without expansion at all.
 
I have seen this multiple times in this thread and it has me laughing.

Current data shows that covid originated sometime in early November in China. Moreover, review of coroner reports and hospital records in Seattle (I think) suggest that some deaths and severe cases attributed to influenza and severe pneumonia were early covid-19 cases.

So, like as not, North America is dealing with covid on top of glacial maximum.

I also tend to think people here and on AH love to just say "government collapse" especially when it comes to America, while disregarding how robust the system truly is.

America doesn't rely on a highly centralized federal government for a reason. A failure of the central government to act is covered by the states acting independently, as we have seen. The states fill in that gap in leadership. I hate to break it to you chicken littles, but the US government is extraordinarily stable despite the mess Trump likes to make around him.

Would Canada fail? Sure. It's fucking unlivable. Mexico and Central America? Sure, there isn't a stable government in the entire region except maybe Panama.

So that said, I'd like to pose a couple questions to the thread:
  1. How would Trump's impeachment hearing go? It was an ongoing process at the time but I can see it going one of two ways:
    1. The Democrats drop it entirely in the face of the crisis. Frankly, this is the more likely. They just drop it after impeaching him in the house as the "fuck you" it is and focusing on the crisis. The public wouldn't be able to stand watching lawmakers do
    2. The GOP essentially capitulates and votes trump out. They are fully cognizant (IRL) of how bad he is. I can certainly see them just deciding to stick with Pence and having a reliable head in the middle of a huge crisis.
  2. The more pertinent question, in my mind, is if this whole deal basically replaces 30,000 BC!NA with modern!NA what the hell happens with all the ice?
    • Do we just find ourselves suddenly encased in ice in clavier covered areas? If it is, Canada is just gone as everyone is immediately killed. The same goes for New York, Chicago, Seattle, Salt Lake, Michigan, most of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Dakotas. Let's also not forget that the Mauna Kea observatory is also gone too. Yes there was a glacier there. So, no refugee crisis. But....
    • Does the earth just lose something like 15% or more of its surface water? I'm not sure I can even guess at this. It's a shitshow.
    • Or is it that the ice just slowly comes back and we ignore the problem? The real question here becomes how long does it take to reaccumulate? That is what will really determine the nature of the crisis.
      • If it takes hundreds of years to accumulate, the crisis will chiefly economic in nature as the US is cut off from all meaningful international trade. There is likely a steady move of people south. Likely an invasion or annexation of most of northern Mexico or all of it because the warm latitudes are suddenly at a premium.
      • If it reaccumulates quickly, then the crisis becomes way more than an economic one.

Heck, if we're speculating on modern politics now- which, for the record, thank you everyone for being civil, and please keep it that way- it's possible that Amendment 25 is used to remove Trump, if he proves too incompetent, or if impeachment becomes too big of a problem.

As for including COVID- I haven't been paying much attention to it's origins, so I'd thought that placing the ISOT on January 1st would be just outside of the time for it to have reached the US, but still allowing for speculation if it did. Thanks for including a source verifying that it probably was here at that time.

At this point in time, NA was colder, but the glaciers hadn't actually spread out very far. The amount of water on Earth should be similar, though the sea levels will still be lower due to glaciation in Europe. The maps should be linked earlier in this thread.


The biggest issue is going to be computer parts, as we lack sufficient extraction for several of the rarer components. Mostly rare earth metals. This will get fixed, but expect the tech industry to fall back for a decade or two while we tool up the parts of that supply line that don't currently exist in significant amounts in the US.
False! the US produces Rare-earths as well! 20.000+ Metric tons per year and then factor in recyclying efforts. Only reason we don't produce more is because it doesn't make economic sense to compete with China's production but we know where the deposits are. We just don't exploit them because its not financially viable without government incentive at the moment.

Which types of rare earths, and in what quantities? And how long will our current equipment (plus any backlog) last, as compared to the time to begin processing our own, with numerous other problems to solve? Heck, how long will it take to find and train employees?
 
Last edited:
Keep All Modern Political Discussion Civil
but this isn't a debate thread, and the objective here isn't to convince the other guy, but instead lay out possibilities for the stated ISoT, so I'll pass in hopes of not generating more hostility.

That's what I was trying to get, so thank you. I don't want flames.

@Kellcat - your hateful rabid politically charged post was cringe worthy and irrelevant to the thread.
Trump kicked your puppy or something?

Like this. Everyone please refrain from insults, especially to other posters, and generally to other political and social views.
 
Last edited:
Which types of rare earths, and in what quantities? And how long will our current equipment (plus any backlog) last, as compared to the time to begin processing our own, with numerous other problems to solve? Heck, how long will it take to find and train employees?

So I've got good news and bad news. The United States has for a while been ramping up Rare-earths production to wean off dependence from China. these efforts are coming online right now as we speak so lots of the multi-year groundwork necessary to set this up is already done. The bad new is I have no idea on what types of rare-earths as there's something like 13 or 15 I are the big dumb, it is 17, But I presume it's a wide spread. One instance of Market research from 2019 I found estimated 75% of consumption of rare-earths in the US was to make catalysts. Things like Lanthanum and the like but hard information is beyond me.

I found a promising (Rare Earth Metals Market Size & Share | Industry Analysis - 2026) report, and it's very recent too but a quick check through infohawk and the Uiowa Libraries that I have access to didn't turn up any results nor did I find access to the same report through any of the databases I checked and unless someone has 5000$ just laying around somewhere I can't get access myself to do a quick read-through. Now I could look longer and frankly I bet there is something in the one of the many online databases the University of Iowa has access to but I'm lazy so I'll just wait until monday and call in the library to see if one of the librarians can get me started.

Edit: slight correction on the number of rare-earths.
 
Last edited:
See I'm not sure about that. A lot of demand will dry up overnight and without warning. I've been working under the assumption that NA is headed towards massive recession a lot of consumer demand might just up and disappear and the US certainly isn't going to need to build new fighter jets anytime soon. It might actually be enough without expansion at all.
The US doesn't need to build new fighter jets now, that's never stopped it from doing that anyway.

I can just imagine the legions of rich old white men screaming in financial pain at the merest suggestion of reducing the Military Industrial Complex. They have contracts dammit!
 
Last edited:
The US doesn't need to build new fighter jets now, that's never stopped it from doing that anyway.

I can just imagine the legions of rich old white men screaming in financial pain at the merest suggestion of reducing the Military Industrial Complex. They have contracts dammit!

That's actually a fair point, though- we won't need most of our military equipment, so deconstructing it for the rare materials might actually become a job. It'll be painful to deconstruct the raptors, though, provided large numbers are actually in NA at the time.

Now I could look longer and frankly I bet there is something in the one of the many online databases the University of Iowa has access to but I'm lazy so I'll just wait until monday and call in the library to see if one of the librarians can get me started.

Calling a university library to answer an obscure question on a small point on an online impossible hypothetical debate? That's something I can get behind!
 
Calling a university library to answer an obscure question on a small point on an online impossible hypothetical debate? That's something I can get behind!


What else am I suppose to do? check through the... 1236 Databases ... personally? Nah I'll just ask the librarians which database probably has what I'm looking for it's how I've survived every other paper so far and it's worked great.
 
You are dramatically overestimating the amount of food shortage there will be. It will be bad, but nowhere near "we can only feed 10% of people" bad. The US produces far more food than it needed to feed everyone that lives in it
It's not the amount of food that's concerning to me (I'm aware the US is a net exporter of food) - its the shipment and distribution. OTL, we had short term shortages of quite a lot of things with only Covid as a problem, and in this scenario we have Covid rearing its ugly head (likely as a complete surprise rather than as the anticipated oh shit OTL) on top of the problems and panic from the time shift. (The News may well be focused on the problems from the ISoT to the exclusion of enough other things that whatever-Covid-19-ends-up-called becomes a serious problem before anyone's really aware of it...where OTL, anyone paying attention knew it was coming for months before there were significant US effects.) Local stabilities won't be enough to handle that - there would need to be a national stability to ensure that the food traveled the distance it needed to. To the best of my knowledge, large cities do not produce enough food locally to feed the citizenry, and if food isn't shipped in...well, there's enough food in the country, but you've still got a food shortage. Multiply that by every large city affected and that could easily be a lot of problem.

How would Trump's impeachment hearing go? It was an ongoing process at the time but I can see it going one of two ways:
  1. The Democrats drop it entirely in the face of the crisis. Frankly, this is the more likely. They just drop it after impeaching him in the house as the "fuck you" it is and focusing on the crisis. The public wouldn't be able to stand watching lawmakers do
  2. The GOP essentially capitulates and votes trump out. They are fully cognizant (IRL) of how bad he is. I can certainly see them just deciding to stick with Pence and having a reliable head in the middle of a huge crisis.
Hm. As of December 18th 2019, the articles of impeachment were in, so technically it would be supposed to go to the Senate. I would add a third possibility to your list: people are sufficiently freaked over what's happening that the impeachment is effectively forgotten. With both parties more concerned about the new problems from the ISoT it becomes a "we'll deal with it when we have time" sort of thing. Of course, if Trump does something sufficiently boneheaded, obstructive, or vile, Democrats (being politicians, of course) could well bring it up again as a lever against Trump and his supporters. Both Republicans and Democrats are politicians first - so if there's any stability or chance of elections, they're both quite likely to be more focused on their re-elections than the problems the country is facing.

Soo... thinking about it, the impeachment hearing simply falls out of view as not being important enough. Time passes - maybe weeks, maybe months - before Trump pulls something big enough and nasty enough to pull attention back away from the country's crises, Democrats push for the impeachment to happen, and we end up with something roughly approximating the OTL circus. Democrats hate him and want him gone - there will be no movement to acquit from that quarter; depending on what he did to draw attention to himself, there could be even more antipathy than OTL. Republicans have bent knee to his lies and obstruction and bile for over three years, so just as in OTL they continue to excuse and justify his every action. Maybe all Republicans (instead of merely almost all) vote to acquit "as a show of solidarity in these unprecedented times", or conversely maybe there are a handful of Republicans who decide they want someone in office who isn't...well...Trump. Either way, the 2/3 threshold for impeachment isn't reached, and division and distrust continue to grow when they can least be afforded. Democrats are furious that an incompetent like Trump is being allowed to cause problems when the country is in such a major and unprecedented crisis, while Republicans shout that Democratic willingness to impeach the president in the middle of such a crisis is treasonous. Non-political-persons who are mostly just worried about how they're going to survive in this new world watch in horror as the country continues to tear itself apart.

The flip side of that is the nightmare scenario would be the United States goes fascist and secures a food supply by basically implementing Generalplan Ost on Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. A country with a deficit of food and a surplus of weapons is a situation that might get very ugly very quickly.
This would require the nation to actually hold together enough for there to be a nation to do this. If things fall apart to the extent of "use weapons to get food", I would expect it to more be a matter of smaller regions who have managed to pull together and refugees and violent (desparate) gangs. If Mexico has managed to pull itself together, it may be able to resist these smaller actors, though it's also possible that significant damage is caused. Worst case, armed brigands and refugees added to Mexico's internal problems from the ISoT overwhelm Mexico's ability to adapt, and Mexico collapses right along with the United States.

But anyways on the manufacturing front NA is fine. Lifestyles pre-transference are torpedoed but what can you do.

Fite me. I'll go dig up my undergrad papers on the topic if need be.
Would be interested to see some information on this, actually - almost everything I can find is in terms of imports versus exports rather than any information on actual production. I've found some bits and pieces where claims are made that most electronics and televisions (for instance) are almost exclusively imported rather than produced locally, but outside of that it's mostly anecdotal. Some information on how we import so very much in the way of consumer goods, but no information on how much if any is actually produced locally, or how much is produced from locally mined materials, etc. Looking specifically at Wally World, the numbers I can find vary wildly and nothing looks authoritative - Wally World is stated to rely on imports for from anywhere from 25% to 80% of its consumer goods sales (not authoritative and such agreement among figures. sigh.) At 25% that's significant shortages and the problems caused by that. At 80%, the problem becomes rather more than "significant". To make things worse, it's likely that the shortages are category-specific; it's unlikely that X% of everything is made in the US - more likely that >X% of Product A is made in the US, while <X% of Product B is. See earlier comment on electronics/TVs, and also according to Business Insider, 97% of clothes sold in the US in 2015 were imported...

See I'm not sure about that. A lot of demand will dry up overnight and without warning. I've been working under the assumption that NA is headed towards massive recession a lot of consumer demand might just up and disappear and the US certainly isn't going to need to build new fighter jets anytime soon. It might actually be enough without expansion at all.
Agree on the massive recession. From what's been said in the thread so far, it sounds like every single port in the ISoT has just been destroyed. All of the jobs (and supplies) from shipping are gone along with all the ships and ports. With no capability to export, every industry that is relying on exports for survival crashes - unless we can find a use for all those not-going-to-China soybeans, for instance, there's going to be some unhappy US farmers out of a job. The fishing fleets along the coasts are gone - their ports are destroyed, their boats are destroyed, and any who were at sea during the ISoT are probably dead. With the continental shelf largely being moved, all that high value seaside property isn't so high value anymore - a view over a muck-filled wasteland isn't likely to be terribly popular. Hopefully the continental shelf coming along for the ride will prevent any immediate massive earthquakes from destroying the coasts, because that is just what the situation needs added to it.

Consumer demand might plummet from all the people losing their jobs, but at the same time prices for consumer goods are likely to skyrocket. All the cheap goods from China-or-wherever are gone, and not coming back - that will drastically cut supply and lead to price hikes and price gouging. Raw materials imported for use in production are likewise gone, causing massive job losses in at least the short term - until such time as supplies can be found more locally, or until productive colonies can be started.
 
Agree on the massive recession. From what's been said in the thread so far, it sounds like every single port in the ISoT has just been destroyed. All of the jobs (and supplies) from shipping are gone along with all the ships and ports. With no capability to export, every industry that is relying on exports for survival crashes - unless we can find a use for all those not-going-to-China soybeans, for instance, there's going to be some unhappy US farmers out of a job. The fishing fleets along the coasts are gone - their ports are destroyed, their boats are destroyed, and any who were at sea during the ISoT are probably dead. With the continental shelf largely being moved, all that high value seaside property isn't so high value anymore - a view over a muck-filled wasteland isn't likely to be terribly popular. Hopefully the continental shelf coming along for the ride will prevent any immediate massive earthquakes from destroying the coasts, because that is just what the situation needs added to it.

Consumer demand might plummet from all the people losing their jobs, but at the same time prices for consumer goods are likely to skyrocket. All the cheap goods from China-or-wherever are gone, and not coming back - that will drastically cut supply and lead to price hikes and price gouging. Raw materials imported for use in production are likewise gone, causing massive job losses in at least the short term - until such time as supplies can be found more locally, or until productive colonies can be started.

Anyways. This is all the stuff I could find on my computer in easy reach. Might be a few repeats this is over the course of several papers on differing but related topics. Sadly my 3504 Globalization Course is now locked to me which means I can't actually re-download my old-papers from that class but a bunch of others should be represented here. I'm not including the papers themselves because to be frank they are terrible undergrad work but here are the sources.

Berman, Eli, et al. "Changes in the Demand for Skilled Labor within U.S. Manufacturing Industries: Evidence from the Annual Survey of Manufacturing." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 109, no. Issue 2, 1 May 1994, pp. 367–369., doi:10.3386/w4255.

Gallagher, Nancy, et al. Iranian Public Opinion on the Nuclear Negotiations. Univeristy of Maryland, 2015, Iranian Public Opinion on the Nuclear Negotiations, cissm.umd.edu/research-impact/publications/iranian-public-opinion-nuclear-negotiations.

Gleckman, Howard. "China Trade War: What Is A Tariff And Who Pays It?" Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 26 Sept. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2018/09/25/what-is-a-tariff-and-who-pays-it/#57cdf11e137b.

Goodman, Matthew P. "From TPP to CPTPP." From TPP to CPTPP | Center for Strategic and International Studies, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 8 Mar. 2018, www.csis.org/analysis/tpp-cptpp.

Holly, Krisztina 'Z'. "Trump Has Manufacturing All Wrong -- And So Do The Rest Of Us." Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Feb. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/krisztinaholly/2018/01/31/trump-state-of-the-union-8-myths-of-manufacturing/#21ed81dc3a40.

Jacobson, Louis. "Is Protectionism a Big Part of the Great Depression?" @Politifact, 31 May 2018, www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/may/31/ben-sasse/protectionism-big-part-great-depression-ben-sasse-/.

Josephs, Jonathan. "WTO Chief: 'Months' Needed to Fix Disputes Body." BBC News, BBC, 10 Dec. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/business-50736344.

Lawrence, Robert Z., and Lawrence Edwards. US Employment Deindustrialization: Insights from History and the International Experience. Peterson Institute for International Economics, 2013, US Employment Deindustrialization: Insights from History and the International Experience, www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/us-employment-deindustrialization-insights-history-and-international.

Mcbride, James, and Andrew Chatzky. "The U.S. Trade Deficit: How Much Does It Matter?" Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, 8 Mar. 2019, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-trade-deficit-how-much-does-it-matter.

Pascal, Alex. "Against Washington's 'Great Power' Obsession." The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 23 Sept. 2019, www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/09/multilateralism-nearly-dead-s-terrible-news/598615/.

Petri, Peter A., and Michael G. Plummer. The Economic Effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New Estimates. Peterson Institute for International Economics, 2016, The Economic Effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New Estimates, www.piie.com/system/files/documents/wp16-2_0.pdf.

Sparshott, Jeffrey. "Newsletter: 'I'll Just Raise the Tariffs Even Higher'." The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 20 Nov. 2019, blogs.wsj.com/economics/2019/11/20/newsletter-ill-just-raise-the-tariffs-even-higher/.

Taylor, Adam. "Analysis | A Timeline of Trump's Complicated Relationship with the TPP." The Washington Post, WP Company, 13 Apr. 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/04/13/a-timeline-of-trumps-complicated-relationship-with-the-tpp/.

Wu, Wendy. "China Wary after Trump's U-Turn on Joining TPP ." South China Morning Post, 13 Apr. 2018, www.scmp.com/news/china/economy/article/2141650/china-wary-after-trumps-u-turn-could-see-us-rejoining-tpp.

"US Employment Deindustrialization: Insights from History and the International Experience." PIIE. August 31, 2018. Accessed May 02, 2019. US Employment Deindustrialization: Insights from History and the International Experience.



Pierce, Justin R., and Peter K. Schott. "The Surprisingly Swift Decline of US Manufacturing Employment." American Economic Review. July 2016. Accessed May 02, 2019. The Surprisingly Swift Decline of US Manufacturing Employment - American Economic Association.



Harrison, Ann, and Margaret McMillan. "Offshoring Jobs? Multinationals and U.S. Manufacturing Employment." MIT Press Journals. July 2011. Accessed May 02, 2019. MIT Press Journals.



Berman, Eli, John Bound, and Zvi Griliches. "Changes in the Demand for Skilled Labor within U. S. Manufacturing: Evidence from the Annual Survey of Manufactures *." OUP Academic. May 01, 1994. Accessed May 02, 2019. Changes in the Demand for Skilled Labor within U. S. Manufacturing: Evidence from the Annual Survey of Manufactures *.


Holly, Krisztina 'Z'. "Trump Has Manufacturing All Wrong -- And So Do The Rest Of Us." Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Feb. 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/krisztinaholly/2018/01/31/trump-state-of-the-union-8-myths-of-manufacturing/#4839420a3a40.
 
Last edited:
Interesting thread movement since I last checked in. I think it looks like the "most people die" possibility is much less likely and is hinged on administrative failure, while agriculture seems more stable than I worried.

Infrastructure damage is gonna be huge, though. I am unsure if rivers would even stay stable in the short term? Rainfall patterns and changed ocean levels seem like it might mess with inland rivers, but not sure.

I would expect a US centered collapse to take out Mexico even if Mexico's ecological situation was perfect, and a Mexican collapse to take out Central America. North America is heavily interlinked economically and 2019-2020 Mexico makes the Trump run US look stable even without an ISOT smashing it in the balls. AMLO and Trump have mostly gotten along as well as they have due to never meeting in person, and Mexico becoming basically the only other country that matters to the Trump administration feels like an unpleasant place to be in the ISOT.

COVID being around is interesting, but I expect it to be basically ignored in this timeline and maybe legit missed in other statistical noise of medical and weather disruptions. There might even be a chance the butterfly storm and small starting infection might wipe it out, but that seems like a bad bet. I'd guess the pandemic pushes a ton of marginal groups into much higher death rates with economic depression, malnutrition, and covid aggravating each other. I would be worried about pharmaceutical disruptions tearing through vulnerable populations, and the relatively old population of the US seems really vulnerable to the general mix of problems in this particular ISOT. (If anything pushes the US into socialism I'd guess it is vanishing insulin and anti-depressants fucking up the middle aged, and the last person I'd want overseeing mass nationalization is Donald Trump.)

My guess would the US gets through this without a civil war, but more resulting deaths per capita and absolute than anything else in American history. It'd be disruptions on the level of say, France during World War II, which the bulk of the US has literally never experienced before. Coups, small scale rebellions, invading parts of North America for no good reason all seem on the table, but I don't think America's dividing lines fold easily into separate sides in this, and there are a lot of pressures pushing towards centralization.

I do expect culture to kind of roll with the ISOT. Even if objectively this is the weirdest thing that ever happened by far based on laws of physics, it doesn't look that weird to the ape brain. I expect massive upticks in religious belief and other forms of spiritualism, belief in aliens, and so on for a while, but unless any progress is made in understanding the ISOT mechanism I think that fades outside of maybe some cultural quirks like "every family should store six months of food" enduring.
 
Rivers will definitely change course, pop up out of nowhere or disappear entirely all across the country thanks to the different rainfall quantities and patterns. I'm not sure how long the process would take, certainly not immediately, but the timescale could be anything from months to years depending on the circumstances.

Given the greatly reduced rainfall of the time, I would expect that more rivers would dry up than anything else, but there should be some new ones and some survivors eventually.

This will be an issue, but is probably likely to be addressed alongside related issues like the mass relocation of population that will be necessary.


COVID certainly has plenty of potential to make things worse, but hospitals will already be overflowing and the most at-risk people like the elderly will likely be at-risk from so many other things that it probably wouldn't make things substantially worse.


A surge in religious fervor is also guaranteed, both because transporting an entire continent through space\time is the sort of thing that only a god or effectively god-like being could possibly pull off, and because of the usual upsurge in religious fervor that occurs during 'apocalyptic' times. How long it would last and what the ultimate consequences of such would be is more difficult to say. Some form of Divine Mandate 'god put us here so therefore it must be his will that we do [insert whatever the people in question want to do here]' sort of thing seems likely.
 
Last edited:
Really? The climate data I can find suggests that ~30k years ago, outside of a few specific locations like parts of Columbia and Central America rainfall was reduced by anywhere up to 90% in the worst locations.

Obviously the full 90% isn't going to apply to NA (and getting rainfall data for NA specifically is proving unusually difficult for some reason), but I would have thought that would still translate to like ~40 - 50% modern rainfall, does that really not cause at least some of the smaller rivers to dry up?

Because, like, there are rivers that seasonally dry up right now, reduced rainfall should exaggerate that sort of thing.

Plus, once the temperature begins to equalize as the troposphere brought along for the ride loses heat to the rest of the atmosphere, ice and snow will start creeping down from the mountains and spreading out across the continent (eventually burying Canada entirely under multiple kilometers of ice by ~24,000 BC). I would have thought, if nothing else, that would alter rivers if only from the mountain rainfall that normally feeds said rivers just straight up staying frozen and not doing that.


e: Apparently changes to the jet stream brought massive rainfall to the otherwise dry Western United States area, creating a shitload of pluvial lakes like Lake Bonneville.

I feel like rainfall sufficient to create entire lakes in the middle of Utah and Nevada is the sort of thing that is going to mess with rivers at least a little bit.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, the entire ship-based logistics network (which is, you know, kind of important) is going to be completely and totally fucked by the transition, that much is absolutely certain. Some parts should survive; inland ports on major rivers will probably be okay, though unable to actually get out to sea again without some serious work digging through the salt mud flats surrounding the coast, either by the river itself or by humans with great metal digbeasts.

But the vast majority is toast, which is why feeding people is going to be a fairly immediate concern, because I believe that food is mostly transported via boat and I'm not at all certain that the land and air logistics networks will be able to fill the gap, at least not easily or quickly enough to matter in the short-term.
 
Back
Top