If Half of the Population Were Wiped Out

1. What atrocious situations would happen the moment half of the population were wiped out?

As the video says, there is a big chance that many of the people that dissappear would be taking care of essential jobs, like managing critical infrastructure (electric grid, electric powerplants, banking and underground systems), driving busses, flying planes. Many others could be doing dangerous tasks and their dissappearance would cause a great deal of damage. Also, all of the services we rely on would stop working. Things like banking systems, internet and mobile phone connections, even food and water supply.

But not only that. Due to the fact that all of the accidents and shortages would happen at the same exact time, big chain reactions could appear, much like an atomic bomb of accidents.

This would greatly increase the damage and life losses, so the percentage of people that would cease to exist would be much bigger than 50%.

2. What would happen after humans adjusted to it?

In my opinion, the video is too optimistic with how the situation would be after the humans left adjusted to the new reality.

We have to take into account that things like food supply are not static, but rather dynamic, and they depend on the amount of people and resources invested on the sector that produces them. With that much less people there would be almost no food pruction, no water processing or no construction materials. Every industry would have to be rebuilt and, even after the adjustment, the capacity of the new societies to keep people alive and healthy would be extremely low, causing long term hunger and deseases.

Of course, all of the resources would have to be focused on producing food and cover basic necessities, which means there would be little chance for a proper health system or a new communications grid to appear. All of those things would have to wait much longer to be rebuilt.

Fights for control of the territory and resources would not dissappear after the adjustment creating more instability and chaos. Only after an incredibly long time would new, more powerful and stable societies arise, bringing longer periods of peace.

Human societies have slowly evolved and developed for thousands of years and an event like that would mean a step back to (almost) the cavemen. No, people would not live better if we were fewer.

The only thing I can agree with is that, in the long term, pollution would be reduced, but only after a great period of time due to the destruction and contamination produced by the event. And, of course, when societies start growing again, they would need more and easily accessible energy, which probably means going back to burning coal. Again, a really bad idea.

3. How do you see this from an ethical perspective?

From what I have exposed previously, it is obvious that I think it is a terrible event with terrible consecuences and little to no advantages. It is wrong from every perspective I can think of.

4. If you were in this situation, how would you deal with this new world?

Probably gathering as many people as I could find to build a strong society as fast as possible. This way better infrastructure could be built faster and there is a greater chance of survival.