> Which region would be less affected by the coming climate crisis?

Do you have evidence that the ultra wealthy are actually taking this into account? Over a human timeframe every ultra wealthy person has access to plenty of “climate change safe“ locations, no particular advance planning is needed.

▲

genthree 9 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

“Climate change safe” for the rich:

- Hard to reach by land (not vulnerable to migration waves)

- Not so small there will be incredible deprivation if sea trade volume plunges (this rules out the vast majority of island nations)

- Not badly overpopulated

- Correct latitude (not too close to the equator)

- Stable liberal democracy (so they probably won’t take all your stuff)

- Unlikely target for outright conquest in great-powers games or expansion.

Bonus points:

- Interesting, varied natural environments.

They are indeed thinking about this stuff. It’s why so many are buying New Zealand citizenship and buying land there (and sometimes building their survival bunkers there too). It checks every single box, and basically nowhere else does.

	▲	maxerickson 2 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		There's about 1 billion people in North and South America. If there's some sort of catastrophic collapse, there's not going to be overpopulation or problematic waves of migration anywhere on those continents.
	▲	xienze 4 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> Stable liberal democracy Isn’t it precisely these stable liberal democracies where we have the most “the rich aren’t paying their fair share” rhetoric?

▲

sroussey 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Getting citizenship requires planning.

▲

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS an hour ago | parent [-]

Only if the local government is still intact, which in this scenario is unlikely. At the very least they could bribe their way in.

	▲	generic92034 34 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Not even that. I doubt there are many governments that would not find ways to naturalize a billionaire, if they are willing to invest.