What to do when hurt and muscle is main form of transport?

[TopHatFox]

Since ERE people tend to use muscle over motor for just about everything (gardening, transport, recreation, etc.), what happens if one of us gets hurt for a time. For instance, if a bicycle accident occurs, and my ankle gets hurt/swollen, I'll be unlikely to be able to garden, get places very well, or hike a mountain.

This would be troublesome with a job that needs getting to I imagine, and would likely come as a opportunity cost of recovery > $. Alternatively the people with cars could likely drive with their other foot. Maybe asking others for help would work, or taking the bus, and focusing on activities that don't require the body to function (like movies and soup ).

I'm curious what some plan B, C's, D's, etc. for getting hurt and having muscle as a main form of living. (The first step is to avoid being hurt in the first place of course, via proper precaution, planning, etc.)

[JL13]

I used to wonder about this - if I broke my leg if I could still drive my car (it's a manual transmission) or if I'd have to rent an automatic car.

But now I can get to places via bike, running, bus, friends, uber etc. It's probably not a good idea to put yourself into a situation where 1.) not being able to get to places now/cheaply would create cascading problems and 2.) there are no alternatives.

It may be more expensive or less convenient, but it's temporary, so it's not issue.

[sky]

There are many injuries where you would need help from someone for a period of time. Even if you had a luxury car, with a broken leg it will be several weeks before you could drive.

[Jean]

This is usually taken care off with capital (enough wood and food so that you may do nothing for a few month, and good enough friends so they visit you if you can't move)

[startbyserving]

In general, a disability is either something you plan for or make due if it happens. You either have the monetary buffer or you don't. If you get hurt with no money you do the best you can. Hopefully if someone hits you with their car they have enough insurance to cover you - Most don't, which is why I'm hesitant to ride bikes. - I keep a large uninsured /under-insured policy on my small car.

I have Aflac short-term disability, so if I'm hurt I get a portion of my salary. (Technically an injury could keep someone from walking and biking, but not so much as to disallow working. However, because doctors tend to err on the side of caution, I would expect this to be uncommon). - I hope not to derail the topic but I'll briefly explain my reasoning.
1. Insurance is a good deal for those that use it. It is a bad deal for those that don't
2. Devil's advocate: Many Ere minded people are less likely to need insurance (i.e. Many are risk adverse). I don't do as many dangerous things as I used to.
3. However, being FI gives you more freedom to exercise your rights than someone else. If I get hurt, I have a financial buffer. I can 'afford' to stay home. How many times have you seen someone work through an injury because they needed the money? even Aflac pays something like 50-60% of the money someone would otherwise make. Many people simply cant afford to get paid to stay home. If I am hurt, I will stay home until I'm better.
It's counter-intuitive but Aflac seems like a good deal to me because "I don't need it" but I'm "more likely to use it than someone that does need it."

[Ego]

The causes of accidents can be split into three broad categories.

1) The accident happened to me as a result of external forces. Run over from behind while riding my bike.
2) The accident happened as a result of something I did or failed to do. Losing balance while riding new bike.
3) The accident was a result of a combination of 1 & 2.


By regularly engaging in moderately risky behavior we increase the frequency of exposure to risk but become more skilled at eliminating category 2 & 3 causes for each exposure. It creates a positive spiral where skills increase and marginal risk decreases.

Conversely, by failing to regularly engage in moderately risky behavior we limit the number of exposures but become more vulnerable to category 2 & 3 causes on the rare occasion when we do take the risk. Thus begins a negative spiral with skills decreasing and real risk increasing.

The latter is the approach my walking-dead tenants at Soylent Towers employed. The number of safe activities continued to shrink until walking was eliminated and all that remained was death.

[jennypenny]

Conversely, by failing to regularly engage in moderately risky behavior we limit the number of exposures but become more vulnerable to category 2 & 3 causes on the rare occasion when we do take the risk. Thus begins a negative spiral with skills decreasing and real risk increasing.

@Ego--I get what you're saying. It's just that every time you make this argument, I can't help but think that it sounds exactly like the arguments my teenage boys use on me when they are trying to get me to agree to some new shenanigans of theirs. "C'mon Ma, you should let us play frisbee on the roof because it's a good way to practice stuff like balance and agility. And the more you let us play on the roof, the better we'll get at it. If you let us go up there every day, we'll be so good we'll never fall off."

[Ego]

@jenny, I agree that this way of thinking can be taken to extremes. Can be. But in the real world we are so afraid of the bad thing that could potentially happen that we are taking fewer and fewer chances. Reminds me of the lists we post here of the things we did as kids that will get you arrested today and the posts about sheltering kids from uncomfortable ideas. Notice that we're talking about the dangers of riding a bicycle.

[BeyondtheWrap]

Well, you've probably saved a lot of money by bicycling everywhere, so in case you do get hurt at some point, I'm sure you'd have the extra money to take a cab to work for a few days.