Why do you say that?
1. A .22LR pistol will prove more useful than a .22LR rifle in an apocalyptic scenario.
2. I'm weary of the AK being presented as the most reliable long arm ever devised. It's hardly the case, though some can indeed be very reliable. Many of the post-ban/no-ban AKs in modern times can't hold a candle to the old pre-ban imports in fit, finish, reliability, or accuracy -- even many of the recent builds made using domestic US receivers and small parts. I have seen many AKs that have cycling problems and also have seen those that have been shown to break small parts.
3. I disagree with the author's choice of automatics over revolvers for his reasoning stated. Of course, I don't really know how he's imagining this SHTF world he starts his article by premise where he thinks he needs to shoot and miss and reload faster with a 9mm bullet than to hit convincingly the first time at longer range with a 310gr .44 Magnum.
4. For 'high-powered rifle', he chose one that is 'moderately high-powered' with generally unreloadable ammunition. Personally, at the price that a lot of ARs and AKs are at this time (though I realize that he wrote this article very shortly before the Obama firearms market panic when prices were much lower), he might have looked at an accurized bolt-action with quality optics that would serve a fellow lots better in this 'Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome' scenario that he's got bouncing around inside his head. I think that if I could have one high-powered rifle, it would be a Sako TRG-42 in .300 WinMag with a NightForce scope. Why choose an AK that splatters bullets on an area the size of a 50 gallon drum at 300 yards when you could have a rifle that would shoot the top hat off Abraham Lincoln at 1000 yards? In a truly SHTF world, you want to be a rifleman.
5. Finally, wiser and more notable men than this fellow have made more useful lists along the same lines.