Pages Navigation Menu

Bugging-in vs Bugging-out

There are nearly as many opinions on bugging-in vs bugging-out as there are people…

In my opinion, bugging-out as an evasive tactic makes a lot of sense, but only as a last resort. Bugging-in will cause the least amount of stress on you and your family. The reality is that with any large-scale collapse, a large percentage of people would all have the same inclination to “go to the forest” to survive. But that is simply not a practical solution long-term. I think most people would have a very difficult time adjusting to a vagabond lifestyle. Especially, without community support.

If only 10% of the US population bugged out, that would mean that 32 million more people are wandering the countryside competing for the same resources as before. Just like during the Great Depression, all of the fish and game populations would be decimated within a few short weeks and would remain so for decades.

Those with experience at maintaining livestock and growing their own food have a significant advantage at surviving most of the likely collapse scenarios. Rural homesteaders who planned to bug-in and extensively prepared certainly have the best chance at overcoming whatever comes their way.

I’d love to know what you think…

Follow us on Minds, Steem, Facebook and Twitter for more discussions related to emergency preparedness, self-reliance, and urban and outdoor survival skills…



Supported By:

Pin It on Pinterest