Let's assume that their will be a massive breakdown in the economy and that there is trouble in the cities and breakdowns in electricity, water even in one out five towns. It lasts long enough so that enough of General Motors suppliers fail to topple General Motors and many otherlarge firms. Lets say, at least 40% unemployment. Govt is struggling and not much help. The railroads and food chain ar severly hampered but hobbling along.

The question becomes: what kind of rural community would be best? Clearly you would want it to be able to have food, water, and a micro-economy.

I have spoken to quite a few y2k savy people who are preparing in cold winter climates and who are within an hour of cities with over a 500K population. They don't strike me as "Prepare Savy".

As Cannus Maximus has reminded us, we have one hell of a think tank here. So, perhaps we can have as relocation review of basics from out y2k elders. There are things our greybeards know now about relocating that they didn't know way back in their y2k youth.

What say you old chaps? Where would you relocate if you had a chance to do so again? What kind of self sustaining local economy would you strive for? Would you go West and to the colder climates where your neighbors are going to be cold and hurting for food and perhaps water? Would go south and face more people but have better crop yeild and water?

-- Tomcat (tomcat@tampabay.rr.com), January 21, 1999

Answers

Seems Joel Skousen has covered every possible consideration in his magnum opus Strategic Relocation . But once you intersect every requirement, from water to growing season, population, climate, distance from highways, military bases, local economy, political leanings of local govt, etc. I think the Red Mars is the only answer...

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), January 21, 1999.

Blue, you're right! Can I get a ticket from you?

I feel reasonably comfortable with our rural NY location, but hard to know how much that derives from deep familiarity with the terrain and the people. 'Course, that is a VITALLY important criterion for safety anywhere. I would like to be even further from NYC (how about 10K miles?) but the home boys will be scared to death of our farmers if they make it this far ... and they'll be heading south, I reckon.

Still, to answer your question in a way that might strike some as schizophrenically odd:

.... Rural VA-NC-SC. Good weather. Reasonable access to water. Fine growing season. Confederate history (if you need to ask why this helps, I can't help YOU). We have lots of friends there.

.... The north woods (Wisconsin, Minnesota and equivalent parts of Canada). The cold is a friend: outsiders won't want to go there and they won't survive if they arrive. Lots of water. Long history of helping one another and low history of violence.

One common thread here is WATER. I think North is right that access to potable water is the supremely denied fact, even now, with Y2K remediation. You can fast but you gotta drink. Helps for growing things too. Except for this, I would have chosen a whole range of deep-southern and south-western climes. Oh, I can feel the flaming heat of the Florida boys already (hey, uncle, be nice, I'll be down your way to play a little golf in two weeks, life still goes on pre Y2K, ya know).

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), January 21, 1999.

You one smart cookie!

Stay the heck away from Florida, bad tasting brackish water, nobody knows their neighbors cause were all from somewhere else, lots of extremely violent crime, sunstroke, mosquitoes, gators, poisonous snakes, cockroaches, termites, hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, rampaging Indians, Spanish conquistadors looking for a fight, moochers, felons, carjackers, drug wars, gangs, etc. etc. etc

Good golfing though.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), January 21, 1999.

Gee, you sold me on the golfing, though. That should be fun, post Y2K. Okay, Uncle, we're moving to Florida pronto. Hey, everyone on the NG, come on down!

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), January 22, 1999.

Look for a community large enough to support a 100 bed hospital, with farming going on around it, preferrably with a LOT of flowing water through it. There ought to be at least one or two small industries in town or near town (something to export). In the best of all possible Y2K worlds, the town would also sport a College or two. (Arewyn, if this looks familiar, it ought to, you live VERY near the prorotype) It would also help if the local power were hydro.

CR

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), January 22, 1999.

It might help to live near a highly navigated river, such as the Mississippi or the Ohio River.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), January 22, 1999.

I don't qualify as a Y2K greybeard, but here is my two cents. My relocation destination ( no it's not a rap), is a nearby rural county.I have a few acres, but it is an hour away from a city of 300,000 and pretty remote. Much agriculture, southeastern state, "good old boys", ( have a few inroads with these guys ) spring fed creek, little law enforcement, little government. It's the best I can do for my family. Good luck !

-- reed moore (reed_moore@postmaster.co.uk), January 22, 1999.

I made my move about 5 years ago. I chose northern Arkansas mostly because of the long growing season, the low population, and the price of land, although other areas might have been ok too. I'd been thinking about it and looking at areas since about 1975, when I read Mel Tappan's book Survival Guns.

-- Noah Simoneaux (noaj@yournet.com), January 22, 1999.

I have lived in CA, MT, ID, CO, ND, MN, FL and TX. It is true that the cold keeps out alot of varmints and roaches(apply your own definition to varmints and roaches), but if you are thinking of MN, realize it is fairly well populated comparatively, and Minneapolis has its share of low-lifes. Minnesota has always been a rather liberal state. A classic example..., Fargo, ND and Moorhead, MN are separated by the Red River as their dividing border...just watch the people who want welfare flock to the MN side to live. ND has the cold without the abundant trees and water that MN offers, but the people are more conservative and stoic. Remember the Grand Forks flood? Next to no looting (compare to Hurricane Andrew), neighbors not only helped neighbors but just people in general, and people had a great attitude overall. Colorado is pretty good if you get well away from Denver and the popular ski resort areas, and avoid east of Denver. Montana is even better. You will find independent and self- resourceful people there. Idaho is also beautiful, and the people are not only fairly self-sufficient but also friendly. Texas left no wonderful impression, so I must have missed the good spots. Florida was a nice place to vacation, but I wouldn't want to live there again. CA is a mixed bag, lots of people have relocated to northern CA, but personally feel the coastal areas are vulnerable in more ways than one. In conclusion, I say look for agricultural areas with some ranching, a small college and decent hospital nearby, and pray for decent neighbors.

-- Mumsie (Lotsakids@home.com), April 14, 1999.

The final deciding point for me about 9 years ago was not any of the factors mentioned above. The main factor for me was the culture.

I returned to the land of my birth and youth, Texas, in anticipation of severe problems in the world. It is my opinion that the single most important factor in troubled times is my understanding of the people around me.

Not that anyone really ever understands anyone else (in a philosophical sense), but I have a better chance to NOT misunderstand those around me when I'm in the culture that was responsible for early years. In this culture I can depend, to a large degree, on my instincts when dealing with others.

--Greybear, who went back to where they don't all talk funny

- Got Roots?

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), April 14, 1999.

Good points,

However, no one is safe from terrorist attack.

-- Moore Dinty moore (not@thistime.com), April 14, 1999.