[Marcella]

The guy says one must have other people, then spends the rest of the article warning against trusting people.

Everyone’s situation is different. Some will have people they can trust, some won't. My public profile is so low, I'm almost nonexistent here.

In a huge meltdown, I might have three family members here and that's it. None of them have anything stored to donate to the “cause”, but I knew that and have enough provisions for them. That would give me two males and one woman here besides myself. One of those males is my son who is six feet of strength and can handle a weapon. The other male is a liberal who carries a weapon and right now wouldn't shoot anyone for any reason. Carrying a weapon is a macho ego thing only. He might change under duress since my son would be an example.

Everyone has to determine their own plan they think will work to provide for and secure their own future.

[yorkiemom]

The guy says one must have other people, then spends the rest of the article warning against trusting people.

Everyone’s situation is different. Some will have people they can trust, some won't. My public profile is so low, I'm almost nonexistent here.

There's lots of conflicting advice out there. For myself, I've decided to err on the side of caution. Very few know of my preps and plans. I have many in mind to check out when the time comes, however. But since I don't know them or their character well enough yet to discern how they will react during economic or societal collapse, they are just on the back burner for now. If I created a group too hastily, some of the members could end up being enemies because of circumstances. Like being hungry. So I take articles and posters telling me I need a large group with a grain of salt. The group can also be acquired later after seeing who passes the first round of tests.