Folks who have zero to minimal experience speaking to people in all sorts of scenarios (stressful times, pre-violence scenarios, deescalation, ultimatums, etc.) would do to polish up these skills a bit.

If your group has a police officer, prison guard, military leader, etc. they may be useful . The manner you speak to people in stressful times can be a LOT more effective when you have experience doing so.

Sometimes a bad situation just needs the right amount of verbal judo to handle.

If your normal job doesn't require much interaction with people, people who are nuts, people prone to violence, You're not gonna really appreciate what I'm saying.

This. Those thinking they'll hunt for food during extended shtf are living in dream land. Look at the actual numbers of animals out there. It's not as many as you think.


And you're going to have mounted/dismounted patrols, flying drones, et cetera during extended SHTF?!  Lol ok. When are you going to have the time or man power to do that?  You realize taking care of the homestead is a full time job. You'd have little time left over for security. You'd have to grow food if the event was long enough and that takes time. You have to take care of your animals. That takes time.

You sound like you're the one living in a fantasy. You might be able to secure some of your property but not a lot if it. Not hundreds of acres. Not 100% of the time.

Yeah, I was just brain-storming.  There will be a certain percentage that will actually evacuate a good distance (look at the Syrian refugees).  I just know how many calories I burn hiking 12-15 miles a day with a pack...that's not something I could sustain for more than a few days without calorie (especially water) replacement.  Very few urbanites have a stash of light, freeze-dried meals, so even if they put their canned goods in their packs, weighing well over 50 pounds, they would be moving much slower than 10 miles a day; and that is giving a conservative estimate of being in shape; if their pack is lighter, it's most likely because they have little to no food.

Part of my assumption is based on the "wait for assistance" crowd.  Most people would squat in place for up to a week and if .gov wasn't handing out cheese and water, what condition would most people be in even if they had 72 hours worth of food on hand?  Naked and Afraid may have a dumb premise with being naked, but look at lethargic and apathetic most of these people are after just a few days with no food...and most are starting out in pretty good shape.  

I would counter that most homeless bums are most likely more "road-savvy" and would actually fair better traveling the road than 90% of the couch-potato crowd.  

You're point is valid, but I was just trying to make some assumptions on the majority of people that wait too long, are not in the best of shape to deal with any sort of prolonged adversity and a high probability they have less than a few days of food on hand let along the proper attire and footwear to walk further than to their car.  

I do think a small percentage would actually make it out of the urban areas, but I suspect they will resupply (violently) along the way from suburban areas...that would extend their distance, but I just don't foresee a mass exodus from city centers.  The only reason the Syrian population did a mass exodus is because they were getting shelled and shot at.  Our city populations are by and large lazy with a demented sense of entitlement...I suspect a good number will die in place due to starvation or dehydration waiting on someone to drop off food and water.

This does make you think though...

ROCK6

Yeah, and some people still know how...yet this is a lost art to about 99% of our population.  Hell, most probably don't even know how to skin and process game...my fear is a few morons with guns could wipe out a heard of cattle and only feed themselves with fresh steaks for a few weeks with tons of meat spoiling and wasted.

ROCK6

Good thread.  Lots of food for thought.  I don't know if there are any right or wrong answers until an actual scenario occurs.  Too many variables..

Many of you have probably read the article below written by Old Bear many years ago.  It is a simple short story called "Birth of a Raider".  The story has always stuck with me. as it sets out a good example of how desperate things will get -- and quickly.

I used to a member at frugal way back when before it got weird.  Anyway, enjoy.

http://www.frugalsquirrels.com/fiction/windsofchange-aftery2k.pdf

Interesting thread with some good opinions, I didn't read all the reply's yet but wanted to toss some random population numbers out...  Just food for though, (no pun intended )

Obviously take these numbers with a grain of salt but still, the ratios don't look good.  I am just using deer as an example as it is most likely the most abundant large game available to us.  Obviously there is small game in greater numbers but what a small animal will provide a couple meals?



http://www.deerfriendly.com/



http://www.census.gov/

No need to do the math with those numbers.  

Now I am not saying I wouldn't gladly take a critter of opportunity during SHTF, or maybe set a few traps, but unless times were dire, I don't see myself actively hunting.  I know most of my neighbors and if they need to try their hand at hunting to feed their family's then I am not going to draw down on them for crossing my property.  Other situations will be dealt with as needed.  I will do my best but I doubt I could stop every person wishing to cross over my 50 acres.  I can't do it in good times I would be a fool to think I could do it during a disaster or SHTF situation.  Doesn't mean I wouldn't try.

Agreed.  The other thing to consider is how difficult it would be to shoot these critters in this situation.  At least here in the midwest, the vast majority of hunters are unsuccessful in good times.  In a SHTF event the deer will be extremely difficult to harvest without a significant amount of time and energy to hunt them.  Also they will be almost 100% nocturnal.  

Joe 6 pack with an AR15 coming out of the city will have no clue how to hunt deer in this scenario.  The locals will have a better chance -- but as you said -- are you going to shoot your neighbors?

I won't be actively hunting for at least a year maybe more as guard duty will be job one and only after everything calms down will I allowing distractions.
That said theres not much difference in guard duty and hunting.
I am actively driving deer and elk out of the garden now and expect a lot  harvesting to protect the garden.
I hope I'm not alone and someone else is around to dress out and dry meat or it could get stressful.

Like topping up before a crisis (shopping), I'd harvest game before dipping heavily into provisions.
Hunt while safe and top off stores...can it, jerky, etc.

How are you at deterring coordinated sniper assaults?

Sorry I'm just now answering I was attending a class at CSAT late last week. You deter people from infiltrating the same way any military organization does- patrolling and intelligence gathering along with effective counter fire among other things. You push the perimeter of what is most important to you out as far as you can. When patrolling you gather information and overwatch any dead ground that might provide a staging area for attacks. You coordinate with neighbors- who also should be patrolling in terms of what they are seeing and hearing. You establish LP/OPs and man them. You create standoff distance and barriers to ingress/egress and view- You make use of a "sniper screen" in terms of how you set up your homestead property.

The whole "snipers gonna kill everyone" is defeatist bullshit. It's a cop out for people too fucking lazy to plan to survive long term. First of all, I've been the President of a local shooting range for nearly two decades with over 400 members with a fairly rigorous membership application process-not easy to be a member and so most of our members are more serious shooters. Judging by the number of shot to shit target frames we have every month I have a rather jaded opinion of the ability of the average shooter. Yes, there are many who are very good and there are some that are phenomenal shooters but most people can't shoot worth a shit quite honestly. Further,  I have yet to have anyone in this thread explain the whole-- "We can't survive with a back pack wandering in the woods" and "We can't hold land either" paradox ---and I've asked repeatedly...... The only plan they have apparently is to criticize anyone with a plan and to shoot themselves in the head at SHTF onset...... Is it a threat? Absolutely. Can it be mitigated? I believe Yes, with appropriate planning, training, and work. Is it a 100% guarantee? Hell no, and NOTHING IS, so get over it already. One of our retreat members owns a construction company that does highway construction projects. In only a few days he can do one hell of a lot of "mitigation work" in terms of defensive positions and securing our perimeter etc....with a dozer, track hoe and Jersey Barriers. We've already done quite a bit of road building, fire breaks, fence line clearing (shooting lanes/track traps) and have some screening and defensive positions in place at our dwelling site....

This takes manpower of course, which, we have. Someone was prattling on about "It takes manpower to run a homestead you won't have time"....Yes, it does take manpower to run a homestead. Most of it will be mechanical. We can grow enough food with a full day of running the tractors in planting and another day of harvesting (with TEN YEARS OF DIESEL STORED) to feed everyone on the place---Two Hundred bushels of wheat- 8-10 acres worth, will suffice. (Please check my math--- 40 people x 300 LBS Wheat per person / 25 Bushels Yield per acre (Texas Dry Land yield average)(60 Lbs per bushel).... TWO FULL DAYS of planting and harvesting. There are currently 200 acres in active wheat cultivation with the harvest stored on site until sale....Hell, if we were lucky enough for SHTF to hit when the bins were full....we'd have over TWENTY YEARS of grain onsite TO START WITH.....There are also plenty of grass fed goats and beef which aside from vaccinations/vet work, water checks and pasture changes pretty much tend themselves.....We will be busy, but many hands makes for light work...

I agree the "sniper" threat is overblown.
I have come to the conclusion that if seal team six wants my shit they are going take it.
Yes an excellent shot that is determined to kill me we will likely succeed..... Maybe...
But few know I'm here those that do would be welcome and and 3 good shots with some training can hold my place against most.
I also have the advantage of not being easily accessible buy vehicle so how many serious guy are out there that will be hiking a long distance in rough terrain without water to engage us. There are much easier targets in the other direction.

Will's situation is close to ideal and they will do fine unless gov decided to take all there stuff to redistribute to the fsa in which case they would go from thrive to survive overnight and still be better off than most.

You keep asking for a solution to the paradox, THERE ISN'T ONE. At least not one where you can "win" and feel good about it while playing by your rules.

There is no one-size-fits-all blanket policy to any of this isolationism. There just isn't.


You honestly think 40 guys can run 100% secure 24/7 security on 20xxx acres? Your out of your mind. Of course, you could do it if you start to build up your own military and shoot everybody on sight (at maximum range as well to minimize casualties on your side, consider artillery).


If nothing, think of the resources to keep all that security up. Its staggering. Also, exactly what are you planning on doing with 20,000+ acres post TEOTWAWKI? Farm it like they farmed in the 1800's? And you have a workforce of thousands? With hundreds in supporting roles for those thousands of ag workers? You want to know what REALITY is for that many acres? You rent it out to some tenants. They may section it out to rent it to other tenants. (Gee, where have we seen that system before???) Its not feasible to manage all that land yourself. Maybe your tenants provide you with food and labor, and you provide "security".



But, I'm all ears (and eyes) to see EXACTLY what your plan is to pull it off, down to fuel usage and supporting tradesman skills (and where those supplies come from). You going to go all horses? Great, where do horse meds come from? Farrier supplies? Leather for tack? Please break out the spreadsheets and graphs. Show me how you think its possible.



You seem to keep looking for this ideal, perfect, guaranteed strategy to have for this fantasy SHTF scenario. You are frustrated because while most of us call you nuts, you keep asking for the solution, to which you are never satisfied with the answer. THERE IS NO ANSWER, that is the answer!! This is a loose-loose scenario.


With that much land, the BEST possible outcome is to strengthen your area and setup a tenant farmer solution. Welcome them in with 20 acres and an agreement. They will play ball because if they had nothing coming in, they will have EVERYTHING in that kind of deal. But, you are not a warlord, and not judge/jury/executioner. Folks tend to not like that. Have setup a Constitution that applies to EVERYBODY. You have to make them almost dependent on you, because in all honesty YOU are dependent on THEM.

I assume Will is on a west Texas cattle ranch/farm and not a farm/estate back east the rules are completely different.
These places where self sufficient with roving bands of indians trying to steal from them and kill them 100-200 years ago and would be again very quickly.

titels wrong the word you want is poachers and in SHTF they will shoot land owners too. see Africa for evidence

The ranch next door is about 24,000 acres. They do not "farm" at all, they do rotational pasture grazing on short grass prairie- as the Buffalo did in this country for tens of thousands of years....without medicines or much at all in the way of "care" other than a regular burn from lightning strikes to revitalize the grass and annual branding, castrating, polling etc....Put it this way, several years ago, the 6666 Dixon Creek ranch to the north of us decided to cull the "range bulls" off their place- these bulls have lived WILD their entire lives...over a month long roundup they lost about a dozen horses to bulls and put several cowboys in the hospital (Why they didn't just shoot them, I dunno, Cowboys are funny that way...)...these animals don't exactly require or get a lot of care, they are pretty much self sustaining...... There is a rather large and profitable market these days for grass fed, minimal chemical treated beef and our neighbors do pretty well.... They run the place just like it was done nearly 150 years ago pretty much although they do use pickups and 4 Wheelers in addition to horses. It is run with a rather small number of day to day employees and family members quite honestly, not requiring huge labor inputs every day.......Our 1,800 acres has crop ground. We will be able to farm what we need to for nearly 10 years post SHTF using the tractors and fuel/chemicals/seed we have stored---to cultivate 25-30 acres- the inputs just aren't that huge.... and the acreage required is MINIMAL for self sufficiency farming. We will have about 90 people in total between the neighbors 50 and our 40 which is quite a few bodies.......

Is this a "permanent", "We're an Island" solution? No, not hardly. But it gets us EASILY 5-10 YEARS down the road in most any collapse. I'm betting that's a better plan than most people who have done any planning at all much less those who are clueless, have.....

On a daily basis, complete security of the whole place is obviously not 100%. The living areas? We can ABSOLUTELY lock them down every day no problem. Then it becomes a matter of dealing with the perimeter intrusions. First, we absolutely CAN prevent anyone from squatting for more than a few days at most. Period. We aren't going to allow a damn Hooverville to spring up on our property, no way, no how. Can we exclude every person that puts one foot on the property? Absolutely not and that would be a waste of time and energy to try. Can we generally disrupt scouting operations etc....Probably- at least to the extent that IF they are able to scout at all- What they are going to see is a tough nut to crack and not someone who thinks that they can somehow just hide in a Hobbit Hole and the world is going to pass them by.....They better bring a big crew with some serious trigger pullers- a half assed army of half starved Fudds isn't going to fare that well--- That's not so easy to hide or to keep operational post SHTF solely on "raiding".....especially with a neighborhood watch system. Very quickly I think the whole area will be set up similar to the Rhodesian Farm Alerts etc.....that's the plan anyway...

But to get back to the original premise of the post? You better be willing and able- have a plan, to exclude most people from your premises because there is no difference between a Refugee and a Raider in practical terms when it comes purely to security considerations. If ONE can  camp out on your place without you knowing, so can the other.....If you CHOOSE to let them stay, that's your business, but you damn well better know who they are and that they are there in the first place.

Hey. Rock. I got ya man. Was just using your words to drive a point. Nothing more .


Will. Your spot on refugee vs raider.

Problem is this.

Very few have land as big as you. Hell most are I'd wager sub 10 acres.

Then you add in mindset.

The training involved to secure your land holdings isn't very popular.

Preppers...you know...Lots of rotating can shelving ..military gear makes you a target. ..types are the majority of people out there.

Yeah.

I'm being a Dick about it.

But most it's nothing but an hobby or insurance policy.

Load up your pack..put your fighting gear on and wander your fences for 24 hours..

Ewww icky survivalist gross..  prolly a militia guy...my passport and glock is all I need.  Mindset.


If it wasnt..we'd have more threads about property security..patrolling. small team tactics..use of cover and terrain when moving...blah blah blah.

Hell how many actively hunt fish now ? Vs I did it when I was 12.

Do we. Nope.


Each thier own. But even my small place I plan to try as actively as I can to keep refugees or the chicken /garden thief at bay.

Be it the golden hordes or those fucking tree rats dropping hickory nuts on my roof all day..or the stray cats or coons from the chickens. .


I know a lot of those posting in this thread are not the types I'm typing about.


But be thankful you have the advantage of land as a buffer ..and the man power to be proactive in its security.....

I am just back from Urban Defense with Paul Howe. Spent 3 days learning about how "security" works in REAL WORLD GRID DOWN SITUATIONS. Paul KNOWS because he lived it for decades all over the globe. If you've ever seen the Movie Blackhawk Down, Paul was one of the Delta Operators who garotted a Somali off of a recoilless rifle and then blew the shit out of a technical with it.....He was in Panama, Liberia, Somalia and many other shitholes during his career....

We spent 3 days absorbing his lessons and applying them with live action role players in some cases. I'm sore today. All over. It was an expensive trip in terms of actual dollars spent and in foregone income and opportunities- look, nobody has unlimited time or money...... Worth every damn dime and I feel I have a good handle on what I can and can't do and how best to do it.

Several of these snappily dressed gentlemen are friends of mine, in theory, I could BE one of them......

Max Velocity

Yea, it's a habit of mine.......

 
I know who he is and max.
Saw that video when it came out.

His classes Intrest me as I have friends that attend them and have spoke highly of them,

The seriousness of the scenario and timing will determine response.  If it happens when it's below zero for instance....

In a total SHTF situation, IMO, most will die within the first 30 to 90 days if the gov't or some group/entity is not providing food, water, shelter.
Many will die from lack of medications; illnesses, lack of clean water, lack of sufficient food to sustain oneself or family, and due to civil unrest/injuries/murders, etc.

After that first 90 days, HOPEFULLY, the SHTF scenario will be improving.  It will be very difficult to try to fight off hundreds of fleeing city dwellers, armed, starving people who have nothing to lose and who's backgrounds could include past hunting and/or military experience, especially if you have thousands of acres to protect.  Everyone will do what they gotta do I guess.

 

When you have regular patrols, you have trails (I doubt his security task force is walking randomly through 26000 acres, they will be mounted on horse or machine and follow routes). If you have folks who want to get in, they will recognize trails and setup an ambush. No "sniper shots" from 1000 yards needed, as a few guys with any centerfire semi-auto can coordinate fire to take out the small patrol before they even know they are under attack from short range.

 

If you think you get through this mad max scenario by brute force alone without MASSIVE casualties from your delta force security team, your dreaming.


You want to show up with your assault jeep and strong-arm out a bunch of un-armed (or poorly armed) refugees, you will have great luck.


If you get up against anyone who actually wants to inhabit a piece of your territory, blood will be shed on both sides guaranteed.


I don't have a one-size-fits-all answer, but think this through.


Thank GOD that this scenario has only about a .001% chance of happening, because as I've said before: its a shit sandwich, and no good sides to take a bite out of.


I truly think that outside of the major city centers, most rural folks (and whomever can get out there that aren't roving gangs) will band together to form communities.

As a once famous warlord once said

"Just walk away......"


All hail lord humongous

The dude, OP said he had 29k acres with 40 or so able bodied persons. they will be actively land managing, farming, patrolling, hunting, and schooling children... running and maintaining electronic surveillance equipment along with all the farming and surveillance/patrolling vehicles.

Op must be rich. Op must really be liked or good at manipulating folks.

Personally, I have 1800 acres, some of that is farm land, most of it is pasture.... The ranch next door, with whom we have very good relations has about 24,000 acres- pretty much all wild country/pasture.

Between the two places we expect about 90 people in total should something bad happen. We have had quite a bit of discussion about the issue and worked together to coordinate things. I have been a survivalist since I was a little kid, grew up on a farm during the Cold War etc....As an attorney I like to think I present myself reasonably well- I have many opportunities to interact with people and I can get along with most-excepting Liberals and their ilk, given where I live, that's not much of an issue anyway.

When you start talking to people who have their own businesses etc....you would be amazed at the number that are quite aware that where we are at right now is not sustainable. Because they bright folks who understand where we are, many of them ask the next question, "What happens next?" Once they do that, they think about their families and their kids- yea, they have people they care about like anyone else.......and resources to take care of them. It's not a difficult leap for them to make.....

"Yea but if I go on patrol, someone might shoot at me, and then who would take care of the little missus and the chilluns?"

Gee, maybe if the bad people roll right up to your friggen door because you didn't have a damn clue they were around they'll shoot you then too? Nah....You can just give them a jug of water and a can of beans and I'm sure they'll keep going......

 
It's like the question "how do you  eat an elephant " is over looked by many.

Do you want to patrol 30k acres if you own it. Yes.

Do you do all 30k at once..nope.


Your point to of shrinking it in. Is a good basic means to control your immediate area.


I'd rather have my 10 acres locked down tight around my retreat first before worrying about the other 20k...



What's the quote in platoon about the positions being to spread out........

I'm not sure if patrolling is better. I like the idea of hidden positions that can watch all approaches with communications back to the base.
I hope and pray I have enough people that can shoot watching my back as I go to "visit" with "refugees" at the gate.
One person can observe all obvious approaches to the house and three can cover all approaches.
I dont have enough NV rigs yet and making those positions 4 season comfortable are still on the to do list.

Do you think you can control not only the area you are actively using, but the 26000 acres of pasture, AND know who is doing what and coming from where AT ALL TIMES from everywhere AROUND that 26000 acres? The US GOV'T has a hard time pulling that kind of intelligence off. Unless you are running military grade surveillance planes, you don't know shit about what is going on inside, much less OUTSIDE 26000 acres, not with a mere 30-40 people patrolling

 

You running APCs with all the latest tech goodies? Willing to bet the "patrol" is either "planned" as being horse-back or pickup truck. Either way, 2-5 guys with ARs or AKs will make short work in am ambush.


Does that mean you should not defend your land? No, absolutely not! All I'm saying is that if you think you come out without significant personnel loss, your dreaming.


Point I am making is how many delta force ninjas are you willing to loose to active patrolling?

I've already laid out what I consider to be a reasonable plan. We can lock down our dwelling areas pretty hard preventing most effective attacks from snipers and surprise mass attacks at close range. We can then send out patrols and use other means to make sure that nobody "takes root" anywhere on the property, and to help detect incursions that could lead to follow on attacks. Forewarned is forearmed.

That is great until you start talking patrols. What is your acceptable casualty rate?

 

As long as it's less or equal to having the whole thing wiped out because we just stuck our heads up our asses and let someone drive right up to the front gate, it's all good. Seriously.

Like I said earlier, your risk is NO LESS just because you Hobbit Hole. In fact, I would argue that it is considerably more. The reality is that you very well will lose people patrolling, but that risk is offset by doing essentially nothing and letting people roll right up on you thereby reducing your reaction time and options- very likely wiping out EVERYONE at once.

Losing one person would suck. That's a fact, but I believe the risk reward chart favors pro active measures in this case.

So what do people do who don't have access to thousands acres?

That's a good question. If you don't mind, share a little of what your situation is and I'm sure there are plenty of folks here that would help war game it out. What can that hurt? First question is, can you produce enough food and have easy access to water ---making it even worthwhile to stay where you are? If not, then you better store as much as you possibly can to buy yourself time. If you have someplace else to go, that might be a better option......


It's a question worth talking about.

NETWORK and be proactive.

 

Honestly it's all those in that boat got.


I don't have over X acres. But you know what...I'm planning ahead..looking at Sat images...talking to neighbors on walks..

I'd rather fight the hordes..zombies etc few Miles up the road vs at my gate.

Ymmv.

Make friends with those that do.

There will be no crops, or what there is will be small and guarded closely.  It won't support the current deer population.

People will be hunting them year round, 24/7, without regard for sex, age or other disposition of the animal.

Even a small amount of land is hard to keep people off of now.

Small game, there will likely be more of in less populated areas.

People get hungry, they won't give a shit about you or your guns.  They'll lie for you, sucker you in and stab you, shoot you, set your house on fire with you in it, run you down, and try to take what they want.  If the first one doesn't get you the 7th one might.

Then you have to dress out Bubba and get him ready for the food stores. Waste not, want not

That's not kosher

Any one of the tier 1 commandos sitting on a zillion acres here ever think that if everybody started shooting on sight everybody that strayed on their land may be PERPETUATING the very scenario they are trying to deal with?

A family cannot manage more than a few acres. You talking 50 able bodied people? Great, you can manage about 40 (You won't be driving modern ag equipment after a SHTF), and you don't really need much more than that anyway. You won't be selling crops (you are shooting people who dare enter your domain, remember?), you won't be selling beef. The idea of managing a "game" population over thousands of acres isn't feasible.


You also won't be trading for anything either (chasing everybody off w/o question after all). Hope you have everything you could possibly need for ever...


Perhaps, just perhaps, you should *selectively* bring in people who are willing to work, willing to stay, willing to contribute. You know that weird looking idiot and his idiot wife/kids that were caught on your land trying to catch some fish at the pond? Oh, he was a well respected general surgeon. Gee, that would have been handy to have around. His wife was an OB/GYN, son was home from college on break from getting his masters in electrical engineering. His daughter just graduated from hippy school, becoming an herbalist. But screw 'em, right?


You know, helping bring stabilization to the area, it sort of helps everybody. Unless you are PLANNING on this mad max scenario to last in perpetuity, EVERYBODY has to calm down and think about forming community and getting us back to a great republic. If everybody held the same attitude that we should all shoot FELLOW AMERICANS on sight for merely trying to survive on a wide open seemingly abandoned area, what is the point? What are we trying to survive to get to?

I thought OP was talking about uninvited guests coming after your food supply not weather you would work with the community.
And unless these large established ranches start warring with each other they will be fine as history has proven.

I imagine that the trek from from the city will cull out the most useless and will make the decision easier.
I hope to have room available in outbuildings for the keepers. I hope a masseuse shows up as there on my list of acceptable for entrance.

Well, best of luck to you.

Just try to remember to not loose your humanity, lest we forget what we are surviving for

I think you should get out more and meet some of the people that will becoming for help and decide which ones are more important than your own family. and read the posts above with a less critical eye as I haven't noticed any posts talking about becoming sociopathic warlords.

Well, I've met plenty of the shoot on sight folks, or when pressed that is the ultimate plan.

Good to know.
You should visit the west sometime as it is a different world than what you're used too.