All of which gets us into the classic battle of haves vs have-nots. I think we also end up looking at these things on a case by cases basis and situation by situation basis.

People survive with what is there in the environment around them, and we are NOT in a poor country. There is a social safety net in effect, but what I am finding in getting the retreat and enclave situation together is the worst people to deal with are those who will parasitically manipulate those around them or simply not reciprocate contributions when they have the means to do so even when that means to do so might have to involve going to sign up for the food stamps and welfare.

Any of us could be a house fire or vehicle breakdown from having little or no resources in a bad situation. Even in SHTF, sure, there is a place for charity, but lets not lose focus on what we are talking about here, which is the threat of government use of force in wealth distribution. I'll go out on a limb here and say that someone else being stubborn and unreasonable during a disaster then having the expectation of volunteer freedom fighters to just show up and defend their wealth for free has many other guesses coming.