All interesting.

Perhaps another angle: In the "fog" of uncertainty about a looming disaster which is more likely an unsurvivable error, bugging in or bugging out?

If your bugout location is well-selected and clear of the disaster area, and if you leave early enough, I'd think that in general mistakenly bugging in would be more likely to result in avoidable death.

If you leave early enough and get clear of the disaster area, the worst you have is an unplanned vacation.

If you don't leave early enough and get stuck in traffic on the road, you might not get clear of the disaster area. Then the question becomes would you have been better off at home or in a car, out of gas 50 miles up the highway.

I think I'd agree with that. Just look at how many millions have evacuated for hurricanes. How many have died evacuating from a hurricane versus those who stayed behind? However, these evacuations come at great cost, too.

Actually, if we use the logic of avoiding deaths, we should mass evacuate people for heat waves when they pop up in unexpected areas (e.g. Chicago) or are extreme. Over the years, heat is the number one killer of people, not hurricanes.

Right you are: http://io9.com/5803268/chart-reveals-what-natural-disaster-is-most-likely-to-kill-you-in-america . The most surprising thing I learned is that California is safer than the Midwest in terms of death from natural disasters.

Heat death is easily avoidable -- if you can afford air conditioning and you don't have to work outside. Evacuations for heat emergencies are (at least, in some areas) replaced with warnings and opening cooling centers.

What a great reference! The attached article is well worth reading as well. It is interesting to note that most of the hazard types are weather related and are generally forecast well ahead of time, allowing one the opportunity to carry out whatever strategy would best serve them. As many have observed here, the better course of action depends upon many situational and unique variables.

The chart reinforces my decision to forsake the Midwest and go west many years ago.

Note what a minor role earthquakes play in generating mortalities. That is about the only natural hazard that is not specifically predictable.

If there is a true SHTF type disaster, distance is indeed your best bet if you can manage it safely.

The problem is that it is difficult to know whether to go or not because there is just no way to know whether whatever warnings are being given by the authorities are meaningful.

At some point getting the heck out becomes dangerous in itself and it might be best to just hunker down.

I know that is not really an answer, but most of these kind of hypothetical questions don't have a real answer because the answer is highly dependent on circumstances that are unknown, and are often unknown when the decision to leave or stay has to be made.