When is 'gloomy' not 'doomy'?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

On December 16, 1998, Victor Porlier indicated his conclusions about the y2k problem in an article posted on the Westergaard site at http://y2ktimebomb.com/DSA/VP/vp9850.htm. I haven't seen it discussed though admittedly I don't see everything that shows up on the variety of boards available, including this one.

In short, his worst-case scenario is a depression rivaling that of 1929-1937. He calls that "gloom." Now, from a strict DJIA (Dow Jones Industrial Average) or stock market perspective, there was a fall from a high of nearly 400 on the Dow in October of 1929 to a low of about 40 in mid- 1932. Does anyone here think that if history repeats, a near-term Dow decline from 9300 to 930 (along with the attendant dislocations and disruptions) would be anything other than an unmitigated disaster? Are we as well prepared as Americans were 70 years ago to cope with these disruptions? Or do I underestimate the resilience of our society, our technology and our people?

-- nemo... (nemo@deepsix.com), December 20, 1998


The Great Depression occurred when most Americans still lived in rural areas and supplied their physical needs locally for the most part. Many, many of the products currently available in the grocery stores were not available then because of the logistical problems in getting them harvested and delivered (not to mention imported in many cases), so people generally ate what they grew or what grew in their locality, a much more self-sufficient way of life.

We now have two full generations who have lived all their lives in a high-tech society in which all they have to do to support themselves is to train themselves to do a very specific job, such as computer programming, and as long as the economy holds up and they go to work regularly and do a good job, their physical needs (food, water, shelter, etc.) will be taken care of by the money they earn. They have literally no idea how to support themselves on their own in a local economy that needs only food, water, shelter, clothing, etc.

The psychological effect of a severe y2k depression will be absolutely devastating. It will make the Great Depression seem like easy street.

-- cody varian (cody@y2ksurvive.com), December 20, 1998.

Amen cody.

RIP America.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 20, 1998.

when, but when, but when???????


Cody and INVAR - right on I'm afraid, it will not be pretty.

One of the best sites I've found is Peter Carmichael's, who has put together a bunch of essays covering the sociological and psychological aspects.

Link at


Also Alan Lewis has a bunch of diverse essays along the same lines - well worth checking out.

Link at


-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 20, 1998.

Everything moves much faster now than it did then. Even though the powers in the market are pushing their luck to the brink, they seem to still remember 1929, and will act quickly to avoid it again. Greenspan will jump in with interest rate cuts, and should be able to turn what would be a depression into only recession, although this may happen several times. These guys are addicted gamblers and they will do everything they can to keep the game going. From a macroeconomic standpoint, the United States may need to go backwards in time for a while, establishing a "buffer zone" between us and the rest of the World. That is, unless the "New World Order" starts to take control soon. It sure looks like that's what we are being led into, as we are now witnessing the death of the Grand Old Farty (uh, Party). It would probably be better to have society collapse and start over, than to sit here and take what the Global Elite have planned for us.

-- (#@*.COM), December 20, 1998.

Andy - The writer's name is Douglass Carmichael, not Peter. Agree that he has written some very thought-provoking pieces, though I do find it interesting that he has posted anything in the Recent Writings area since last July. Must be busy digging up the backyard to put in more water storage...

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.com), December 21, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ