Dear anti doomers You always come to this forum, blast the participants with degrading insults and then leave. How about helping us? We would love to hear more of your actual knowledge and experience. Speaking for myself, I am definately not a computer type nor am I stupid. I read all that I can and try to muddle through, trying to decide how to best take care of my children. I go to the GN is a big fat idiot forum too, hoping to feel relaxed about preparing, but I still don't get much actual information. Most of that is ranting and raving and downright stupid. I would love to see more actual helpful information posted here, not immature putdowns. From what I have read in this forum, it seems that most who post here are very intelligent and would love to hear some actual, real life good news by actual, real life programmers. So tell us some sucesses and details. Most of us don't want to spend all the cash for preparations but from where I sit it would be irresponsible not to.

-- a mom (help@dontgetit.com), January 31, 1999

Answers

There is not going to be any information here because there is nothing real to talk about. How do you prove or disprove speculation from paranoid schizophrenics?

Y2k is NOT going to be all that, it's just not possible to tear down a world through computers... think about it!! The embedded chip system has been widley over rated and in the coming months you'll hear less and less of these Doom and Gloomers because they will all be converted into rational, sane people.

-- (rgersg@strgstg.com), January 31, 1999.

Here's information about the compliance (or non-compliance) of Fortune 500 companies, based on the quarterly reports they are required to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission:

http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/Computech/Issues/hbela9902.htm

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), January 31, 1999.

Mom:

How can anyone really help you?

We know that huge amounts of resources are being allocated to the problem. This shows the problem itself is/was huge, and also shows that a lot is being done about it. Nobody knows where we stand.

We know that schedules are slipping. This is due mostly to the fact that the original schedules were politically mandated, without regard for the size of the effort. It's partly due to the fact that the scope of the effort was underestimated.

The status of remediation clearly varies widely from one shop to another. Some are nearly finished, and doing time-machine testing of ALL systems. Others (especially in the public sector) are in awful shape even of critical systems. Programmers tend to project the status of their shop onto the global status.

There is overwhelming evidence that critical testing is being shortchanged. There's lots of evidence that those upgrading to (hopefully) compliant systems are having the same problems we *always* have with major upgrades.

There is good evidence that embedded systems don't represent as comprehensive a threat as we first feared, and also good evidence that a few critical embedded failures can halt key processes, perhaps for a long time (6 months to a year, maybe).

Much of the remediation in most shops consists of waiting for compliant versions from the vendors of both software and hardware. Like everyone else, these vendors are largely missing their announced availability dates. 'Compliant' new versions from vendors don't have a good track record when tested, either. Expect more of this.

The most honest thing anyone seems to be saying is, "We just don't know where we'll be when the time comes." We can hope for the best, but such statements are hardly cause for optimism. We're working on it. Stay tuned.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

-- Hard to imagine these D&Gs turning into rational people. Most of their responses to very good questions have been flames. However, there are some who do respond with well thought out cases. These people may change their minds in a few months. I'm waiting for 4/1/99. They say this is the next big date when things fall apart. If life goes on as usual, then we may start seeing a change in tide.

-- Interested (about@y2k.com), January 31, 1999.

Mom,

Here's a good introduction to the Y2K problem. It's a speech given by Senator Bob Bennett of Utah, carried by C-SPAN2, to the National Press Club in Washington D.C.

Bennett covers a wide range of issues, including the danger from non- compliant embedded systems:

http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/y2k/CSPAN/19980715/Bennett.ram

You need RealPlayer software, which can be downloaded at no cost, to see the video.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), January 31, 1999.

Anyone willing to bet that the majority of pollyannas are under 30? I didn't say "all," I said "majority." I hypothesize that those who can remember (or appreciate) life before Sputnik constitute the vast majority of doombrooders. Those in the middle age range will remember the energy shortages of the mid-70s and lean towards doombrooding. Doombrooders of tender age have probably experienced a devastating tornado, hurricane, flood, brushfire or earthquake. In short, adverse experience separates the pragmatists from the idealists. (We wrinklies are on intimate terms with Murphy and his associates.)

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), January 31, 1999.

Another answer to the specious flint-child:

========== Mom: How can anyone really help you?

We know that huge amounts of resources are being allocated to the problem.

('are being allocated'? irrelevant. It has not been spent. I can 'allocate ten billion dollars. If it is nort being spent, mere 'allocation' is meaningless. Just one more in a litany of things you ignore. It is a familiar pollyanna quip. They are 'allocating' money. Sorrt, it is Meaningless drivel unles the money has been spent. From the SEC filings we CLEARLY see that this is not so. And please remmebr that on TOP of that, the money is only going to a minute fraction of systems, the mission critical systems. So even then , only a tiny proportion of ALL the systems are being worked on)

This shows the problem itself is/was huge, and also shows that a lot is being done about it.

(ROTFLMAO. This is as fallacious as possible and is anothe rPollyanna mainstay. It is the clearest sign of the pollyanna intellectual bankruopcy. It confuses saying 'yer gonna' spend money with having actually DONR the job. You see if the job WAS being done they could point at a HIGH percentage having been spent. But they can not, because it HAS NOT been spent. They can only say "They're gonna spend it'. )

Nobody knows where we stand.

(Another Pollyanna hallmark. They START from the position that one CAN NOT know. Therefore NO MATTER what arises, NO MATTER what evidence surfaces, they must harmonize with that preconception. They announcement that the British Government has intentionally mislead the people of England about tha lack of remdiation means that flint 'still can not know'. The FACT that a MAJPRITY of countries in the world have not yet begun on Y2K means that flint, 'still CAN NOT know'. These FACTS come out day by day and are daily ignored by those whose predisposition it is that one 'CAN NOT' know. It is a wonder that flint knows that the floor is still there when he gets out of bed in the morning)

We know that schedules are slipping.

(Gee. You actually KNOW something.)

This is due mostly to the fact that the original schedules were politically mandated, without regard for the size of the effort. It's partly due to the fact that the scope of the effort was underestimated.

(It does not matter WHY they are slipping. Even a naive view of IT metrics makes absolutely PLAIN and CONCLUSIVE that over 85% ofall projects this size average, Average, AVERAGE 18 to 24 months LATE. The biggest cause is late satrts which were PANDEMIC in relation to Y2K. Yet you still don't KNOW if most will be late or not. And you just can not figure out what the consequences are ,eonomically for the majority of the world to be laye with the technology that they are utterly reliant upon. Nope, you just can't mak a wild guess.)

The status of remediation clearly varies widely from one shop to another.

Some are nearly finished, and doing time-machine testing of ALL systems. Others (especially in the public sector) are in awful shape even of critical systems. Programmers tend to project the status of their shop onto the global status.

( And the vast bulk will not be done on time. This is indisputable. But, you refuse to accept it. And therefore you go about blathering that you just can't figure out what will happen. As of now, overall, ther is no one of any significance in any industry that is done. There is not even a FRACTION of any industry that is done. Yet flint mollifies his anxiety by saying that 'some will get done'. But, of course that has NEVER been the issue. The issue is that NOT ENOUGH will be done. This, flint refuses to address because the facts would weigh him down like an anchor)

There is overwhelming evidence that critical testing is being shortchanged.

(Ooops! and flint still does NOT know what this means. Yet, flint claims to be a programmer. He calls the testin'critical' and can not figure out what happens when you don't do the 'CRITCAL' tasks.)

There's lots of evidence that those upgrading to (hopefully) compliant systems are having the same problems we *always* have with major upgrades.

( and now, he says they are *hopefully* upgrading, Do you see hwat I mean. he always pins it on hopefullness and NOT the facts which he sated above and yet ignores. he pins it all on hope alone. That way he can comfort himself about NOT knowing. )

There is good evidence that embedded systems don't represent as comprehensive a threat as we first feared, and also good evidence that a few critical embedded failures can halt key processes, perhaps for a long time (6 months to a year, maybe).

( This is merely patently false. The evidence is explicitly contrary. In one particulary salient area telecoms are reporting that the have incredibly long waiting times even when there IS the availability of replacement part. But, you will notice that flint gives NO evidence at all that the embedded syatems problem is abated. just the mere assertion.)

Much of the remediation in most shops consists of waiting for compliant versions from the vendors of both software and hardware.

(this is not true, agai. It is NOT **MUCH** of the remediation for **MOST** shops. But if it WERE, the case SO MUCH MORE the problem of companies having to rely on someone else to fix their systems. In many many cases it has been reported repeatedly that supposedly compliant software absolutely was NOT compliant at all.)

Like everyone else, these vendors are largely missing their announced availability dates.

(And this agin serves to exacerbate the lateness, if completion at all. But, flint still can't add 2+2.)

'Compliant' new versions from vendors don't have a good track record when tested, either. Expect more of this.

(Wel well. You *DO** recognize that. But, then conveniently lapse into the you don't know what it all means.)

The most honest thing anyone seems to be saying is, "We just don't know where we'll be when the time comes."

That is the LEAST HONEST thing that could be said. It blatantly exposes you advanced idiocy on the issue. It CLEARLY expose that your opinions are NOT based on the evidence even in pasrt. They are wholly and explicitly in EXTREME CONTRADICTION to the facts. It is out and out cognitive dissonance.)

We can hope for the best, but such statements are hardly cause for optimism.

(LOL LOO All you have is hope. Then you say they are not cause for optimism. You always say what things are NOT. How about saying what they ARE for a change. If something is NOT a cause of optimism it would be a cause for PESSIMISM. But, not in your cae. if something is not a cause of optimism, it is just thrown into the 'well, no-one knows' category.)

We're working on it. Stay tuned.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

You are a laughable troll flint. Point by point I have gone through your ridiculous blather. You do not have a leg to stand on. But, I suspect that that is something else that you 'can not know' either.

-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), January 31, 1999.

Mr. Milne, you said:

"These FACTS come out day by day and are daily ignored by those whose predisposition it is that one 'CAN NOT' know."

And so, for the thirteenth time I ask you to present any of these facts that lead to the inescapable conclusion of wide-spread disaster you insist is there. One will do for a start.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), January 31, 1999.

Old Git, you said:

"Anyone willing to bet that the majority of pollyannas are under 30? I didn't say "all," I said "majority." I hypothesize that those who can remember (or appreciate) life before Sputnik constitute the vast majority of doombrooders. Those in the middle age range will remember the energy shortages of the mid-70s and lean towards doombrooding. Doombrooders of tender age have probably experienced a devastating tornado, hurricane, flood, brushfire or earthquake. In short, adverse experience separates the pragmatists from the idealists. "

Well, I'm frequently branded a "Pollyanna" here, and I'm on the high side of 30. I remember the energy shortages of the early and mid 70-s quite well. I have experienced a devastating tornado. I am not a doom- brooder about Y2K or about much of anything, for that matter. Chalk me up as one for your minority.

When you say "In short, adverse experience separates the pragmatists from the idealists" I am forced to disagree. In my experience it is not the adversity that separates people but their reactions to it. Those who adapt and overcome the adversity do well. Those who decide to rail about their misfortune or the sorry state of affaris surrounding them do not. You often cannot control the things that events that occur in your life, but you can always control your reaction to those events. Myself, I would much rather light a candle than curse the darkness.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), January 31, 1999.

Old git,

I must be a young git, circa 1958 Taurus.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), January 31, 1999.

Old Git:

I can remember V-J day. Does that count?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

Interested,

I read a lot about Y2K, and it's been slowly dawning on me that April 1 will most likely NOT cause any disruptions that the public will notice. A non-compliant accounting system will not affect manufacturing or distribution systems.

Some state unemployment systems were going to start having failures after January 1 of this year, but a quick band-aid was put on the problem. Unemployment benefits usually last a year, meaning that someone who signed up for benefits in January 1999 would also have an ending date in these computers for jobless benefits of January 2000.

Some states temporarily solved the problem by entering benefit end dates of December 1999 into their systems.

I expect that is what New York state and Canada will do in April 1999--change the end date of their fiscal year 2000 from March 31, 2000 to December 31, 1999.

Here's a quote from an article by PNG on the significance of April:

http://www2.gol.com/users/png/fy_rollover.html

"Fiscal years have little to do with company or country operations. Producing products, providing services and distributing them are the elements that create commerce. Looking ahead in projections and deciding where and when you are going to post the results is keeping score...not producing, providing or distributing."

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), January 31, 1999.

Interested,

This is exactly what Mom was talking about. Your first sentence is a slam at other people. Nothing else in the post contributes more than your opinion of the situation -- no facts, nothing, except air.

======== "-- Hard to imagine these D&Gs turning into rational people. Most of their responsesto very good questions have been flames." =====

Please, Interested, where is there a single fact in that paragraph?

Now, I have to ask you a couple of questions. You appear to be waiting for the negative case to fall apart, but can provide no indication that such will really happen. What if it doesn't? What if there really are power outages in January? What if there are food shortages? What if there are bank runs? Bank closings? What if GM's thousands of suppliers can't all make it -- or even enough make it for GM to continue as a viable company? What if the chemical and oil refining industries have to close down for a few months? But you, in your unwillingness to look at what is going on about you, believe (or profess to) that nothing will happen, so don't bother your little head with taking steps that could save your life -- and the lives of your family if you have one.

Hey, if I'm wrong I'll eat well. If you're wrong.....well, starvation isn't a good way to go.

Bad bet, "interested." In gambling towns they call it a sucker bet.

And, of course, in your hurry to voice your opinion you never did respond to the original post -- you simply validated it.

What makes you think your opinion is of any interest to anyone? Do you have facts -- verifiable facts -- you can give us? If not, then you're just blowing smoke.

Haven't seen signs of enough verifiable facts from pollyannas to make a difference, but sure have seen a lot of facts that indicate we're in for a rough ride.

-- aunty (poly@anna.com), January 31, 1999.

"Those who adapt and overcome the adversity do well. Those who decide to rail about their misfortune or the sorry state of affaris surrounding them do not. You often cannot control the things that events that occur in your life, but you can always control your reaction to those events..."

Wow, you just made a great case for preparation! I bet you didn't even realized it. I suppose that I am what you would call a "doom & gloomer." I am also in the minority, apparently, at the ripe old age of 23.

I'm not a scientist, I'm a graphic artist. I do understand the basics of Chaos Theory. To put it very simply, a small change can have a dramatic impact on large complicated systems. You've heard the whole "butterfly flapping its wings in China" thing. It seems obvious to me that this problem, Y2K, is a prime example of a complex system. A 5, 10, or 20% failure in "mission critical" systems is a whole lot larger than the butterfly.

The information about the complience, or lack of, in the developing countries of the world is enough to throw a huge wrench in the machine. Even if the first world countries were 100% complient (we aren't) there would be some large disruptions. Most of the "stuff" that we take for granted comes from the countries that aren't doing anything at all about Y2K.

It also seems to be a favorite past time of the "anti-gloomers" to attack the rest of us for making preparations. They proudly state with authority that "you gloomers are in the minority." I've been in the minority consistently throughout my life. I'm not afraid of standing out, or looking foolish if Y2K is a 1. I don't think that any of us are. Who cares?

The "majority" isn't always right, especially when it comes to potentially disasterous situations. The majority of people thought the Civil War would only last a few weeks. The majority of people thought that Hitler would be happy with Poland. There are an endless number of examples. There is no safety in the majority when they are fickle and blind.

-- d (d@dgi.com), January 31, 1999.

It has not been spent. From the SEC filings we CLEARLY see that this is not so.

[From the SEC filings, we see that over $100 billion has already been spent in the US alone. Milne's statement is a lie according to his own source!]

( And the vast bulk will not be done on time.

[In an earlier thread, you spoke of 'enough' being done. That's the right question. 100% completion isn't the issue, and you called people idiots for claiming that it was. Now you turn around and place yourself into your own idiot camp. Neat trick.]

There is overwhelming evidence that critical testing is being shortchanged.

(Ooops! and flint still does NOT know what this means. Yet, flint claims to be a programmer. He calls the testin'critical' and can not figure out what happens when you don't do the 'CRITCAL' tasks.)

[Where did I say I didn't know what this meant? Since I didn't, you made it up. When did 'shortchanged' become "don't do"? You made this up too. You'd be much more persuasive if you critiqued what was said, rather than attacking what wasn't said, you know?]

There's lots of evidence that those upgrading to (hopefully) compliant systems are having the same problems we *always* have with major upgrades.

( and now, he says they are *hopefully* upgrading

[I clearly wrote 'hopefully compliant'. How did this become 'hopefully upgrading'? Can you read at all?]

he always pins it on hopefullness and NOT the facts which he sated above and yet ignores.

[If I stated something, how did I ignore it? This is logically impossible. But we know logical impossibilities don't slow you down at all, never have.]

There is good evidence that embedded systems don't represent as comprehensive a threat as we first feared, and also good evidence that a few critical embedded failures can halt key processes, perhaps for a long time (6 months to a year, maybe).

( This is merely patently false. The evidence is explicitly contrary.

[Maybe my fault. There is *ample testimony by those doing the work* that embeddeds aren't as bad as we thought. There is *no* testimony or other evidence otherwise. Another Milne lie, what else is new?]

In one particulary salient area telecoms are reporting that the have incredibly long waiting times even when there IS the availability of replacement part.

[Incredibly long is still before the trigger date, and the parts are not critical to communications either. I guess mentioning the facts undermines your case.]

Much of the remediation in most shops consists of waiting for compliant versions from the vendors of both software and hardware.

(this is not true, agai.

[You just mentioned communications where it's true. It's true of most embedded systems, it's true of most banks, it's true in manufacturing. Another Milne lie exposed.]

Like everyone else, these vendors are largely missing their announced availability dates.

(And this agin serves to exacerbate the lateness, if completion at all. But, flint still can't add 2+2.)

[It's dishonest to attack someone for failing to accomplish what they never set out to do. I never set out to do Mom's thinking for her. If she wants you to do her thinking for her, I'm sure she'll ask.]

'Compliant' new versions from vendors don't have a good track record when tested, either. Expect more of this.

(Wel well. You *DO** recognize that. But, then conveniently lapse into the you don't know what it all means.)

[Date bugs have been found in 'compliant' new versions. How did this become 'utterly noncompliant'? Your argument is, we found a bug, therefore this program is utterly noncompliant, therefore failure is guaranteed, therefore the customer will go broke, therefore this will happen to all customers, therefore we're all doomed. LOL!]

The most honest thing anyone seems to be saying is, "We just don't know where we'll be when the time comes."

That is the LEAST HONEST thing that could be said.

[Only if telling the truth is not honest. You've made it clear that you consider lies to be more honest than truth, but you may be in a minority there.]

EXTREME CONTRADICTION

[We can always tell when you're on thin ice, because you substitute shouted adjectives for analysis. You need to reread the 'rules of disinformation', you're overusing the few you remember.]

Point by point I have gone through your ridiculous blather.

[And point by point, you've told lies, contradicted yourself, made unsupported assertions, attacked what wasn't said, and hurled insults. Good work. Very convincing.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

Never wrestle with a pig. You'll get dirty, and the pig will love it.

-- (x@y.z), January 31, 1999.

Hi "mom" - never figured I say that to anybody but my own mother, but what the heck)

Look at the differences here between the mindless, numbed accusations in the first answer - and the strong but fact-laced arguemetns (for a high-level-of-disruption for a long time from P. Milne, and for lesser troubles for a shorter time from several others).

Those mindless accusations and distractions are very typical of those who visciously and maliciously attack anyone who is preparing for year 2000 troubles.

Those of us who are preparing (each to a different degree) don't know why they are committing these attacks. But we have seen nothing from any "Y2Kattacker" (who is different from a troll - a troll is like a vandal, they are just looking to stir up trouble by publicly destroying things.)

The recent y2Kattackers are more troubling - they are obsessed with a religious fervor in condemning anyone who choses to prepare - attacking them personally, with obsenities, with religious overtones, with militia references, profiteering motives - nothing negative is beyond these attacker's limits. Again, we don't know why - and they refuse to say,choosing instead to ignore the facts (such as they are, ignoring trends, and pretending that popularity equals correctness.

And I thought we lived in a republic where each person could chose his or her own future. Maybe these attackers don't like freedom.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), January 31, 1999.

Mr Cook, we all know the undisputed king of the obscene attack, and he sure ain't an optimist. I'm rather surprised you're not upset to have your perfectly valid concerns smeared by such tactics.

If you can find a single post anywhere telling people *not* to prepare, I'd appreciate it if you could direct me to it. I don't have time to read every thread.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

Correct, granting the obvious "filth-rating" to deaqr Mssr. Milne is required - but as you saw in his responding to your comments here (and earlier) he does generally try to argue each point with either a fact or an extrapolation from current conditions. He does though consistently extrapolate further and with more "absolute" conviction than I'm willing to assume.

His choice - his preparations.

To your second comment - the recent y2kattackers are systemetically doing that by so viciously attacking and trying to discredit people who they denigrate and "doom and gloomers" - to newbies to y2k, who are likely skeptical about the seriousness and length of the potential troubles, scared at facing a suddenly uncertain future, and looking for anything to confirm their desire to feel "alright" about believing the government - the seriousness and predictability of their attacks - to us, and to more open people such as Yardeni, Ed Y., Sen Bennett, etc. - does tell implicity new listeners that " people who prepare are the ....... right wing, militia-fed, terroristic, hoarding, survivalists" that most new people have been taught to fear by the liberal press's distortion of Y2K.

More clear?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), January 31, 1999.

Mr Cook:

Absolute conviction when facing God Only Knows What's Coming isn't entirely rational, but I certainly favor informed preparation. Disinformed preparation based on what I showed to be systematic disinformation is still better than no preparation, I agree.

I know from talking to quite a few people that the possible impacts on them personally has yet to penetrate. The don't see any problems now, and they can't really understand the ramifications of what these bugs mean. Preparing for more than a bad weekend is expensive and a nuisance, and most people would prefer not to think about it. Nonetheless, exaggerating the likely problems beyond any reasonable expectation, screaming and drooling in the process, prompts few to prepare, and many to dismiss the entire issue as the province of the insane. I cannot keep a straight face at the thought of pointing any of these people at anything Paul Milne writes and saying "here is a reasonable man making a good case."

I don't know if you've noticed, but Gary Milne (Paul's brother) has begun defending the family name. Turns out PM wasn't a stockbroker for years, it was just over one year. He didn't leave 3 years ago when he saw y2k coming as he says, he left 12 years ago. And he didn't leave for fear of economic breakdown, he left because he couldn't get along with people. The whole thing is rather comical, and a bit sad.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

It does seem very weird how viciously some of these people are attacking preparers. I don't quite get it. The only thing that I could imagine is they blame the preparers for any problems that could eventually arise. Why are they so indignant and rude? The GN is a big fat idiot forum is filled with these attitudes. It strikes me as very misplaced. Could anyone speculate on this extreme reaction of these people? They act like everyone who is preparing is a militia group member or totally whacked out. I consider myself to be a fairly run of the mill person. I am not extreme in any sense except for my love of my children and God and life. I live in a nice neighborhood in a small town. I do not at all fit the image these anti preparers have of D & G ers. Plus, I feel none of this "disgust and hatred" for them. (I may later when they come to me for food) Anyway, any insight would be appreciated.

-- a mom (help@dontgetit.com), January 31, 1999.

Ignore Paul Milne, Flint. Paul Milne, ignore Flint. The two of you are going to trash this forum if Koskinen's hired spinmeisters don't do it first.

I do not call this forum to hear one poster talking about another poster. Do I have to get my Y2K information from somewhere else? I have much better ways of spending my time then listening over and over and over again to this ridiculous bickering over and over and over again.

Both of you are preparing for Y2K. Act like it!!

-- (stop@it.please), January 31, 1999.

stopit: OK, good point. You'll notice that I have never initiated any of these battles. My original post here made no mention of anyone. Yes, when I'm attacked unjustly I try to show that the attack is baseless. I do this because a growing number of posters here seem to feel that lies told for The Cause are justified.

I think I laid out the situation pretty clearly in my original post. I believe I'm being attacked for that very clarity. But from now on, I'll turn the other cheek.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

Mom -- "Most of us don't want to spend all the cash for preparations but from where I sit it would be irresponsible not to."

I think this is the view of most people here. It's certainly mine.

Milne and Infomagic may be clairvoyant seers, but I'm not. So I don't know what's going to happen. Only that something awkward, or worse, is quite likely to happen. Others may -- and do -- think otherwise. OK with me.

BTW if we're talking memories, I remember watching my father pay 7 cents a gallon for Texaco gasoline in 1932. And the station owner checking the oil and tires and cleaning all the windows.

Years ago (1964) I met people here in the South who told me their families would not have survived the Depression (1929 et. seq.) if they hadn't had their farms and vegetable gardens. Because there Just Was No Work To Be Had. Those without gardens went without food, except for some charitable assistance.

If only half of Milne's projections turn out true, we're still in for very rough times.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), January 31, 1999.

Okay - so point them at the Red Cross and FEMA - and try to get them to be ready for 2 weeks of no services - suits me.

Then if things turn lousy for one week - they will be ready and come through with no significant problems. (Unless their neighbor in the apartment below burns up the place trying to keep warm!)

If the troubles turn lousy for 2-3 weeks, they (we hope) will start trying to stretch things and supplies so the last 2 weeks are merely very uncomfortable - surviveable, but uncomfortable. If the troubles last 3-5 weeks, very uncomfortable, but again probably surviveable.

Look at the bell curve - if 10 percent will never get it, and ten percent prepare well for long-lasting troubles. Then 40% will prepare for soemthing between 2 week and four weeks of intermittent services, and 40% will prepare for 2 days to two weeks of intermittent services.

It better than nothing - and will help prevent panic. Bank runs? Don't knwo - seems logical in any case to have two weeks of cash available - and the system doesn't have that much, even if money for cars, mortgage and credit card bills are left "intact" in the system.

And for those who chose to listen to Mr Clinton-Gore and his minions in the news - what will they do after they burn the Times and Washington Post for warmth? Can't print without power. Can't get newsprint without gas, can't set type without computers and the press running.....can't burn papers in the fireplace if you don't have papers delivered.

Can't eat a TV set. Can't drink a TV set.

Unfortunately, can't burn a TV set either.

Guess it isn't good for much after all.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), January 31, 1999.

Dear "mom": Sorry, but quite frankly, anti-doomers are getting very desperate, because time is getting late -- real late. And they know it. Why do they do the attacks that you describe? Maybe because they have known about Y2K for quite a while now -- and have done nothing. And, in their hearts, they know what is coming. You know, things will be bad enough for people who have not prepared -- but to have known what is coming, and still have done nothing -- that will truly be the worst.

Where there is a will there is a way. Prepare.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), January 31, 1999.

I know a while back we were trying to determine what made us get it when other people didn't. Of course we decided it was because we are so smart. But sometimes I wonder if there isn't a less attractive explanation. Like maybe we are so gullible.

Lots of reports appear on the internet, the source of which we have no way of verifying. Contradicting reports appear, which we have no way of verifying. A lot of companies/people simply aren't looking into a problem considered to be boring and trivial. This alone prevents us from really knowing the effects.

I would never discourage anyone from preparing. However, when we get these accusations of being in a cult, maybe we should consider if we have become a little too suggestible. I wouldn't get all up in arms over being called a cultist/fear-mongerer/fool etc. The possibility exists that we are as ridiculous as we appear. So just nod your head in agreement and move forward with your plans.

You're right, we're all cultists/fear-mongerers/idiots. You win. Congratulations.

-- Amy (leoneamy@aol.com), January 31, 1999.

why isn't anyone telling the psychopathic pollyannas the obvious:

it doesn't matter if they don't believe that the situation is serious. it doesn't matter if they don't like us, it doesn't even matter if they don't think we (y2k preparers) are entirely sane. The reason it doesn't matter is that there is nothing that they can do to stop us from preparing, and there is nothing that they can do to stop us from spending as much time as possible encouraging others to prepare. Preparing includes (of course) stockpiling suitable supplies and my also include relocating, reducing one's dependency on financial institutions and paper currency, as well as working to ensure one's family is protected suitably if the social situation deteriorates. We WILL continue, we WILL encourage others to do the same.

The above being said, and given that some shortages and backlogs are already accumulating, the pollyannas have only two choices: either they must begin to prepare themselves, or refuse to prepare and accept the fact that as shortages increase, and more people become aware of them, the situation will continue to deteriorate.

Therefore, there's nothing required in response to said psycho pollies other than to remind them of this, whenever they show up...then just ignore them.

or am I over simplifying? Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), January 31, 1999.

Good point, Arlin. Ignore the trolls and pollyannas and keep preparing.

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), January 31, 1999.

d, you said:

"Wow, you just made a great case for preparation! I bet you didn't even realized it. "

Of course I realized it. That's why, at least in part, I said it. I have been advocating preparation since I first came to this forum nearly a year ago. HOWEVER, I advocate preparation based not on the overall worst-case scenario (i.e. "I need two years of food, ammo, water and diesel fuel") but on what you evaluate as the worst case that you can reasonably expect (i.e. "I need to get by for X days/weeks without supermarkets, electricity, telephones, etc.). I have said many times here that everyone should have two days to a week of non-perishable food and potable water stored at all times, Y2K or not.

The question isn't "How bad might it possibly be" but "How bad is it likely enough to be that it is worth my time and expense to preapre for?" The answer to that question must be arrived at individually and the reactions to the answer then taken at an individual level. Don't let anyone else do this kind of thinking for you.

BTW, my personal answer is that I am preparing for a week with none of the basics and food shortages (not absences mind you, just shortages) for two weeks after. Beyond that, I personally don't see enough risk to be worth the expense. Obviously, others disagree. I don't offer my position as an attempt to sway anyone but merely as information.

-- Paul Neuhardt (neuhardt@ultranet.com), February 02, 1999.