Doomers: Please Quantify Your Gloom : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Climbing in to flame-retardant suit: I'm prepped to the gills, armed to the teeth, paranoid as a rabbit in a snakepit, expecting global thermo-nuclear war by 2003. Thanks for your concern. Now:

I think y2k doomers need to be a little more precise. As things stand, anything from a couple of planes crashing in China in Feb '00 up to total Hammerfall/megadeath at precisely midnight 2000-1-1-1:00:00 will qualify as "we TOLD you so".

I'd like prominent doomers to make some truly testable predictions:


"At time t, (2000/1/1 < t < 2005) the population of American will be n% of its current (1999-2-8) level, due to y2k"

or something similar for GDP

or something similar for duration and location of power outages, etc.

The predictions are too vague to be rigorously verifiable, even after the fact.

Thanks if this can be provided,


-- Runway Cat (, February 08, 1999


Dear, Runaway

You won't get many answers to your query.

This is why!

-- Daffy Duct Tape (, February 08, 1999.

RC -

okay, but this is just for grins - given no Divine Intervention, as of 01/01/01 the population of the United States will be no more than 90 percent of said population on 01/01/00.


-- Arlin H. Adams (, February 08, 1999.

OK, RCat...

At the price of confirming that I am indeed a D&G'er, I'm going to take your challenge...

***PREDICTION*** By 1/1/2001, I expect the population of the US to be a maximum of 200 million, due to the effects of Y2K and other various (but currently undefinable) global devastations.

-- Nabi Davidson (, February 08, 1999.

RC - Say it isn't so. I hope this post is tongue in cheek. I've been following you for awhile and this seems totally off the wall. Have you seen something to make you back down from your original position on Y2K? (unless, quite possibly, I've misunderstood your position anyway.) I know I got a funny feeling after reading Ed'd essay on disruptions and depression. It didn't seem so terribly D&G. I could have misinterpreted him, too. Mary

-- Mary (, February 08, 1999.

I expect the population to increase at a rate 30% greater than its current rate of increase.

First, I believe in preparing as if the problem is a 10. However, I don't expect reality to be particularly unpleasant for those of us who prepare for the worst, because:

1) The status of most companies' y2k remediation will be better than they are willing to admit.

If a company says that its computer is y2k compliant and its computer then fails, the company will be sued not only by some people because the computer failed, but also by others (such as a shareholder class action) who claim to have relied upon the company's assurance that the computer was fixed.

Just because a company will not state to Gary North's satisfaction that its computers are y2k compliant does not mean that they are not.

2) I lived through the Gary North/Doug Casey scare of the Carter administration inflation, and their predictions did not come to pass.

My prediction of an increase in the rate of population growth is based upon this scenario:

1) During widespread power outages in January, many Americans will go to bed soon after sunset, resulting in an American baby boom of October, 2000.

2) The decline of the standard of living in Mexico will be distinctly greater than that of the U.S., and Mexicans will come across the border in numbers greater than the American government can control.

As I say, prudence requires preparation even if my scenario is correct.

-- GA Russell (, February 08, 1999.

"I'd like prominent doomers to make some truly testable predictions:


"At time t, (2000/1/1 < t < 2005)..."

I'm not a prominent doomer, but I play one on t.v.

At time t, I can safely predict that you'll be remembering this present moment fondly and yearning for same safety and confort, and that you won't be spending as much time at your keyboard. Willing to bet my computer that I'm right.

-- Chris (, February 08, 1999.

First off, I'll predict that nothing happens precisely at midnight 2000, blah, blah, blah... I don't feel any real need to be specific about what I think might happen. Most of us D&Gers probably don't feel the need to step in that particular trap.

How is it possible to make predictions that are "rigorously verifiable" when the information that's available isn't? Besides, if we're right, what's the point anyway? I'm doing what I'm doing because there is a distinct possibility that things will be very bad. Nothing out there has shown me that the grid can't go down, transportation can't be disrupted, telecommunications won't fail, etc... Actually, it's quite the contrary.



If the power goes out in January, we can assume that there will be large problems, to say the least, with refineries, transportation, telecommunication, etc... If the power stays out long enough to cause a significant increase in birth rate due to, err.., boredom, you've just predicted a 10+. That would be a hell of a lot of mouths to feed with diminished capacity. If it did increase 30%, you've just predicted famine in the U.S.

The two parts of your theory simply don't mesh with each other. I'm glad that you're preparing for a ten, because if you're right about widespread power outages, that's most likely what we've got.

-- d (d@notreallydgi.old), February 08, 1999.

Runway Cat --- Actually I think the reverse is the case. Unless the world literally ends, most people will argue that anyone who prepped seriously for Y2K was an idiot, even if we have, say, a rip-roaring depression.

I must say, I'm counting on this to some degree with respect to limiting panic and smoothing events next year. There will be a lot of: "we only lost power for a week. Hey, the world didn't end."

Which, BTW, is true. And no one, not even Infomagic, has said the world is going to end.

-- BigDog (, February 08, 1999.

Not *exactly* the kind of predictions you're looking for but here goes anyway. In july200 > t > 2010 you're going to see:

Lots of people in loose clothes.

Lots of blisters

New fashions: beards on men and the natural non-makeup look on women

People doing double takes at someone NOT wearing a gun.

Trade and barter places where you go to "shop". (A lot like flea markets now except all "real" goods and anamils.)

LOTS of people walking.

Dam near everybody hungry at least part of the time.

People try to trade: CD players and sterios for anything even a drink of clean water, cameras for a cracker, jewlery for a sandwich, ANY work for ANY food, and the world oldest profession (sadly) in profusion.

Doctors making house calls. They'll be glad to work in trade for food.

Wars and rumors of wars.

Thieves and brigands hanging in public.

Pretty babies.

People offering to trade a $35,000 SUV for a horse. (with no luck)

Live entertainment (local folks getting together)

"Home" schooling become the norm

Some government of some kind. (but a new kind)

A Rolex watch is worth 1 bottle of Pepto

Somebody still trying to sign you up in Amway

An electronic watch is not worth a drink of water.

Lots of laughing.

Lots of crying.

Lots of helping

Lots of dying.

-- Greybear

- Got beans?

-- Greybear (, February 09, 1999.

Hey thanks for the (relative) concreteness here.

Mary, to clarify, I'm a '4' on y2k (severe recession, maybe not even that). I even posted a satire late last year Game Time: The Bug That Failed, mimicking an essay written in acadmese in 2043 about how people freaked out needlessly for y 2k. Some of my predictions in that essay have already come true, for example an article recently appeared suggesting that people preparing for y2k have a psychological or emotional disorder - that's a game I knew the media would play.

However, I believe that we are in a period very much like that which preceded the First World War - prosperity and technological advance blinding us to the storm clouds gathering. When the world has this many weapons, sooner or later they will be used, and horribly. Also, our economic ravages of this planet are definitely unsustainable. Finally, our freedom is going out the window, thanks to technology. For all those reasons, which from 100 yards with iron sights look pretty much like y2k anyhow, I call this board regularly. My apocalyptic thinking pretty much tracks Joel Skousen, author of Strategic Relocation .

-- Runway Cat (, February 09, 1999.

R Cat,

I had a few additional questions to you about the MPK at the bottom of the "Hoarding and Confisction" thread. If it's still available and you have the time I'd appreciate the info.

-- Greybear (, February 09, 1999.

Runway Cat, although I'm more of a doomer than you, I feel very comfortable with your World War analogy. But let's make it World War II and wish that we had a Churchill around. Churchill warned about Germany's intentions for many years before WWII. Could our Churchill be Bennett, do you think?

-- Old Git (, February 09, 1999.

R Cat,

Have you also read Skousens Naked Communist.

Good read. Will tell you a LOT about the mentality of Socialists and other power mad dogs.

BTW, thanks, I'll go get the mag tomorrow.

-- Greybear (, February 09, 1999.

The expectation that population will decrease by 10% will be somewhat offset by a baby boom precipitated in September of 2000 by the power outage nine months previous.

-- Jean Meyers (, February 09, 1999.

Jean -

This is a gloomy thought, but...

Your statement assumes that one area of "weakness" will offset another. Newborns and their moms are very high risk if the local infrastructure isn't in good shape. We will have a much higher-than-normal infant mortality rate in those areas hardest hit by Y2K failures (i.e., those which are unprepared.)

-- Mac (, February 09, 1999.


-- Gloom (, February 13, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ