Reading the latest CIA evaluation of ten countries the sheeple seem to be in denial over the inter-related nature of everthing.

Almost every country outlined by the CIA will have at the least severe shortages of some nature. but was particularly telling is the OIL SHORTAGES PREDICTED in the oil producing countries. Export problems of other commodities in almost every other country.

Now we have the herd investing everything they own in an over priced stock market, confident they will get out before the drop or believing it will never drop. Well, just as everyone fears the "panic" in banking brought on by "fear", there will be a "trigger" event that stampedes investors. The event will be something that scares them enough that they won't dare "jump" back in on a decline. It may be a series of events that point out the fact that this problem will have a serious impact on the market.

The inter-related nature of Y2K will at some point present a series of potential problem big enough to begin the stampede. Some sheeple have their ears raised and smelling the wind, but still feel protected by the press releases of BIG BROTHER.

But the inconsistencies are beginning to show. How does the CIA release the report it just presented and yet Greenspan sees no problem. Senators contradict the Whitehouse and begin to show concern that "people aren't prepared". As the contradictions increase the herd will turn, and is more edgy everyday.

Possible National Guard mobilization, refilling the Strategic Oil Reserve, Covert Military Operations, Bank Monitoring, EO's on infrastructure protection, yadda yadda yadda- Whose kidding who.

The amazing thing is the ability of the sheeple to be fooled. They will just as easily give in to the government as long as the "trains run on time." When the panic hits watch out the Feds have been planning for this for a long time.

-- Archimedes (robin@icubed.com), February 24, 1999

Answers

When the investment bulls start pulling out of the stock market do you think that will set off light bulbs for the sheeple and the bank runs shall begin?

-- Bank (runs@marketdownturn.com), February 24, 1999.

I agree with everything you say Archimedes save for one thing - the herd are too greedy and self-satisfied, too brainwashed. I'm not sure now that there WILL be a panic. Unless it is a government induced one.

Later.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), February 24, 1999.

Youre half right at least ; "Its all interconnected".

But "collapse any day" needs a little work. Actually, most of us here Know that the system is extremely vulnerable and could have "collapsed any day" even without Y2K. So will Y2K be the thing that starts the crash? Theres a good chance it will be, but I thought people would eventually care that Clinton is a liar, perjurer, sex maniac, and so forth too.

So when people say that if Y2K problems don't materialize by 1/2000 we will be able to live cheap that year, I disagree. I intend to be prepared for disaster from now on (rotating food, fuel, etc), Y2K or not.

-- Jon Johnson (narnia4@usa.net), February 25, 1999.

Jon, I think your convictions need a little fresh air. We've had an increasingly technological economy for decades, and it works very well, thank you. In the meantime, we've had wars, recessions, natural disasters, and a lot of genuinely mediocre (and worse) programming. The system has continue to work without more than a very local, infrequent, and temporary glitch. Lose a major satellite? Oops, small problems for one day, then back up like it never happened. Cascading failure in the grid? Oops, back up in half a day, and so rare an event that we talk about it over 30 years later.

So I have to wonder: how do you know the system has been teetering on the brink of collapse? We see serious insults to the system on a regular basis, with only tiny short-lived ripples every time. Any other (smaller) system that behaves this way under stress is considered resiliant and robust. The global technological and economic system has always met all the criteria to be considered robust. Claiming it really isn't, it just always acts that way, seems very strange.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 25, 1999.

All of our previous disruptions (e.g., the loss of the Galaxy IV satellite, the East Coast blackouts of 1965/1977) have been contained and isolated. Y2K, however, will not be because of the way that things are I-N-T-E-R-C-O-N-N-E-C-T-E-D, with M-U-L-T-I-P-L-E points of failure occurring S-I-M-U-L-T-A-N-E-O-U-S-L-Y. This is why trying to compare previous such events with Y2K is like comparing an apple to an orange. (Or, more accurately I guess, many apples to a single orange.)

(Note: CGIs -- "Can't Get Its" -- simply do not comprehend such concepts, but I have attempted to spell out the words anyway, just to be sure.)

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), February 25, 1999.

It's the length of the words, Jack. C'mon, don't you GI?

-- Franklin Journier (ready4y2k@yahoo.com), February 25, 1999.

I think Flint is pretty much correct when he says the system is fairly robust. I have viewed this fact with much consternation becuase I hope for something better for our world. That being said, allow me to pick nits for my own amusement...

"We see serious insults to the system on a regular basis, with only tiny short-lived ripples every time"

Try explaining that to an Indonesian, Russian, Thai, Pakistani, Brazilian, or a Bhopalian, Ukrainian, Amazonian or a dolphin.

"We've had an increasingly technological economy for decades, and it works very well, thank you"

Well,yes, it does work very well, assuming that our ultimate purpose as a species is to destroy our own planet asap. The economy is doin a great job of that.

And, the global economy has been doing a lot more teetering on the brink lately, and y2k is obviously going to total it.

-- humptydumpty (no.6@thevillage.com), February 25, 1999.

Humpty:

Nice nits you got there.

Of course the global economy is not and never has been goodies for everybody. There are always a few economic rashes here and there on the globe. And if you go back year by year, you'll find no shortage of learned treatises on how it'll all come tumbling down Real Soon Now. All supported with nice facts, trends, and historical precedents. But mostly it hasn't.

Also, there are economic externalities (mostly environmental) which have yet to be internalized. Some have, some will, some won't. But so long as anything worth having is worth buying, we'll adapt.

Jack: Of course everything is connected to everything in ways too complex to model with our best supercomputers. But this complexity and interconnectedness doesn't represent vulnerability just because it can't be modeled or because it's too much for any person to visualize. That's why they say economists always get paid twice -- once to tell you what will happen, and once to tell you why it didn't! If y2k turns out to be relatively little, I think the interconnectness will be a very large part of the explanation. In complex adaptive systems, remember that changes for the better propagate through just as easily as changes for the worse. The adaptive thrust is to encourage the good things and quash the bad things. The potential for big problems always exists, and almost always gets dealt with when it happens.

So just watch. In 5 or 10 years, we'll be back to TWAWKI.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), February 25, 1999.