A Pessimist's Soapbox

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
I am crossposting this from Hoff's "A Pollyanna Soapbox" thread:

Hoff: you said:

But 'a' was the one, on a previous thread, who in essence confirmed that his goal was to crow about every piece of bad news.

You are misrepresenting me. I said I crow about bad news that IMO is legitimately worrisome. You are an optimist; I am a pessimist, so I see more of the writing on the wall than you. I intensified my "campaign" when folks like Norm moved in, and I'm prepared to match wits and datapoints with them any day.

I too plan to remain in the city as long as it remains the safe and prudent thing to do. But I leaned long ago not to ignore warning signs such as those now appearing before us.

Yes you are right, the situation is not hopeless. However, it's far from hopeful. We are in for the worst crisis since the Depression and World Wars. You can argue with that statement if you like, but consider the likely possibilities:

And this is a partial list, and does not even consider the more technical problems that y2k will bring.

You don't have to be Milne or Infomagic to see that we are facing a larger problem than the pollyannas realize. My goal is not to induce panic, but to persuade as many people as possible to take this situation seriously and prepare to the maximum extent possible.

-- a (a@a.a), May 26, 1999

Answers

a, I agree with your "pessimism." Prudent living and thinking is what I would also call it, and many of us get so caught up in daily routines we can't see the forest because of the trees! I live in Oklahoma and since that killer F-5 in early May, I realized how much I lived and thought within a bubble. Unfortunately, so do many others around here who live in homes that basically got blown away. Granted it is true that F-5's do not just blow in everyday, but here in the Great Plains, where they are MORE likely to spawn than in other places, storm shelters are NOT a common household addition. Nor are there many homes with basements. My family and I were fortunate in this instance, we were safe and through this catastrophe we realized our vulnerability. Fortunately, we can do something to prepare: build a shelter.

But how many will not prepare or even realize their vulnerability? Like tornadoes, y2k has the potential for great loss. Unlike tornadoes, we know that it is coming and when. It is prudent to prepare and a quote from someone somewhere, there is only one time to prepare, too early. Otherwise, it's too late.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), May 26, 1999.

"I intensified my "campaign" when folks like Norm moved in, and I'm prepared to match wits and datapoints with them any day. "

NORM doesn't comment. but "a" is going to match wits with him.

Norm, you wouldn't attack an unarmed man would you?

-- IRONy MAN (marvel@comic.book), May 26, 1999.

Right on, a. Only problem the pollyannas will have is that, for them, Y2K somehow has to happen in a vacuum. To consider the contemporary threats that you mentioned debases the academic purity of their debate. Can't have that, no way.

Another trait seemingly inherent within pollyanna sentiment seems to be the Darwinist viewpoint - Who cares if anybody besides myself is injured by Y2K? I'm one of the strongest, and I'll survive. With my precious, optimistic, pollyanna, this-can't-happen-here hymen intact.

They are strange birds, indeed. One wonders how our founding fathers might view them.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), May 26, 1999.

I for one, don't know when I've read anything better than your comments on this Y2K mess. I thank you. I live in a semi-rural area of southern California, desert, mountains, with six houses on my dirt road. One house isn't occupied. One has an elderly couple that are seldom seen. Now, that leaves the four of us and for the life of me I can't get anyone to either become interested in Y2K, let alone talk about some type of preperations. I've taken as many precautions, food, water, etc., as I can, knowing full well that IF anything does happen I shall be on my own to take care of myself. Do I worry? Yes. Do I believe many will be at the door looking for help? Yes. It is my hope that everyone in the United States reads your posting on this site.

-- Richard Westerlind (Astral-Acres@webtv.net), May 26, 1999.
Richard,

Are you in Riverside County? If you have water, a good place to be.

-- DMH (fire@for.man), May 26, 1999.

Great post, "a" (as usual). The point often missed about the Y2K problem is not that it will do its damage as a single force, but rather that it will serve as a catalyst to, and compound with, a multitude of other problems that are just accidents waiting to happen. (Take fractional reserve banking, for example....)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), May 26, 1999.
A:

You KNOW I'm much more optimistic regarding Y2k than you are. We've already discussed this in another thread. I have, perhaps, both a more optimistic nature in general, and I haven't worked on the "projects from hell."

However, I think you're incorporating a lot of OTHER issues into the Y2k concern. Your concerns ALL seem to revolve around "What IF's." I remember when my son was young. He couldn't seem to ask enough "What IF" questions. I guess I would ask that you also consider the other side..."What if NOT?"

"You say there is little or no chance that we will lose the power grid. Fine. What about the rest of the world? How will Europe fare with no energy from Russia? What if there are a couple of nuclear power plant meltdowns? What if we have a dozen?"

There are actually 3 power grids to lose in the U.S. and Canada, A. As someone recently posted, they don't intertwine. As much as if the Texas grid goes down the Western grid has no way to provide us power, Texas in turn ALSO has no way to share power with the Western grid if THEY go down. [Sorry...got side-tracked there for a moment.]

How will Europe fare? I've been to Europe five times and have friends and family in Norway. They've lived through WW II and have experienced harsher times than most Americans can even imagine. Even those of wealth (comparatively) to some folks in the U.S. live far more frugile lives.

Regarding the nuclear power plants, we really have no control over foreign entities' power plants. I may have misplaced confidence in our safety controls in the U.S., but it's my current understanding that Nuclear plants that aren't found to be compliant later this year will be shut down for safety reasons. The reason I state that we have no control over foreign entities is to remind you that worry about something over we have no control is a mind-killer. Worry about those things over which you DO have some control.

"What about the saber rattling now going on overseas? What if the Russians aren't bullshitting about using nukes? What will happen near the rollover if North Korea moves its 1 million men into Seoul? And China into Taiwan? And Iraq into Saudi Arabia? Why are we at war with the former Soviet Union at this critical juncture?"

Again...your concerns here should be addressed by campaigning Congress or other avenues. This is NOT directly related to Y2k.

"What will happen if the oil supply is drastically curtailed? If the 72-73 recession was brought on by an artificial blockade of oil by a greedy cartel, what will the effect of an actual production and distribution shortage be?"

I, personally, don't worry about this one. Please see another thread in which I posted a URL for the American Petroleum Institute. Nothere didn't find the information desired on that site, but had he/she explored the site in depth...as it branches to MANY areas and other links, I would think you'd feel more comfortable, as he/she would also.

"What will be the effect of the largest speculative stock bubble in the history of the world exploding at the same time serious y2k problem begin manifesting themselves? Why does the popular business press seem to think that we can all get rich by sitting on our ass and pouring our hard earned money into a slot machine?"

Believe it or not, A...I remember the stock market being 600. I'm not missing any zeros there. I hate to think about how much money I lost in those years, but I didn't die and my life moved on.

"Contrary to your unfounded optimism, numerous banking and financial sources are now talking about the imported data problem. What will be the net economic effect of a world banking system that is no longer reliable and cannot sustain international trade?"

I think we all need to step back and examine this one more closely. For the MAJORITY of U.S. residents, the banks won't be affected AT ALL by imported data problems. SOME transactions will be rejected due to invalid formats. There are folks with a helluva lot more banking experience than I have who have already addressed these problems. Now if you expect to acquire funds from a foreign account and your transaction is rejected, you INDEED have a problem.

"According to conventional wisdom, Y2K is now a non-problem. It was solved. What will happen if Russ Kelly's experts are right and y2k is a 7? Will the relatively few people that have prepared up to this point make a difference? How will JIT production and delivery cope with the hoards of people that will empty store shelves in the waning days of this year?"

I think you meant to say hordes of people, but I easily mix those two also. The hordes hoard. Who said that relatively few people have prepared, A? Recent polls (if they can be believed) state that half the population intends to engage in SOME form of preparedness. I agree that it would be GREAT if we could get 100% compliance in SOME form of preparedness. Again, however, your question is yet another "What if?"

"Assuming that we avoid a starvation crisis here at home by using US stockpiles of food, what happens to the 1,000,000,000 people in this world that are dependent on our surplus? Will the disease and violence cause by such a massive global famine be contained to third world countries?"

The attempts the U.S. has undertaken in the past to provide food to needy people in third world countries have ALWAYS been thwarted by the local governments in those countries that chose NOT to distribute the food to the needy. The end result was typically that the local farmers were put out of business if the food got through. I don't see Y2k making a dent here in feeding the world's hungry.

"How will we cope with natural disasters in a world that has been ravaged by the techno-economic failures listed above? How bad will the 11 year peak of solar storms be? How bad will this years forecast of the worst hurricane season on record be? How many will die if tornadoes can not be forecast reliably? Crop failures? Ozone depletion? Rising sea levels? Earthquakes? Y2k won't happen in a vacuum."

All these things will/will not occur DESPITE Y2k. They're occured before and they will continue to occur. Again, I think you're a) assuming that NOTHING will be remediated, and b) extrapolating on the Y2k glitch to include natural phenomenon outside our control.

For Barb: Preparing for a natural emergency has ALWAYS been prudent advice. It is STILL prudent advice for Y2k. However, I've heard from folks who thought that their generator would have been helpful in staving off a natural disaster...or that their hoard would have been helpful in staving off a natural disaster. ENTIRE homes flew about in Oklahoma recently. What makes some feel that their gensets and stocks of supplies wouldn't have flown away WITH their homes? P.S., Barb. I can surely appreciate your desire for a basement. Texas is simply TOO rock-based to invest in such things.

I guess in summary, A, I would like to say that "Yes, indeed...you are a pessimist by nature." I feel as though you've taken on the problems of the world personally. I simply don't feel that there's enough proof of these "What if's" happening, nor do I CHOOSE to worry about things not under my control. Perhaps that's the difference between us.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 26, 1999.

While you're on your soapbox, would you answer a few questions for me?

How does all (or any one) of the above happen when a computer system (any relevant computer system or network) is not able to calculate delta t or sort dates accurately?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 26, 1999.

I have this hypothesis that it's the pollyannas who are the ones always getting rear-ended, because they insist on coming to a complete halt in the street before turning into the shopping center.. unaware of anything in the world except themselves and their own intentions.... "I should be entitled to come to a complete stop in traffic. If the guy behind can't stop fast enough, that's his problem. Those are the traffic laws...."

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), May 26, 1999.
What IF? You knew a war was coming. Would you get ready?

What IF Y2K has international side-effects, just like a global war. Would you get ready, now, or later? (Assume you KNOW its coming).

Y2K does not take sides. It is bi-partisan. It does not operate in a global vacumn. The camels back is carrying a heavy load right now. What will Y2K do?

It will unfairly treat us all unequally, differently and unexpectedly.

Now is the time to take up the challenge for preparing a vast, diverse and leaderless world on a topic of vital national and international security.

Period.

Diane, also an optimist.

See also...

A Pollyanna Soapbox

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 000sBj



-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), May 26, 1999.

Diane how do you (personally) prepare for war?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 26, 1999.
"Global World War II Rationed Items list and Timeline":

http://kuhttp.cc.ukans.edu/carrie/kancoll/voices/1997/0597ratn.htm

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), May 26, 1999.

Kevin, it's a much different world with the introduction of nukes. Further are you suggesting that the individual prepare for war by stockpiling food and supplies. Wouldn't that diminish the "share" that every one gets with rationing?

A, I'm still waiting for you to get back on that box.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 26, 1999.

Anita,>/b>

You've joined my (short) list of adults posting on this forum.

-- walt (walt@lcs.k12.ne.us), May 26, 1999.

bold off. Sorry

-- walt (walt@lcs.k12.ne.us), May 26, 1999.
Anita: there is no "what if" in my mind. We are poised to see all of these things and more. Maybe not TEOTW, but most probably AWKI.

Maria: the point of my post is to demonstrate that their are several other crises that will peak along with y2k. I have expressed my pessimism on y2k technical issues in general elsewhere.

-- a (a@a.a), May 26, 1999.

[This is a serious position paper, and deserves a serious response. One thing 'a' makes clear is that the key difference between optimists and pessimists is the assumptions they substitute for missing data.]

You say there is little or no chance that we will lose the power grid. Fine. What about the rest of the world?

[What data do we have?]

How will Europe fare with no energy from Russia? What if there are a couple of nuclear power plant meltdowns? What if we have a dozen?

[Here's what I've read: Russia has had one serious nuclear meltdown (not date related); they provide 40% of Germany's power, their generation and T&D are ancient and almost entirely analog, and operation is largely manual, and they are doing almost no remediation. Does this guarantee that there will be "no energy from Russia", as you seem to take for granted? If there should be any y2k bugs (about which we know NOTHING), can those bugs be repaired reasonably quickly? We really don't know, we have no information about the nature of any possible y2k problems in those systems. Why do you assume that Europe will have no Russian power? We just don't know enough to make any such assumption. You might be right, you might be completely wrong.]

What about the saber rattling now going on overseas? What if the Russians aren't bullshitting about using nukes? What will happen near the rollover if North Korea moves its 1 million men into Seoul? And China into Taiwan? And Iraq into Saudi Arabia? Why are we at war with the former Soviet Union at this critical juncture?

[What does this have to do with y2k, really? There's never been a time in recorded history when there weren't some percievable threats *somewhere*. This is the normal world political climate, and always has been. And of course there have always been people who fret about it, and occasionally those frets are fully justified. But any chain of events from y2k bugs to political and/or military problems worldwide is made of pure moonbeams. If there are wars started in the next year or two (which is pretty normal, all in all), probably even historians exercising hindsight won't be able to make a y2k connection to them convincingly.]

What will happen if the oil supply is drastically curtailed? If the 72-73 recession was brought on by an artificial blockade of oil by a greedy cartel, what will the effect of an actual production and distribution shortage be?

[It isn't at all clear that y2k bugs will lead to such a shortage. There are some potential problems throughout the chain of oilfields, shipping, ports, refineres, trucking, you name it. On balance, most of these potential problems aren't well identified, simply because identified problems get fixed. So most of the threat involves systems that have yet to be examined in sufficient detail to quantify the danger. Yes, we can assume that what we don't know must be in terrible shape, and we can assume that it isn't. We can assume the sun will go nova tomorrow.

Nobody questions that key shortages can have macroeconomic ramifications, and that many key shortages simultaneously can have major impacts. Right now, we're trying to determine just what will go wrong and how seriously these problems will be. And again, we just don't know. Nobody knows. We can assume shortages because we can't prove they won't happen, and we can assume no shortages because we can't prove they *will* happen. We must realize that our assumptions are still *substitutes* for data, because the relevant data are simply not available.]

What will be the effect of the largest speculative stock bubble in the history of the world exploding at the same time serious y2k problem begin manifesting themselves? Why does the popular business press seem to think that we can all get rich by sitting on our ass and pouring our hard earned money into a slot machine?

[This is just ranting, I'm afraid. There are legitimate differences of opinion among experts as to how much the market is overvalued, if any. Nobody knows when a 'correction' might happen (which of course need not be based on any underlying fundamentals).

Why assume there will be a y2k correction? Why assume serious y2k problems will begin to manifest themselves at all, much less at the same time? You need to support your rants with more than just pejoritive language.]

Contrary to your unfounded optimism, numerous banking and financial sources are now talking about the imported data problem. What will be the net economic effect of a world banking system that is no longer reliable and cannot sustain international trade?

[This sounds like deliberate distortion to me. We read an article that says "We've passed our tests, we keep dreaming up more tests and passing them, we'll continue to test right up to the end of the year, and we're *still* considering everything that *might* go wrong anyway, for contingency planning purposes. And imported data is one of those contingencies we consider highly unlikely, but we're guarding against that too."

And you say they are "now talking about the imported data problem" as though they just realized it, and as though it were expected to be serious. The question you ask here, "what will be the net economic effect of a world banking system that is no longer reliable and cannot sustain international trade" is EXACTLY what the financial institutions are asking. And they're answering this question in every way they can. Remediation, testing, contingency planning. The idea is to make sure that this *doesn't* happen, rather than just assume it will happen and worrying about it.]

According to conventional wisdom, Y2K is now a non-problem. It was solved. What will happen if Russ Kelly's experts are right and y2k is a 7? Will the relatively few people that have prepared up to this point make a difference? How will JIT production and delivery cope with the hoards of people that will empty store shelves in the waning days of this year?

[Russ Kelly's experts are all over the map, and their scale is so hazy as to render most numbers meaningless anyway. And quite seriously, I ask you how much more knowledgeable those experts might be than you and I, and many of the regulars here? Some are technical people, and know a whole lot about a relatively tiny slice of this pie. Others are non-technical, and can do no more than speculate about what might happen IF. Speculation can be fun, but we should be more concerned with resolving the IFs.]

Assuming that we avoid a starvation crisis here at home by using US stockpiles of food,

[Why assume that? Why not assume we'll starve anyway? Why not assume there won't be any food choices? Why assume at all? Farming equipment has passed y2k tests OK. Major trucking firms (Yellow) declare themselves completely compliant. Retailers are now testing their automated inventory systems. We have pretty good indication that the whole food chain won't be impacted very much at all. NOW, just where is this starvation coming from? What will cause it?]

what happens to the 1,000,000,000 people in this world that are dependent on our surplus?

[Numbers are important here. The US doesn't feed a billion people outside our borders, or anything close to that. Yes, our surpluses might actually reach a billion people in small quantities of this and that. Far, far fewer than a billion would starve without those surpluses even if they were 100% stopped (and there is NO evidence that that will happen, and a great deal of evidence that we'll have an export slowdown at most, and maybe not much of that. So why exaggerate?]

Will the disease and violence cause by such a massive global famine be contained to third world countries?

[Oops, check it out. I think the whole pessimistic viewpoint is being epitomized right here.

We've read that there are still some problems remaining in the US food supply chain. Those actually working on various parts of this chain don't expect big problems remaining next year, but there's no denying that some will exist.

Somehow, 'a' extrapolates this into the entire chain collapsing! And this in turn means no exports. And this in turn means starvation worldwide. And this in turn means disease and violence. And this in turn means the disease and violence will redound onto the US! We have a whole chain of unsupported assumptions, each more farfetched than the last.

This is what I call the conviction that *every* lost nail will cost the entire kingdom. Combined with the conviction that nobody will be able to replace any nails at all. I fear we've left the real world far behind.]

How will we cope with natural disasters in a world that has been ravaged by the techno-economic failures listed above?

[And the beat goes on. Yes, we have solid evidence that there will be some number of failures, and that some of these will have economic impact. But when I say 'solid evidence' I'm making a statement of probability -- that the system of systems has too many bugs, interacting in too many ways, to hold out much hope of nipping them all in the bud. I'm willing to *assume* that some major bugs won't be repairable in time to avert serious problems for some people. But getting from there to a world ravaged by technological collapse and natural disasters requires an incredible suspension of disbelief. It requires a *refusal* to recognize any feedback mechanisms in politics, economics, management and organization, technology, or anything. Remediation (now going on) is a feedback process -- see a problem, fix the problem. This is what people do.]

How bad will the 11 year peak of solar storms be?

[Anybody's guess. And it's a pure guess. You are implying, once again, that if we don't know, therefore they'll be very bad.]

How bad will this years forecast of the worst hurricane season on record be? How many will die if tornadoes can not be forecast reliably?

[This is a good question. How many have been saved because of reliable tornado forecasts (as opposed to people who can *see* it coming and get out of the way?). Hurricanes and tornadoes do some damage, and don't have any date problems at all [g]. And if a hurricane or tornado is bearing down on a populated area, it's never been true that we can pick up that area and move it out of the way, no matter how much warning we get.]

Crop failures? Ozone depletion? Rising sea levels? Earthquakes? Y2k won't happen in a vacuum.

[Groan. We need to ask, to what degree will y2k make natural disasters worse, and why? The best argument I've seen is that IF everyone is disabled by computer bugs, outside help will be less available. But this presupposes everyone being disabled. WILL they be disabled? That issue needs to be addressed.

Basically, all you've said here is that IF every possible unknown (that isn't addressed in time) turns out to be the worst case possible, and IF there are enough of those worst cases, and IF all of this is compounded by unrelated external factors, THEN we'll be in real trouble.

In real life, worst cases in what we've addressed already have been pretty rare. And those have been fixed. And we've addressed the most important systems first.

So your pessimism isn't really based on the information we have, which isn't all that bad. Instead, it's based on rampant fear of the unknown, and the assumption that everything we don't know (which is all too much) will *necessarily* turn out to be disastrous.

No, it's not impossible. Being killed by a meteor isn't impossible. But you'd be better off digging into what little data we have to determine probabilities and likelihoods, rather than wailing about how bad everything we *don't* know is going to turn out to be. And you'd get a clearer idea about those probabilities if you examined *all* the data we have, rather than just the limited subset of worst- case speculations.]

And this is a partial list, and does not even consider the more technical problems that y2k will bring.

You don't have to be Milne or Infomagic to see that we are facing a larger problem than the pollyannas realize. My goal is not to induce panic, but to persuade as many people as possible to take this situation seriously and prepare to the maximum extent possible.

[Nothing wrong with preparation. But you *do* need a little Milne or Infomagic in you to jump from some things *might* fail to all things might fail to all things will fail to all things will fail and nothing will be done about them. *Especially* when the evidence we have now still says that some things *might* fail.]

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 26, 1999.

'Further are you suggesting that the individual prepare for war by stockpiling food and supplies. Wouldn't that diminish the "share" that every one gets with rationing?'

This concept has been addressed many times on this forum. The idea is that by stockpiling (say canned beans) that the great pile of canned beans in the Universal Warehouse will be depleted and that when the time to eat (01/01/2000) comes around there will be less in the Universal Warehouse to be shared by all. Just read a few of the threads on JIT inventory, and learn a bit about how food gets to the table and all the processes in between.

-- Shelia (Shelia@active-stream.com), May 26, 1999.

Flint,

" The fate of the world ecomomy is now totally dependent on the growth of the U.S. economy, which is dependent on the stock market, whose growth is dependent on about 50 stocks, half of which have never reported any earnings".

Paul Volker, former Federal Reserve Chairman

-- CT (ct@no.yr), May 26, 1999.

Shelia, just answer the question about the effect of rationing, that is, the government intervening on this JIT process and redirecting the flow to critical needs. Try to follow the thread, Kevin pointed to WWII rationing. Stockpiling does create a wonderful black market though, doesn't it? Maybe that's why the government frowned on this type of activity, huh?

A, good side stepping. Yeah, "I've answered this many times before" bull crap. How do you arrive at these conditions with a year miscalculation?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 26, 1999.

Flint: your longwinded rebuttle does not change the facts, and there is no use in comparing these odds to a supernova or even Paul Davis's "all electrons in the universe converging into one point". This is not a matter of seeing the glass half empty or half full. This is a matter of reasonable doubt. I have reasonable doubt that these things, or a significant subset thereof, will not occur.

Maria: you said

A, good side stepping. Yeah, "I've answered this many times before" bull crap.

Do you really want me to reiterate all of my concerns about software and firmware? If your small mind, that apparently only sees y2k in one dimension, needs a recap of problems on the technology front, point your browser to

Why I am still gloomy

How do you arrive at these conditions with a year miscalculation?

one more time for the reading impaired:

the point of my post is to demonstrate that there are several other crises that will peak along with y2k.

Shelia: Another benefit of early stockpiling is that the distribution problem is already taken care of.

-- a (a@a.a), May 26, 1999.

Maria,

Are you now saying that date miscalculations will not cause problems?

This issue really isn't that complex. There is a risk associated with Y2K and a (potentially greater) risk with all of the other issues that "a" raised. I guess it comes down to how lucky a person you think you are. Do you feel lucky punk?

-- nope (privacy@please.com), May 26, 1999.

Nope:

You're right, there are risks. They are impossible to quantify very accurately, though every test being performed is a step in the right direction (even though we only read about those tests which are actually publicity stunts).

On another thread (I lost it now), someone claimed to have found a story (no link) saying 50% of banks are not expected to complete remediation. And in the very next post, someone asked for the link to the story that "50% of banks would FAIL." And that questioner didn't even notice the change from not finished to failure -- to him, they were identical!

I personally expect very few if any organizations to be 100% compliant at rollover or for years afterwards. And I expect very few organizations to experience fatal problems either. There is a huge difference between 'some computer bugs' and organizational death. But there are some here who appear to believe that nobody can survive even the slightest symptoms. Noncompliant doesn't mean dead.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 26, 1999.

Hey, nope! I've been using the e-mail address of privacy@please.com since last summer. If you wouldn't mind, I would really appreciate it if you would use another one. That way, there is no confusion as to the author of the remarks. Thanks.

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), May 26, 1999.
Gayla:

I sure hope you or the other poster don't begin a thread in which I find myself responding. I get more E-mail daily from this board stating that the E-mail didn't go through succcessfully than any others. There are messages associated with posting on this forum that ask that you NOT use a phony E-mail address. I won't be responding to any more threads that A originates for exactly this reason.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 26, 1999.

When you initiate a thread, you can request that responses NOT be emailed to you. This is so that if you use a false address, everyone else won't get bounces. "A" ignores this (or maybe he doesn't understand it).

-- Anita (flintc@mindspring.com), May 26, 1999.
Noncompliant doesn't mean dead.--Flint

It can when its an accident: nuclearplant, chemical manufacturing, oil refinery, life-support system in a problem riddled hospital, etc. ... etc.

Diane how do you (personally) prepare for war?--Maria

Psychologically/Mentally: For a good reference read about the grieving process described by Dr. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross in her book On Death and Dying. She posits that we all move through a five- stage grief cycle whenever we experience a severe loss or, in this case, anticipate loss through a coming crisis: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and move on to the point of acceptance.

Ive accepted that war, or domestic terrorism is quite possible, next year, and somewhat Y2K related. Saddens me, greatly. Working on taking Red Cross classes.

Spiritually: whatever your belief system, spend time connecting to it and the greater light.

I do not fear dying, because, I KNOW theres more beyond the other side. Its helps when youve already faced your death, and survived.

Physically: Be prepared to be as self-reliant as possible, taking care of basics: water, food supplies, shelter, heat, medical needs, seed supply (to grow new food in gardens), etc., and have a mobile contingency plan for everything. Be prepared to camp.

Emotionally: Remain flexible and adaptable, trusting your survival skills and abilities, and your inner guidance. Connect with simple joys, as much as possible, to lift the heart during the low times.

Remember: Shift Happens... daily.

For you Maria, getting ready for war would be COMPLETELY different. And so it should be, for everyone makes their own preparedness choices based upon their personal experience and abilites.

So, how WOULD you get ready for war, Maria? Share with us.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), May 26, 1999.

Sorry about the Notify problem. Must be a new default as no one has ever complained 'cept Hoff 2 days ago. I will put a yellow sticky on the screen just to keep from inconveniencing you nice folk again.

Bad, bad, a. :)

-- a (a@a.a), May 26, 1999.

Diane:

I was speaking of organizational death. Like how 50% of banks might experience y2k problems somehow becomes 50% of banks will fail. There is a BIG difference between having computer bugs and going broke, as you should well know (since every organization suffers bugs every day).

I don't think ANYONE will be compliant. I expect very few to to out of business because of y2k bugs.

As for individual deaths atttributable directly to y2k, I can't say. Especially when every industrial accident is currently suspected of being a y2k problem, and some of these are fatal to someone now and then.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), May 26, 1999.

Ah-ha -- as we could have guessed. Flint's last post bottom-lines with basically the following: Y2K WILL NOT BE FIXED IN TIME, BUT ITS NO BIGGEE.

Ladies and gentlemen, I submit that this is in fact the Last Defense of the Pollyannas. This will be their mantra come July, when all of the widely publicized June 30 compliance deadlines are missed, and yet another set are issued.

The pollyannas have nothing left but this -- that Y2K never really that big a deal, and silly us for ever thinking that it was.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), May 26, 1999.
King of Spain:

"Ah-ha -- as we could have guessed. Flint's last post bottom-lines with basically the following: Y2K WILL NOT BE FIXED IN TIME, BUT ITS NO BIGGEE."

I'm actually getting a bit tired of defending Flint's posts, but for some reason he's been misread here a LOT lately. Where exactly did he say this, KOS? I agree 100% with him that 100% compliance is NOT required by 100% of companies/government to keep mainstream America rolling along watching mud-wrestling on T.V. [I ASSUME that's your favorite, as you continue to mention it.]

Ladies and gentlemen, I submit that this is in fact the Last Defense of the Pollyannas. This will be their mantra come July, when all of the widely publicized June 30 compliance deadlines are missed, and yet another set are issued.

Where exactly did you get the impression that Flint was a pollyanna? You may just find out that his cache is bigger than YOUR cache...or would that be a threat to your manlihood? [grin]

WHAT exactly happens when June 30 compliance deadlines are missed? Aren't YOU expecting the "BIG ONE" (quoting Redd Foxx) on 01/01/2000?

The pollyannas have nothing left but this -- that Y2K never really that big a deal, and silly us for ever thinking that it was.

I don't believe that Flint has EVER stated that Y2k never really was a big deal. Is there something that you disagree with that you're not stating in your posts?

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), May 26, 1999.

Diane, Your preparations are rules to follow for everyday life, not something above and beyond. Life is filled with changes; these "war preparatations" (as you call them) help to accept these changes. Somehow I thought you'd give some additional preps. You're right about me being different than you. Since I joined the military some twenty years ago, I've been well aware of the consequences of war. The mental preps came a long time ago for me.

A, thanks for the link. I haven't had time to look through it but I will. You still dodged the answer, though. I want to know your thought process. How do you get from a year miscalucation to point b to point c to point the world will collapse. Can you do that or are your thought processes too convoluted?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 27, 1999.

Maria,

If you don't follow the rules for everyday life, AND prepare to be self-sustaining, which is NOT what is currently followed, you'll have a harder time when faced with... "something above and beyond."

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), May 27, 1999.

Diane, What??? You'll have to explain that transcendental comment. I thought you were going to say something more specific about war preps, not just "camping". I thought you were going to mention how tuned in you are to world events and would read the strategic warning signs, then run to a neutral country before the events took place.

You gave your typical "tree hugging", "angels" response. FWIW, I'm well aware of the grief phases, practiced a few times; well aware of how to survive with no power, food shortages; well aware of how to deal with life changes, many have come my way; not afraid of death and understand spiritual phenomenon. So you're saying war preps are no different from everyday preps.

Lisa, What the hell do you think our founding fathers were? Your responses are starting to show a strain. I just re-read that. Our forefathers were rich, elite, landowners protecting what they had, ensuring the government wouldn't take it from them. Hate to burst that little bubble of yours, but they were not the "Robin Hood" kind promoting a welfare state. And BTW, this polly will share all that I have if the end comes on 1/1/00.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 27, 1999.

Maria: dove, that's what we're trying to get to here: self- preservation.

"And BTW, this polly will share all that I have if the end comes on 1/1/00."

What? a box of stove-top stuffing? a can of bean dip?

You got some diapers stashed? Some milk or formula? Are you trying to say you're prepared, but we're a bunch of idiots for suggesting there may be a reason to prepare?

-- lisa (lisa@lisa.lisa), May 27, 1999.

A, where are you? Are you playing with yourself again?

Lisa, I've never said don't prepare. I have at lease 30 days of supplies in my pantry (yes one of them is dried milk). My pantry is six feet. I'm very frugal. I buy large quantities when they are on sale. I have a stand up freezer, wood burning stove, 500 gallon tank of water buried in the front yard (house built in 1982 on a natural creek - needed to solve the water problem), sun room for passive solar, lots of camping equipment (been on two week camping trips many times in my life). You may have missed my earlier posts; I can survive because I know how. I'm not telling you not to prepare Lisa, I'm merely trying to find out why you believe in a collapse of the world. That was my first post - "I don't get it...how do you conclude..." Still waiting for an answer.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 27, 1999.

Maria, to quote an enemy/buddy of mine:

Great Coodily-Moodily!!!!

No wonder you're so sanguine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm going to have to recover for a bit and I will get back to answer that.

-- Lisa (lisa@work.now), May 27, 1999.

Congratulations Lisa, you finally became an adult. If Y2K did this for you, great. ("I've (finally!) learned the details of finance, economics & govt. that I've always ignored. I feel like I could test out of 60 credit hours, entirely due to Y2K research. ") Now maybe you can grow even more in the upcoming months and try to think logically. ....We know that a can't.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 27, 1999.
Whoa, mama.

I was choking over your stash.

Now, (pronounced the way Ross P. pronounces "now".)

Tell me how an apartment dweller, living from paycheck to paycheck (or welfare disbursement to WD, for that matter) can ever hope to achieve the prep level that you have. You're proving my point: you're prepared, and you're happy to share with neighbors, but anybody beyond that circle (roughly 269 million people) is flat on their own. You assume you're typical, or something, and that the inner-city folks will prepare as a matter of course.

BTW, I came off a 9 and made a three-point landing to a 5 when the probability of grid failure was put to rest in January.

OK: do you admit that a prepared populace will not panic?. Can you further concede that the time for the nation to prepare is now?.

If so, then why the hell are you constantly starting trouble on a forum whose stated intent is dissemination of preparation info?????

And why do you act so surprised when somebody pushes back??

-- Lisa (lisa@work.now), May 27, 1999.

That's the whole point, it has nothing to do "with the prep level" I have. It's been a matter of economics, nothing more. I'm not preparing for Y2K, these items (dare I say even that dried milk) was purchased fifteen years ago or more. Back in the 70's with the energy crisis, the gov gave incentives for solar additions to the house - - guess what? I took advantage of these incentives. It's my way of life, nothing to do with Y2K. Once again I don't care if you prepare or not. Have a good time in following your choices in life. Care to answer my question since a is not responding? What logic leads you to conclude the end?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 27, 1999.
Moderation questions? read the FAQ