Ed Yardeni T-200 Conference

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

Ed Yardeni's T-200 Conference is online at:


I understand Yardeni will be releasing a survey tomorrow. Yardeni, chief economist at Deutsche Bank, has been a leading Y2K commentator.

From his Y2K Reporter:

"I think I know enough about Y2K now to give you a more detailed assessment of my subjective probabilities of the five alternative scenarios. I assign 10% and 5% probabilities to the most optimistic and the most pessimistic scenarios, respectively. Unfortunately, most discussions and debates of the subject tend to focus on these two extremes, namely, either it is a hoax or it is doomsday."

[I took the libery of editing Yardeni's specific predictions table for reasons of format. The full text can be found at:



"Minor disruptions. 10%

Same impact as natural disaster. 20% Multiple problems will cause modest 6 month recession. 25%

Major global recession lasting 12-24 months. 40%

Depression lasting 2-5 years. 5%"

When opening the T-200 Y2K Conference, Yardeni commented on his 5% prediction of a depression:

Five percent is really not much to get worried about.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 17, 1999


Lest we forget that Mr. Yardeni is STILL a SHILL for the securities industry.


-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 17, 1999.

Mr. Decker -

Perhaps you missed these other threads:

Yardeni's Latest Conference now on line

A Reporter's Notes on Dr. Ed Yardeni's 200 DAY CONFERENCE (6/15/99

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), June 17, 1999.

Ray that's a pretty brainless response.

Yardeni brought together a bunch of people for the ActionDay conference, as he did 100 and 200 and 300 days ago.

I guess you think all of them are shills too? (oh I forgot...unless they're Doomers, they're shills, or idiots, or bedwetters, or something)


-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), June 17, 1999.

Chicken Big, always a pleasure to get a response out of you.

Yes, Ed Yardeni is STILL a SHILL for the securities industry. The ONLY difference between him and the rest of the Wall Street Shills is that he has at least mentioned y2k as a possible problem for the Shillsters. Don't believe he has really changed his position much even as the EVIDENCE mounts with regard to the severity of y2k.


-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 17, 1999.

Decker - "Yardeni, chief economist at Deutsche Bank, has been a leading Y2K commentator."

Yardeni is "the Chief Economist and Global Investment Strategist of Deutsche Bank Securities in New York" (yardeni.com) and is not retired or deceased.

-- Get it (right@Mr.Drexpert), June 17, 1999.

The first three lines on the page referenced:


"Prepare for the worst. Hope for the best."

Dr. Edward Yardeni

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), June 17, 1999.

"Unfortunately, most discussions and debates of the subject tend to focus on these two extremes, namely, either it is a hoax or it is doomsday." It's as if Yardeni has visited this forum.

I think his Y2K Reporter is well done. He obviously has done some research and has far better connections than most. Based on his comments, Yardeni considers depression a genuine long shot. And depression is well short of the social and economic meltdown bandied about on this forum. Of course, because he doesn't predict doomsday, he suffers the usual attacks. A "shill?"

I did read the other threads, but Yardeni's comments (and the others) seem to warrent further consideration.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 17, 1999.

I'm with Ray. I don't think that Yardeni, in the position he's in, can really afford to speculate on realistic odds of global depression.

Think Alan Greenspan. Think sneeze.

-- a (a@a.a), June 17, 1999.


You say a depression is well short of a social and economic meltdown? Maybe I'm not following you here. Do you have personal experience with living through a genuine depression and can tell us why it wasn't a meltdown. From what I gather, when we went from the "roaring 20's" into the Great Depression is seemed to be *the end of the world as they knew it.* Lasted more than 10 years. Untold misery. So, since this seems to be the "roaring 90's" are you saying that another depression won't be such a horrible thing?

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), June 17, 1999.

The link to Dr. Edward Yardeni's Y2K Reporter:


-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), June 17, 1999.

This is what Yardeni STILL has to say, in his Y2KBook: "As of May 1999, I still see a 70% chance of a severe global recession."

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), June 17, 1999.

Been pondering the scenarios alot lately, too. Cory's ranking of "7" hasn't changed as far as I know, Yardeni's numbers have stayed at 40% chance of 12-24 months global recession, with 5% chance of TEOTWAWKI. It's hard to plan for a 5-7/8 scenario. Easier to do bump in the road and 10. Easier to think about total collapse than hard economic times. That's the emotional/mental roller coaster of this Y2k thing.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), June 17, 1999.

YO....Mr. Decker, I'd enjoy hearing your response to Gordon's question. By ALL means Montana Man. Step up to the microphone! With the evidence to date....it is TOTALLY beyond me how ANYONE could be spouting the "recession yada"......Depression appears to be the "bump in the road" to me.

-- Will continue (Farming@home.com), June 17, 1999.

Gordon, here's something you might find interesting.

From David A. Shannon's The Great Depression (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 2nd printing, 1960) [still in print, available at Amazon Books and used book stores].

The tone of this article by Frank A. Vanderlip, former president of the National City Bank of New York, indicates a disillusion with American financial institutions that would have been unthinkable by a business leader only a few years earlier. Frank A. Vanderlip, "What About the Banks?" The Saturday Evening Post, CCV (November 5, 1932), PP. 3-4.

The present economic disturbance has been so severe that it has made even some changes in our language. No longer is it an apt metaphor to say that anything is "as safe as a bank." The word "securities" has almost become obsolete. An investment that drops in price to a tenth or, perhaps, even to a twentieth of its former range is not a security; it is a jeopardy. The page of stock-and-bond quotations might well be headed Quotations of Risks and Hazards. To call them securities in the light of their fluctuations is ironical.

In 1720, a financial debacle added to the English language a phrase which has persisted in common world-wide use for two centuries. A hopelessly exploded financial venture is to this day called a South Sea Bubble.

The South Sea Company in its time was the rival of the Bank of England. It was the ambition of the Tories that it should supplant the Bank of England. When the bubble burst, the extreme decline in the price of the stock was from 1000 to 135. The company withstood the shock, however, and continued in business for eighty years.

Here is an example from our own times; United States Steel and General Motors stocks, the two leading industrials of the country, declined from the high quotations of 1929 to 8 per cent of that price. The decline in the stock of the South Sea Company was only to 13-1/2 per cent of its hghest quotation. Take another example: The stock of what has long been o ne of the premier banks of the country declined from 585 to 23-1/2. That is to say, it fell to 4 per cent of its highest quotation. The decline in the market price of this great American banking institution was therefore more than three times as severe as was the fall in the stock of the South Sea Company.

The illustration is by no means a unique one. There were innumerable American bank stocks which made a more distressing record. Between October 1, 1929, and August 31, 1932, 4835 American banks failed. They had deposits aggregating $3,263,049,000. The stocks of many of those banks not only fell to zero; some did worse than that, for they carried on to the shoulders of the stockholders further liability, which had to be met, in addition to the complete loss of the money which had been invested when the stocks were bought.

If I draw illustrations from the banking field to indicate the limits to which the depression reached, it is only because I am writing about banks and not because the banks are the one glaring example marking the extreme of the financial cataclysm. The railroads, the insurance companies, the building-and-loan societies and mortgage companies would quite as well depict the situation.

The decline in the price of bank stocks was only a minor phase of our debacle. The quoted value of all stocks listed on the New York Stock Exchange was, on September 1, 1929, $89,668,276,854. By July 31, 1932, the quoted value of all stocks had fallen to $15,633,479,577.

Stockholders had lost $74,000,000,000. This figure is so large that not many minds can grasp it. It is $616 for every one of us in America. It is, roughly, three times what we spent in fighting the World War. The bursting of the South Sea Bubble concerned a single company. In the bursting of the New York Stock Exchange bubble , the value of all stocks fell to 17 per cent of their September 1, 1929, price--almost as great a drop as the South Sea company stock, with its fall to 13 per cent of its top price. Remember that this calculation is not a selected example. It is made from the aveage of all stocks listed on the Exchange.

The South Sea Bubble wasn't so much! We have done pretty well in the way of bubbles in our own time. All financial history shows no parallel to what we have been going through. Never before, in this country, or anywhere else, has there been such a general loss in "security" values.

The decline in the quoted value of New York listed stocks is only part of the story. The total of real-estate mortgages in default, particularly mortgages on city property, is unexampled. The value of real estate can no longer be accurately appraised, because the market for real estate has been practically paralyzed.

The loss of $74,000,000,000 in the value of New York listed stocks is something more than a mere item of financial data. Implicated in it are ten million cruel heartaches. I am using "million" as an adjective, and making an understatement. The laborious savings of an uncounted number of lifetimes have been swept away. Prudent provision for the future has been made to contrast unfavorably with the pleasures of spendthrift waste. . .

Not only did our investments shrivel in the last three years, but we even frequently lost our pocketbooks. Cash in hand, left for safekeeping in a bank, often went the way of our investments, and worse. Almost $3,000,000,000 of our daily-used cash funds were sequestered in the doubtful asssets of the 4835 insolvent banks. Widespread communities were left with only the mattress as a safe depository, and with little to put into it. People became so frightened in regard to the safety of the banks that they locked up in safe-deposit vaults, or secreted elsewhere, more than $1,500,000,000.

This is a shameful and humiliating exhibition. It is uniquely bad. Across the border in Canada, there was not a single bank failure during our period of depression, and one must go back to 1923 to find even a small one. Nowhere else in the world at any time, were it a time of war, or of famine, or of disaster, has any other people recorded so many bank failures in a similar period as did we. We were not experiencing a war, a famine, or any other natural disaster. All the economic tribulations we have undergone in the last three years have been man-made troubles, and Nature has continued to shower us with an easy abundance--more, indeed, than we have known how to distribute with economic wisdom.

Human stupidity and cupidity were the taproots of this great financial disaster. Those are the evils which wil always beset us. There have, however, been revealed faults and weaknesses in our banking and investment practices that account in part for the extreme nature of this experience. Isn't it about time that we began thoughtfully to examine some of the fundamentals of our banking and investment theories and methods?

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), June 17, 1999.

Here we go.

When I moved to the Mid Atlantic region, it was "the end of my world as I knew it." So was my tour in the military. Can we agree to move beyond this definition of TEOTWAWKI?

Based on my reading of the forum, some people feel Y2K will have more impact than the Great Depression... a total social and economic collapse of the nation. For practical purposes, this is what I call the "end of the world" scenario.

I did not live through the Great Depression, but I certainly heard stories from my great grandmother... usually when I had let the last sliver of soap fall down the drain or some other "wasteful" behavior. As a reader of history, I have enjoyed some good books on the era. Even during the low point of the Depression, the employment rate was 75%. Three out of four people had jobs.

Without doubt, these were hard times. As always, the poor suffered the most. Despite the constant challenges, the factories ran. People went to and from work. You could walk to the local store and buy a wide variety of goods. The police enforced the laws, perhaps turning a blind eye to the local bootleggers who defied Prohibition. People met, fell in love and were married. Children were born. One of the most common comments my grandfather made was, "We didn't know we were poor." There were birthday parties and Sunday picnics after church. Good hearted people did what they could to help the next person. My great grandmother fed more than one train-riding stranger in exchange for some modest labor.

They were hard times, but those hard times also forged the character of the men and women who won the Second World War and led our nation into the prosperity of the 50s. They were the same folks bewildered at the social unrest of the 60s and the repulsed at self-involved 70s. We are a spoiled child of a society. While I rue the suffering caused by hard times, I sometimes wonder if it isn't the good spanking this country needs.

Read carefully, friend, about the Great Depression. Then read the end of the world scenarios. You can decide if there is a difference.

As for me, I still fret when that last sliver of soap slips down the drain.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 17, 1999.

Check out this thread from deBuggery tonight:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb237006&MyNum=9 29666130&P=Yes&TL=929662818

DECKER: While CPR may disagree strongly, I agree with Yardeni on the prediction of a recession next year with Y2K as a contributing factor. After reading his web pages, I find Yardeni more somewhat more credible than Yourdon on economic matters.

PEG: I happen to believe that CPR would NOT DISAGREE...Am I wrong Charles?

CPR: What makes you ever think I am optimistic about the Economy next year?

So it looks like, in June 99, the polly's are catching a whiff. A recession is coming.

Aug 99. They see smoke. Hmm...market's gonna tank...looks like a depression.

Oct 99. They see fire. Oh My God! This could mean TEOTWAWKI!

Dec 99. Their supply of smoked caviar runs out. Holy Hell! Its the End of the World!

-- a (a@a.a), June 17, 1999.


I don't personally put a lot of stress on TEOTWAWKI, except for that last W, WE. I am not locked into that scenario in any apocalyptic way, but if things change enough to cause a meaningful reordering of the way most of live, then the "We Know It" part is valid. What do you have to say about the current gold trading situation? From what I gather, there is a ponzi game going on that involves a lot of international banks up to their ears. A derivitive trading game that is so dangerous that it can destroy the banking system "as we know it." Do you believe in that situation? Maybe you could tell me what you think the dangers are right now, or if there is no danger.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), June 17, 1999.

Thank you Mr. Decker. What would the Depression have been like without fossil fuels? Electricity? Farm land? Medicines? How many relied upon welfare? Child support? Was the government still operational? Were their communication systems still in place? What was their reliance on imports? Do you have any clue at all what we are thinking? Are you thinking? Or do you merely flex your tongue for the experience? You sir, are completely clueless and a considerable bore, however, I know for a fact that plenty of people think you're really, really smart and love to read your phoo-phoo. I know this, because you told me so.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 17, 1999.

Note also that unlike the first go round in 1930, there are a dozen countries with the nuclear bomb and probably another dozen more with assorted biological and chemical weapons.

-- a (a@a.a), June 18, 1999.

A Commentary,

Both Old Git and Will Continue have got me to thinking. They are making some very good points. In fact, the whole Yourdon forum has been terrific for that. Look here. Look there. Look even farther, over there. And the looking uncovers details and details and details. I begin to feel like Gulliver, who thought his size and strength was sufficient, but then he wakes up to find that a whole bunch of little "things" have got him wrapped up and tied down and helpless. Not one big thing. Dozens of little things, but the end result is *caught.* This is why I am inclined toward the Yardeni and Yourdon thinking. Complex little ropes that taken all together spell defeated. This is why I have a problem with any Polly approach that ignores these little details, or minimizes them, and says that we can deal with every little problem as it arises. For Gulliver, if it had been just a rope or two or three, he could have just rose up and carried on as usual. But once it reached a certain number of ropes, well, it was The End Of The World As He Knew It. That's what I see all around me, out there, right now. That's why I think the basic idea of TEOTWAWKI is a valid concept.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), June 18, 1999.

Wonderful analogy Gordon....you're great at that. Good imagination, clear thinking, logic, common sense, direct, to the point.....you're already married, right?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 18, 1999.

Mr. Decker,

I have some interesting questions whose answers might shed some light on my own concerns about how Y2K problems could be more devastating than whatever happened during the Great Depression. In what year did Social Security come on the scene? How many Americans are on the dole, today? In what year did Medicare go into effect? How many Americans depend on Medicare, today? In what year did Welfare (as we understand it) begin? How many Americans depend on it? When did unemployment checks become popular? How many Americans collect unemployment checks, today? This is just a start, but I look forward to your research and answers.

While I do agree with you that social breakdown must seem a strange and unlikely event (after all, today is just peachy and some internet stocks seem to be rallying), I am almost certain that you will agree with me that there are many things different today than way back when-- not to mention the incredible differences in the racial, ethnic, and moral character of Americans, today. More than these differences in the citizenry, their needs, and their expectations, the seemingly very different variables of the threat make the analogy to 1929 less convincing-- whether this is for the better or the worse.

Sincerely, Stan Faryna

-- Stan Faryna (info@giglobal.com), June 18, 1999.

OK, here's TEOTWAWKI for me. Nuclear blast at Tinker AFB,MWC,OK.,home of those AWACS. Probability? Don't know, small but not impossible, perhaps other areas are more likely. My family and I live due south. Then,y2k, first few months a 3/4 with rolling power outages, on off municipal water supplies, then maybe a jump to 5-7 as global repercussions hit in 6-18 month time frame. What social/economic impact happens in this greater metropolitan area? NO GAS. Got to have gas to go go go on the interstates to get anywhere. When I moved back here from East Coast 15 years ago all I could think of was that I had forgotten about how far apart everything is, the Land Of Spread Out As Far As The Horizon. Got to have gas to get to work, no major mass transit services like the "T", MBTA in Boston metro area, bus lines slow from burbs to OKC, hardly no one carpools, one person in each car-type-thing on the interstates most of the time and everybody wants to do the drive thru hurry up I'm late scene. So, if it's a seven and we live way out in the boonies on a rural route with no neighbors and off a state highway 35 miles outside of OK how will we afford the RATIONED EXPENSIVE gas while furloughed three days a week if we have a job left at all? 7 is alot harder to plan for. No problem if it's a 10, we'll all stay home, hubby as well and watch for rovers if they can get out that far (and some will) plant our gardens in the spring and try to survive and be happy as best we can for as long we can. But a 5-7/8 I just don't know.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), June 18, 1999.

Very true Stan. Everything has changes. America has become engulfed by wide-spread Narcissism. It is only a matter of time until wide- spread selfishness manifests itself and affects the big picture. The American attitude has by no means been figured into the equation. Bursted bubbles will make all hell break loose, not to mention how Y2k will affect the misguided youths of this country. Smell those faltering roses. They may never smell the same again.

-- Feller (feller@wanna.help), June 18, 1999.

Forgot to mention another major TEOTWAWKI, probably more likely than the first, F-5 tornadoes.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), June 18, 1999.

Mr. Decker,

You forget that in the 1930's most business transactions were conducted with cash. Nowadays when a truck makes a delivery to your supermarket you can bet that they don't send the trucker on his way carrying big wads of cash. They either issue a check or call the main office to authorize a wire transfer.

If there is a bank 'holiday' (which seems almost a certainty at this point) then all this commerce STOPS! The lights can stay on, the gas pumps can still be flowing, but without a means to pay for (and GET paid for goods) the shelves will be empty.


-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), June 18, 1999.

As a net is made up of a series of ties, so everything in this world is connected by a series of ties. If anyone thinks that the mesh of a net is an independent, isolated thing, he is mistaken....


"The conveniences and comforts of humanity in general will be linked up by one mechanism, which will produce comforts and conveniences beyond human imagination. But the smallest mistake will bring the whole mechanism to a certain collapse. In this way the end of the world will be brought about."

Sufi Prophet Pir-o-Murshid Inayat Khan's prophecy (Complete Works, 1922 I, p. 158-9)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 18, 1999.

My father and grandfather were disgusted observers of the 60s, saving their worst scorn for "hippies" and "draft dodgers." They thought we were going to Hell in a handbasket. If you read history, you can find conservative older generations disgusted with the antics of youth... in any era. You can also find observers who are convinced the current generation is the most decadent, immoral and unprincipled in history.

It is no different today.

I have suspected the "end of the world" argument is based not as much on "Y2K" but on a "gut feel" about society. With some irony, I share a skepticism about modern American culture. I also know enough history to suggest "average" Americans have a unique gift for rising to heroics. Read the account of a flood or natural disaster (or if you have experienced one first hand), you will see my point. Of course, this is not a scientific point... I just think the "end of the world" folks underestimate the resiliance and ingenuity of everyday folks. (And idealize our earlier generations, just a bit.)

On to your questions, I think gold is very inexpensive. I think the Fed made a mistake in bailing out the LTCM.

There is no evidence to support the notion we will be completely without "fossil fuels? Electricity? Farm land? Medicines?" If there are shortages, prices will rise. Markets will reach new equilibriums. For some goods and services demand will drop and prices will fall. Now, Good Will, are you going to contribute anything to this forum, or is the full weight of your intellect limited to whining?

You have the analogy reversed Gordon. Y2K is our Gulliver and the IT community (and others) are the Lilliputians. While the problem looks overwhelming, there are many people working to solve it every day.

Stan, do you really want a speech on the New Deal? Keysnian economics? How about an analysis that suggests the greater percentage of workers on the government payroll makes us more resistant to depression? (laughter) The first few paragraphs are for you, Stan, just for you.

"If there is a bank 'holiday' (which seems almost a certainty at this point) then all this commerce STOPS!" Nonsense. The financial services sector will function and the Fed will ensure liquidity and preserve the system, even if it exacerbates a recession. (My fear)

Thanks for the comments.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 18, 1999.

Stan good thoughts, here is another one to ponder.

Look at the amount of corporate, government and personal indebtedness today versuses 1929. Corporations were financially in a much better position back then The same can be said about government and even personal debt.

The Piper is on his way!!


-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 18, 1999.

The lack of "spell check" wounds me again. My apologies to John Maynard Keynes.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 18, 1999.


The lack of spell check wounds us all.:-) Now, from your brief reply to my question about gold as a possible trigger to financial collapse, am I to infer that you either don't factor this in right now, or that you don't think it's an important element? Regarding the Gulliver analogy, I see that we look at it from two different perspectives, which in effect is why this forum is so heavily involved in talking about dangerous scenarios and preparation. You call it tomato and I call it tomahto. Gulliver sure did get caught by surprise though, didn't he? And I stick by my own viewpoint on that. What ever happened to the old statement that Y2k is not a technology problem, it's a people problem? Gulliver was a person, in danger.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), June 18, 1999.


"If there is a bank 'holiday' (which seems almost a certainty at this point) then all this commerce STOPS!"

:Nonsense. The financial services sector will function and the Fed will ensure liquidity and preserve the system, even if it exacerbates a recession. (My fear)

Exactly HOW will they do this? From what I've seen the banks are scared sh*tless about bank runs. If it's 'no big deal' why are they scared? How will the banks stay open with no cash?


-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), June 18, 1999.

AHHHHH, once again....when faced with reality....Mr. Regards "retires" for the evening. Seeking to regain his literary strength, so as to become "refreshed" to participate again, another fine day. I so dearly regret my meager intellect offends and fluffs you oh mentor! Perhaps it would be best for all concerned if you were to cease and desist all future correspondence with the likes of us peasants. Naturally, if you were to consider such an act...you may be forced to phoo-phoo with those who would be, themselves, unwilling to consume and retain your brilliant bull shit. I therefore extend my invitation for your continued deliveries of phoo-extrodinare. Fear not, your absence of spell-check....most of us are unable to spell for ourselves anyway. I eagerly anticipate any of your future corrections on my behalf.


-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 18, 1999.

Will, please oh please why don't you retire. You do need some literary strength. Though I suspect that you never had any intelligence whatsoever. You only spout garbage much like the sewage spill. Now go away and try to think about what you write BEFORE you write it.

Decker hit the nail on your head when he wrote, "There is no evidence to support the notion we will be completely without "fossil fuels? Electricity? Farm land? Medicines?" If there are shortages, prices will rise. Markets will reach new equilibriums. For some goods and services demand will drop and prices will fall. Now, Good Will, are you going to contribute anything to this forum, or is the full weight of your intellect limited to whining?"

You Will are the biggest fool, village idiot on this forum.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 18, 1999.

You know Maria...coming from you, that doesn't mean too much to me. I've been reading your crap for along time, right along with the other idiot savant.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 18, 1999.

Beg your pardon, Maria, I ain't exactly retired just yet. I am numero uno idiot on the forum.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), June 18, 1999.

You too Lisa? Damn...at least I'm in good company which is more than I can say for Margerete-Mary up there!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 18, 1999.

Will, I'm still waiting for some logical extrapolation of a year miscalulation to the scenario you believe. Try not to just waive your hands and say "it's all interconnected" or "I can see the total picture because I'm a part of the 10% who think with my brain".

No Lisa, you're not the idiot. Though, you may soon become one if you agree with a much more. You know how I feel about milne's sidekick, a.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 18, 1999.

I guess on Fridays .gov allows their TROLLS to come out and play. Does anyone have a nice sandbox for them?


-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 18, 1999.

Tech 32,

I work directly with several regional banks. I have not seen this fear in evidence. If push comes to shove, the Federal Reserve can swamp the system with liquidity... far beyond currency and demand deposits. A side point, many people have very little money available to withdraw from the banking system... and mountains of personal debt. Even if people withdraw money, they must recirculate the money to meet debt obligations. The Federal Reserve can make rules (and enforce them) to preserve the integrity of the system. The actions required to stem a panic, however, might create huge economic shock waves.

If you are "reality," Good Will, I am willing to consider psychedelic drugs as an alternative lifestyle. Thus far, I have not read one post where you actually offered any useful information. This forum already has a fair number of permanent critics. Why not try providing some new insight on Y2K?


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 18, 1999.

Kiss my ass Maria...I've seen it explained to you in perfectly logical terms on hundreds of occasions and you're still ranting for more. This is *JUNE 1999* dip-shit. Go figure. Go play big-brained- bull-shit with Decker, Poole, Flint, Brock, Anita, and any other narrowly focused butt-wipe you can find!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 18, 1999.

Decker: "I work directly with several regional banks."

PR/Damage control?

-- Lisa (lisa@work.now), June 18, 1999.

Just how much f*****G input do you require Decker? You're pathetic.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 18, 1999.

Decker commented:

"The Federal Reserve can make rules (and enforce them) to preserve the integrity of the system. "

Decker, granted the FR can make rules but they CANNOT preserve the INTEGRITY of a system that has no INTEGRITY left. Our monetary system has been DESECRATE,D by the very people that we put in charge to protect it over many years, just as all of those monetary systems before it. Ruben, Tillman, Rivlin and the rest of the government lackeys that are bailing out know what lies ahead.


-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 18, 1999.

"I work directly with several regional banks. "

That explains alot. If the banks aren't scared, why does every single piece of Y2K related literature they produce recommend that people keep their money in the bank? And don't give me that "it's not protected" crap. The odds of someone breaking into my house and finding and stealing my money are slim compared to the risk of not being able to get to it because of a bank run.

I have friends who despite being of _very_ modest means, have managed to sock away well over $10,000 in cash over the past 10 months. These are people who never would have been able to 'save' had they left it in the bank. Instead, they took their own money 'out of circulation' and pretended it wasn't there. They have done without some things, but my friend tells me it wasn't as hard as he thought it would be. All it took was changing their mindset.


-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), June 18, 1999.

Temper, temper.

In point of fact, only a small number of individuals believe Y2K will result in "the end of world."

These "serious pessimists" would have us believe they are right and everyone else is wrong. They want us to accept there is a business- government-media cabal actively "hiding" the truth about Y2K. (Not unlike the Kennedy assassination, the alien landing at Roswell and the New World Order.) They want us to ignore the majority of IT professionals who work with Y2K problems and do not think it will be "the end of the world." They want us to ignore even pessimistic economists like Ed Yardeni who predict a 70% chance of global recession and 5% chance of depression (too cheery.) They want us to listen to Gary North, a man who has been consistently (and wrongly) predicting the end of the world for two decades. They want us to believe development software metrics apply to a remediation project and that Y2K is just like any other software project. They want us to believe the "code is broken" and "we started too late." They want us to believe dark, anonymous Internet rumors like "the company I work for is way behind." They want us to ignore published reports with any positive information... regardless of the source.

Anyone who disagrees with the pessimists is "stupid" or "dishonest." A question like Lisa's is common enough to warrant its own verb, "shilling." Y2K shilling is implying or directly accusing the poster of working as a propaganda monger. No, Lisa, I do not work as a PR flak for the banking industry nor do I work for any Y2K-related interest

As for you, Good Will, I think you have proven your command of profanity. We are still waiting for evidence that you have a command of logic.

And Ray, whatever you may think about the Federal Reserve, you cannot dispute its power. Good or bad... the Federal Reserve will use its full weight to preserve the current system. If it comes down to an economic slugfest between the Feds and the forces of panic... there will be no winners.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 18, 1999.

Mr. Decker, Well said! Right on!

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), June 18, 1999.

Dr. Yardeni's Y2K predictions have not changed much in recent months. He obviously thinks the mostly likely scenario is a moderate to severe global recession of 1-2 years duration--a scenario that is plenty bad enough, I think, given the fragile geopolitical situation. I'm glad that Dr. Yardeni is still assigning only a 5% chance to the global depression scenario. Depressions tend to lead to nasty things like wars; major depressions in Germany and Japan in the 1920s and 1930s led to the sociopolitical movements that in turn gave us WWII.

I've corresponded with Dr. Yardeni via email perhaps 6-8 times over the past year. Last June, he agreed with my fears that if the Japanese banking system were to collapse, a global depression would be the likely result. (Japan is the world's largest creditor.) Now, as then, I think that's the key, insofar as global economic factors are concerned.

-- Don Florence (dflorence@zianet.com), June 18, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ