Hello,

Yesterday, I posted a thread after reading some economic news on-line;

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19991029/bs/stocks_leadall.1398.html

As I stated in my post, I don't follow the stock market. But I know a lot of you here do. I also have read many threads and post regarding the stock market as a possible leading economic indicator for Y2K.

In my original post, I stated to check out the on-line economic news instead of just cross posting it here. The article reports several positive facts and one negative fact. I purposely didn't cross post selected facts here. Basically, the post called for opinions regarding an immenent crash in light of the most recent good news -- and in light of the recent predictions from forumn members on a crash being immenent -- and not happening -- over and over again.

What I find interesting is the nature of the answers as a whole. Of the 16 answers, last I checked, 12 were negative in tone, two were "neutral" and two were positive. I counted those by snooze button and Nadine Zint as neutral and those by Deano and duh@duh.duh as positive. I'm quite surprised that 12 of 16 replies, or 75% were negative in tone.

What I find most revealing were the comments from RealGold and Brian McLaughlin SINGLING OUT THE SOLE SOURCE OF BAD NEWS IN THE ARTICLE I READ ABOUT NEW HOME SALES BEING DOWN BY 12%. I don't know what data these two were looking at, but I find it telling they chose the main sole negative fact (from the article above) to give as "evidence" for their pessimism; RealGold even stating that "this means three months from now, unemployment will RISE SHARPLY and the ECONOMY will TUMBLE SHARPLY". Sounds like a bad case of negitive bias to me.

Specifically, from the article, reporting on the market and economic news at midday on Friday 10-29-1999, the major points:

1) Dow up

2) Nasdaq up

3) S&P 500 up

4) US Treasury 30 year bond yield down (positive news)

5) Chigagoland Business Barometer up over epectations

6) New home sales down

7) Little worry from Alan Greenspans remarks late Thursday

8) NYSE; 2,040 issues advancing; 848 issues declining

9) NYSE; 103 stocks at new highs; 52 stocks at new lows

10) Thursdays employment cost index and gross domestic product reports showing little signs of inflation

11) Internet stocks big winners.

The article then goes on to talk about several stocks, most of which were up significantly. Regarding the 12% decline in new home sales (not new housing starts), it quoted Alan Sinai as attributing the decline to rising interest rates, a selloff in the stock market and a long boom in the sector. It further quotes him as predicting the slide in new home sales to continue for the rest of the year.

So, the issue is, why single out and focus only on the negative news? I think it is because many here have a very strong bias towards the negative. They think gloom and doom is around the corner, and so pretty much ignore the possitive and magnify the negative. Even if the negative is only one fact among a dozen. I AM NOT SAYING THE TWO PEOPLE ABOVE CONSIDERED THESE TWELVE FACTS NOR THAT THESE TWELVE FACTS ARE PREDICTIVE FOR THE ECONOMY. I AM SAYING that there IS a strong, negative, pessimistic bias here. A post by sysman comes to mind. One thread mentioned how the dow went up one day. The S&P closed up that day also, but the NASDAQ went down a bit. Sysman chirps, basically: "hey! what do you mean the stock market went up?! The NASDAQ went DOWN!"...again, a selective singling out of bad news to support, at least in sysman's mind, that the "market" really went down, not up. Even though two of the three major indices usually referenced went UP!

Hey, I could spend all day on this kind of stuff. My point is to profer that all of us examine our biases. They influence what we perceive, pay attention too, and conclude about whatever facts we analyze. My second point is that, with a strong negative bias, true discussion is pretty much not going to happen. How can it whenever individuals simply comb thru whatever collection of facts there are to select whatever negative ones they find, and then simply rant, diatribe, or monologue them over and over --- refusing to acknowledge the positive? Think about this. This bias and refusal to acknowledge or give appropriate weight and credit to positive news is what makes many whom the doomers label "pollies" shake their heads in disgust and respond with berating flames and post at the disuse and misuse of whatever "IQ" the doomers are exibiting. For the next couple of months, the doomers can get away with saying "just wait and see"...but next year, this will wear excedingly thin and indefensible.

OT {snip}

Myself, I do despise this "blinders" mentality, but what disgust me most are those here who WANT TEOTWAWKI and gloom and doom. This is what prompts me to upload what your "Great Pumpkin", Diane Squires would call "troll post". For those who want TEOTWAWKI because of religious reasons, I would ask, according to your "Revelations", who is going to throw out the old and establish the new....Jesus, or "Mad Max? And, did God tell you to pray for "His kingdom come", or "the worlds destruction"....read proverbs....and "fret not"...

{snip}

As I've said before, I don't know what Y2K will bring, I don't follow the market, and I don't think the markets are going to predict Y2K accurately ahead of time. I do think peoples reactions will make whatever Y2K does bring much worse...and understnding people's biases help in predicting PEOPLE'S behavior...that's why I "probe" like I do.

One thing came to mind the other day. Mr. Ed Yourdon, who "fathered" this place, and the prognisticator of many a negative event due to Y2K and it's effects, wrote a book I bought and read a long time ago. It's title was "The Decline and fall of the American Programmer". As I recall, he used similar "domino theory" cause and effect logic in his prose similar to the reasoning used in TB2000. Arguing about all those off shore "software factories" with high quality producing methodologies decimating the domestic US software industry. This has not happened. The demand for software development talent in the US is strong and predicted to get stronger. What I ponder is the similar thought process behind Mr. yourdons analysis and conclusions in his "Decline and fall book" and his TB2000 book.

I wonder if many tending towards gloom and doom simply are drawn to focus on the negative, connect the dots to a negative conclusion, then hunker down to await the "doom and gloom" that rarely comes. This is not meant as a slight against Mr. Youdon. It is meant as food for thought about how a person's bias towards the optimistic or pessimistic colors one's focus, analysis and conclusions -- and life choices.

I'm thinking when one's predictions get rudely proved wrong by reality over and over, maybe it's time to reconsider the process...and the biases which influence it. Yes, doom and gloom may indeed visit one day...but even then, how about rising up to meet it, roll with the punches, and do the best you can...instead of hunkering down, and letting your life go by instead of being actively engaged "optimistically"....kind of what one person said about LIVING LIFE....instead of JUST TRYING TO SURVIVE THE COMING DOOOOOOMMMM. Hey, all it takes is one little black widow spider in your bunker to make all your plans and preps a moot point. What Malcom Forbes put on his tombstone comes to mind: "While alive, he lived".

Best wishes,

-- Genius (codeslinger@work.now), October 30, 1999

Answers

Note: The twelve facts listed in the text of my original post count both items in number "ten" separately....that;s why I only have 11 numbered items, but reference twelve "facts"....FWIW...have a nice day.

-- Genius (codeslinger@work.now), October 30, 1999.

"So, the issue is, why single out and focus only on the negative news?"

Because otherwise they might have to face the unappealing effects of Buyer's Remorse when they look at the mountain of stuff they bought for Y2K.

-- (_@_._._@_._), October 30, 1999.

First, the black widow spider--I kill it. There, done with that.

Then onto "buyer's remorse". Let's see, I have had buyer's remorse with electronic gadgets that I have bought in the past and realized either a) they didn't work as well or the way they were projected to or b) I didn't need it anyway or c) both. I have had buyer's remorse when I bought a really trendy piece of clothing that I would look silly wearing in less than a year's time. I have had SERIOUS buyer's remorse when it comes to vehicles. But cans of food? Bags of rice? Fire extinguishers? Battery powered carbon monoxide detectors? Flashlights, candles, batteries, first aid kits, first aid manuals? Nope, no buyer's remorse there. Y2K or no Y2K it feels good to know I have those things just in case of ANYthing. And actually most of the things I have gained in preparing have been free: Knowledge (checked tons of books out of the library and have learned things I never thought I would, courses on everything from CPR and first aid to composting through ourlocal extension office), confidence, a renewed sense of inner peace now that I am living a simpler life not buying every little doo-dad that comes along, and most of all, a sense of perspective. Why NOT live like this week or month might be your last? You know what? Things taste better, look prettier, smell lovlier when you adopt such a mindset!

I don't want anyone to die, and furthermore, I don't want Y2K to be ANYTHING. Don't lump everyone who prepares for Y2K into the same "can't-wait-to-kill-some-intruders-want-everyone-to-die-so-my- religion/whatever-can-take-over" category and I'll tell you what? I won't lump all pollies on this board as people who have serious psychological shortcomings, are EXTREMELY scared, and have big problems with dealing with even the IDEA of crisis. How's that?

I am not one to look only at the negative. I am glad for good news. I LIKE my life the way it is, thank you, and do NOT under any circumstances, relish or even begin to like the thought of Y2K being anything more than a 1, at most. I have a 5 year old daughter to protect, extended family who have never gotten it and have done nothing to prepare, friends--same thing. Why in the WORLD would I want Y2K to be more than a BITR? Or even that? If nothing happens after 12/31/99, I will be happy as a clam! The hubby and I plan on breaking out the bottle of bubbly we have chilling in the fridge now, making a toast, and smiling some BIG smiles that last a very long time! (And I've never understood why I should then feel stupid b/c some people I don't know on the Internet said nothing would happen and I would regret buying that extra food....can someone explain to me why I should CARE what other people, especially other people I do not even KNOW, think of my preparations?) Then it's off to the local food bank and homeless shelter to make the new year a little brighter for some people who do not have as much as we, and the knowledge? The confidence? The sense of inner peace? Still there, thank you. No one can take that away. And no buyer's remorse involved! And yes, we will be eating a lot of that food ourselves over the course of the next several months. I have been rotating our supplies and living "Mormon-style" ever since January of 1998, when we first got it, and I like not having to run up to the store for every little friggin thing.

It is this whole "Oh you'll be soooorryy you bought all that food and all those supplies" argument that has me perplexed. It doesn't even make any sense. Why the hell should you CARE what I have in my house? Heck the approximately 2% of the US pop who have been preparing for the last year may just have given a nice little boost to retail sales.

Obviously, it's not really about the food in our house. It's about the fact that the message, and the potential outcome(s) of the year 2000 problem is/are SCARY. And some people just can't handle it. I mean, jeez, it's not like we are influencing the American public or even the media over here. If you say there is nothing to worry about, then why fret so much over us preparers? Go to Starbucks, get your cafe latte espresso cappuchino mocha and peruse US Today, decide what kind of plan to switch to for your cell phone and immerse your brain in such important things as what doodad to buy next! I'm off to bake an apple pie with my daughter. God Bless America!

-- preparing (preparing@home.com), October 30, 1999.

Genius:

You have identified a positive feedback mechanism. The purpose of this forum (many say) is to encourage preparation just in case. But most people don't prepare because they feel insurance is justified by a cost-benefit analysis. They prepare because they're frightened.

Accordingly, to get people to prepare, we must frighten them. People aren't frightened by good news, so that's ignored. Instead, we must sift through all we read for two purposes: to find and emphasize the bad news, and to find reasons why news that appears good is really bad, or else should be rejected as misinformation.

The result is a local avalanche of bad news and dire interpretations of the neutral or irrelevant. And those who set out to frighten people into preparing steep themselves in this, and end up being frightened by it. All the more reason to misrepresent and exaggerate -- doom is on its way for real after all!

And the cycle builds. By now, the local definition of a "troll" is anyone who sees through this.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 30, 1999.

Genius,

I think I would agree with you that we tend to have a bias toward the negative. Genuine good news would be received by most of us with gratitude, but we have seen so many good news announcements with fine- print disclaimers attached, that we have become very skeptical. TPTB keep feeding spin and lies, and we are simply reluctant to swallow the official line anymore. Remember, the troops will be home from Haiti within a year? We won't send ground troops into Bosnia. "I did not have sex with that woman!" There were no incendiary rounds fired at Waco.

How many times does it take before folks decide someone has a problem telling the truth?

Some may hope it's bad, but most of us just want to protect our families and neighbors as best we can. If we swallow all the fluff, and things do, indeed, turn out badly, we will have added to the problem rather than helping it.

BTW, got rice?

regards,

Gene

-- gene (ekbaker@essex1.com), October 30, 1999.

Genius,

I will wager you $100.00 that the Stock market plummets within 2 months!! No matter how much good news you see.

That is a real email address!!

-- D.B. (dciinc@aol.com), October 30, 1999.

Genius..Most of what you said is true, there are a few things I dis- agree with. They are perhaps all summed up in your word "blinders". For one, you have to understand that the main doomer mind set demostrated at this forum was not born out of a religious agenda. Two, every-one here like you had and has a life and hopes to have a better life in the future. BUT for one reason or another herd somthing about Y2K that may have disturbed them enuff to want to fine out more. I would submitt to you that they started there journey with there "blinders" off. Looking at the vast, available, verifiable info with an open mind and the courage to accept whatever good or bad news they have dicovered. I personally at this stage now cannot predict the demise of the stockmarket or the explosion of gold prior to the roll-over. If left alone they would just naturally do what is normal. But to the Y2K savey it is now apparent, TPTB will do what ever necessary prior to the roll-over to keep the Market from tanking. It will be there last, best and greatest efforts. If it does tank prior, its not a big deal to me, I will just say to myself, yep makes sence, and its only another reason way I prepped. However after the roll, if you stayed in the market and Y2K was the fart in the wind, your a winner and I will be shortly following your lead and buying whatever stocks I can. But I took my "blinders" off a year ago and ever since then have not enjoyed life because of what I read. Sold it all for a big bag of cash, and sit in my frustration trying to make those around me believe. 63 more days to find out...---...

-- Les (yoyo@tolate.com), October 30, 1999.

Genius, you are more of an optomist than Little "The Sun'll Come Out Tomorrow" Orphan Annie. I sure hope you're right about Y2K, but it doesn't hurt to be realistic about possible risks and dangers and taking prudent measures to avoid getting hurt by them.

-- Ohio Bob (ohiobob@buckeyestate.com), October 30, 1999.

Spend some time on the debunkers forum. The stated purpose of these people is to disrupt this forum. That's why they post here. Flint is one of them, too. He posts here, challenging the very purpose of the forum like this, continually. A troll, by any other name, would smell as foul. They can't deal with their fear, so they come here and accuse us of creating it; it's called "projection."

About "fear," Flint contrasts fear with his high standard of cold, unfeeling rationality which he holds everyone on this forum to:

>most people don't prepare because they feel insurance is justified by a cost-benefit analysis.

Let's get real. No one buys life or fire insurance this coldly either. Beneath your "cost-benefit analysis" (which ALL the doomers I know HAVE done, by the way) is the reason for making the analysis: facing the fact that your family may be destitute without you, or that you may be homeless after a fire. Fear of loss is a part of life. "Doomers" on this forum didn't invent it, and it is pathetic to ATTACK them as if they did, just because you can't deal with your own fear.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 30, 1999.

Genius:

Are you a REAL genius? What is your IQ?

I discovered this forum in mid JAN99 and was amazed at the postings. On and off I've logged in to read what people think.

I am very concerned for America's future. There have been prophecies and visions regarding the United States of America being judged SEVERELY by God, and the end result will be the destruction of MANY people!

Do you think I want this? NO WAY! That concept is heinous!

And yet I am scared that this judgment WILL happen. I tend to freak out on negative news reports especially when perceptive of past historical crises involving sudden war and death!

And when I learned that Russia will launch a sneak nuclear attack upon our coasts when our nation goes to war with China over Taiwan, well, that's a nightmare scenario!

Do you see America being nuked by the Soviets?

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), October 30, 1999.

Liberty:

You appear to have mastered the art of reading what wasn't said, wasn't implied, and wasn't meant. Perhaps you are illustrating this "projection" so we'll know what you're talking about?

I haven't posted on the debunking forum for a long time. When I did, I challenged *them*. Extremists at either end aren't known for clear thinking. I find the thinking here much clearer on the whole than on the debunking forum, with some exceptions. For example, you seem a complete stranger to the concept.

I understand that it's best to err on the side of caution. But this shouldn't be an excuse for erring deliberately and systematically. You should know that ignorance can be cured, but stupidity is forever.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 30, 1999.

It's easy to see why the 'good news' Genius posted the other day wasn't broadly accepted --

1. No documentation for his claims.

2. Encouraging people to sell their preps.

Latest economic news

Hey, I don't follow the stock market. But I know a lot of you here do. What about your predictions now for a crash? Is it just "TPTB" "manipulating? No way!! They do not have that much money! Good economic news is popping up all over! When are all you doom angloom types going to get on board?????? Hurray!!!! I say let the good times roll!!!!

Are you going to sell your preps and get in on this boom or what!!

What's next? Will Genius criticize FEMA for mostly concentrating on the ways Y2K might cause problems in our lives next year?

Contingency and Consequence Management Planning for Year 2000 Conversion - A Guide for State and Local Emergency Managers

Having contingency plans is not a sign that individuals, businesses and governments are being negative -- it's prudence.

-- Prepare (but@prepare.early), October 30, 1999.

NEWS FLASH NEWS FLASH NEWS FLASH!!!!!!

America to be judged by GOD!

Get your Y2K preparedness kit at your local Sam's Club Now and avoid the long waiting on lines as THE DAMNED souls claw past each other in a furry of last minute hoarding.

Can you believe it? People actually try to validate possible y2k disruptions with the old 'fire and brimstone' routine. How very Western.

-- (_@_._@_._@_.), October 30, 1999.

Flint,

If you had anything to say, I might have something to work with. But you're just sneering at preparers, and calling them ignorant. You are claiming that they are not rational; YOU assume that. What is your rational basis for that? They have the GAO, the Gartner Report, the Navy report, they have the National Guard, and Municipalities building Y2k command bunkers - this and more is enough for them to prepare to feed and defend themselves independently. What rational purpose would drive you to take issue with that? What basis do you have in reason to take issue with their assessment of the situation? You aren't displaying any - you merely sneer, and accuse. Then you insult me as well - what is there left to do but write you off as an arrogant, hypocritical troll?

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 30, 1999.

Liberty:

Genius started this thread with an excellent (and extremely typical) example of the basis for my statements. There really is a clear, systematic, carefully constructed attempt here to select out the worst news and ignore or badmouth any countervailing information.

The sources you cite are good ones. It's very clear that we have problems. Some of these are sure to be noteworthy problems. But I'm neither claiming there are no problems, nor sneering at those who notice the same problems I do. They're real. But can't you see that when you yourself choose to cite only the worst reports you can find, you are denying yourself an opportunity to try to put *all* the pieces together? And when you cite only the worst reports, does it ever occur to you that others also aren't being exposed to all the rest (which is also considerable)?

I regard the response Genius pointed out as an attempt to *trick* people into preparing. I don't consider that necessary. I believe that people can respond to the *potential* for serious risk, and don't deserve to be misled by an extremely one-sided presentation.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 30, 1999.

Okay then "Genius", if your so confidant of "good days forever", then I DARE you to take out a 125% morgage on your home and invest it ALL into the big bull market! After all, if you feel the market will go up forever, and that it's headed to 36,000, and that earnings have nothing to do with stock prices, then by that logic you have NOTHING to lose!! Go for it! Get back to us on the 15th or so of January 2000, if the net's still up, and tell us how you're doing... Good luck!!

-- Crono (Crono@timesend.com), October 30, 1999.

Genius:

Well well... and here we have another example of a polly who thinks noone else but them thinks beyond the moment at hand.

It's obvious you preplanned all this, baiting with the "Happy Talk" in THIS forum as a set-up for this post. Uh, what'd you expect the responses to be...DUH

Pull that crap in a business meeting and see how long you last.

As to my response to you attempting to discredit me:

Ten of the eleven "economic indicators" you cited are meaningless as to LONG TERM impact on the economy. Who cares if the market was "UP" or "DOWN today? Noone who knows anything at all about economics. This obviously applies to you.

You have further discredited yourself by attempting to twist the fact that because myself and one other person chose to focus our response to your post, by citing the only really IMPORTANT economic news of the day (New housing purchases down by over 12%) to mean, somehow, that we only focus on the negative. Well, out of the 11 economic numbers/information you referenced, the one about new housing purchases IS the MOST IMPORTANT and IS the ONLY ONE that is NEGATIVE.

It's blatantly obvious you're an economics novice easily brainwashed by TPTB with "fluff" economic news reports that "ALL IS WELL" all while the ship is taking on water.

1) the sea is calm 2) the engines are running 3) the Captain is in charge 4) the crew is well trained 5) the ship is taking on water 6) the bar is well stocked 7) your luggage is secure 8) we have a well trained staff 9) we are at full steam ahead 10) there's pleanty to eat 11) we don't expect to sink

Okay, Genious...now you tell me, out of these 11 "indicators", 10 are "positive" and 1 is "negative". Which one is the MOST IMPORTANT one to be focusing on???

This analogy is an exact reflection of your "Good Economic News" report in your previous post. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.....duh

Please refrain from the "smoke and mirrors" games. It bores me. I wasn't born yesterday and I take issue with your attempt to "sound" intellectual while at the same time, exposing your stupidity.

Childern such as yourself are meant to be seen, not heard.

-- GoldReal (GoldReal@aol.com), October 30, 1999.

>> comments from ... Brian McLaughlin SINGLING OUT THE SOLE SOURCE OF BAD NEWS IN THE ARTICLE I READ ... <<

Ah, the joys of being mentioned by name...

First, in this thread you actually give an address to the article you read. In the original thread you did not. This being so, why do you think it is particularly significant that I singled "OUT THE SOLE SOURCE OF BAD NEWS IN THE ARTICLE" that YOU read, but that I didn't? How can I single out a fact from something I didn't even read? I got that particular fact from the morning edition of the daily Oregonian, and said as much.

Next, of the eleven individual pieces of good news you call out in this thread, fully 6 of them are nothing more than pointing to the fact that stocks are selling well. Since my general thesis isthat the stock markets have detached themselves from the real economy and are in a bubble, how exactly how does the fact that stocks went up do anything to negate this point of view?

Of the remaining 5 items you cite, 3 are somewhat positive, one is the negative fact I cited, and the other one, about "little worry over Greenspan remarks" has NO bearing on the REAL economy at all.

So, we are left with 3 facts you cite that could be construed as positive. Here they are:

>> 4) US Treasury 30 year bond yield down (positive news)<<

Boy, am I glad you told us what this means -- positive news. Actually, all it actually means is that enough buyers of Treasury Bonds participated in the market to reduce yields. This could mean a number of things, but mostly it means those buyers do not foresee inflation. For that matter, neither do I. Inflation is not necessary for the economy to suffer.

>> 5) Chigagoland Business Barometer up over epectations <<

This is a survey. It pertains only to anticipations of the future. Since I don't know what "expectaitions" were -- positive or negative -- it is pretty hard to say if this is good or only less bad. If it were a number regarding backlog of orders increasing, I'd agree this is good. Instead it is a measure of sentiment. Not very real economic news, IMO.

>> 10) Thursdays employment cost index and gross domestic product reports showing little signs of inflation. <<

This might be moderately good news, except I have not a clue how a GDP number could show inflation or not. And again, my expectation is not employment inflation. This doesn't contradict my primary thesis.

However, thanks Codeslinger, for rising to my challenge to actually cite what this excess of good news really was, in terms of facts. It is much more informative than burbling.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), October 30, 1999.

Happy Days Are Here Again, Ta da da da.

-- PD (Yo@Yo.com), October 31, 1999.

Flint,

Have you ever heard the phrase "no news is good news?"

This "good" and "bad" news is happening against the backdrop of a horrifying, collosal blunder that could arguably grind civilization to a halt. Assuming it's not ass-covering lies and distortions to begin with, this missing "good news" of yours is, in truth, merely "localized improvement on a horrible situation." We are in an extreme situation with Y2k. By using the rhetorical device of picking the "extremes" within this context, you find a "middle" position that may sound reasonable, but is skewed toward complacency and false hope. And the PR machine is printing false hope faster than the Fed is printing hundred-dollar bills right now: we have had enough.

I'm fine with keeping a stiff upper lip. But don't be a such a weasle. Just try not to for awhile and see how it feels. You might find it liberating.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 31, 1999.