My answer to the many people who have asked me if I was feeling suckered, dumb, gullible or sorry for having prepared for Y2k. (Or: Will an admission of gullibility be forthcoming after 01-01-2001?)

(Rant Mode On)

No, No and HELL NO I don't. I see nothing gullible about being prepared for a disaster. Even organizations such as the Red Cross, certain government agencies, and even John Koskinen were advising that people be prepared for an emergency. My level of preparation may drop down one level, but each and every item I purchased in preparation will be either saved in case of a disaster, used up, donated to charity, or kept for my family's personal use. No one loses, everyone wins. There isn't even an issue.

Besides, I don't have to buy any groceries other than fresh milk, meat, and eggs until June or longer. And thats just using my more perishable supplies up, such as canned food and flour. The wheat, rice and beans in 5 gallon buckets can last another 10 years if stored properly, so Im keeping all that as food insurance.

I have enough gasoline to run my riding lawnmower, push mower, weed eater, snowblower for the next two years. There is little more frustrating to me than getting ready to mow and finding all empty gas cans. I also have enough batteries of all kinds that I can keep fresh batteries available for my CD players, shortwave radios, walkie talkies, and flashlights for the next year or so. Whats so wrong about that? I saved money by buying in bulk.

There have been numerous benefits to Y2k preparation, even if there are no major infrastructure or societal problems. Governments and businesses worldwide have injected billions of dollars into the world economy. Governments and businesses will hopefully run more efficiently after having updated their systems. Products and services I've purchased have sustained and even created jobs, and injected even more cash into the economy, which in turn, produces more jobs, and further enhances the economy.

As far as Y2k itself, the issue could crop up for years to come in little-used code, even after 01-01-2001. I don't think it'll truly be a dead issue for years yet. The fact that there have been some Y2K problems proves to me that I was correct in preparing. The fact that these Y2k problems are invariably reported as "other than Y2k" isn't my problem. It sounds a lot like spin to me. I understand that some problems are your normal everyday occurrences, but not everything weve heard can be dismissed as a non-Y2k event.

Lets examine the other side of the issue for a second. Those who are DGIs or Pollys have been lucky. So lucky in fact, I want one of you to buy me a lottery ticket. You dodged a bullet, I didnt even have to duck. Thats all there is to it. If there are delayed events, regional or widespread, you will wish you had prepped half as well as I did.

*Why is it a good idea to be prepared for emergencies?

In my opinion, we have much more to fear from the exorbitant rates of government taxation, overvalued stock market, bio-terrorism, government running its debt up so high that we couldnt ever pay it off, and other government interference with our everyday lives. When I look at the news and see examples of people becoming refugees because they were unprepared for emergencies, it makes me feel good that Im as ready as I can ever be for an unexpected (or expected) disaster. (IE Kosovo, Chechnya, Bosnia, et al)

*Government Interference

There is a rising popularity of gun control laws among politicians in the country. People dont realize just how much of their everyday freedom depends on the free and total access to military style weapons. The founders and original patriots of this country didnt start a revolution in 1775, declare independence in 1776 at the risk of their lives, fortunes, and properties, fight over a decade under horrendous conditions, and in many cases, die miserable deaths, only to protect your privilege to go duck hunting.

What they meant was that every able bodied person who was able to, should have a weapon such as was in use by the military of the day. In 1775 the standard was a flintlock and pistol, in 1875 it was a Winchester 73 Lever Action rifle and a Colt .45 revolver, in 1920 it was a bolt-action rifle and a Colt 1911 pistol. After WWII it was an M-1 Garand and a Colt 1911, and today its an M-16 or Ak-47 and a semi-auto pistol. Were not talking about nukes and FAE bombs here, simply small arms.

The Bill or Rights affirms this Right clearly. The reasons whole revolution started are numerous. Unreasonable strictures on their commerce, and taxation without representation are the most oft quoted. But the triggering event of the American Revolution was the British marching to confiscate the weapons, musket balls, and gunpowder of the patriots. They wouldnt allow it. They shot back.

This was not some action taken out of the blue, but rather it was the culmination many years of abuses by King George III. The American colonists had addressed their grievances to Parliament and had been dismissed out of hand. They did try to get the lawmakers to see what was happening. The lawmakers didnt and still arent listening. Do you see the parallel?

Guns are dangerous, yes. So are computers, cars, hammers, knives, baseball bats, rat poison, alcoholI could go on forever. Each, used responsibly, can be a superb tool. Each, used in an irresponsible manner, can be a deadly weapon.

The point is: Many people have sworn to shoot back if the government attempts to confiscate weapons. That is an individual decision, one I neither condemn nor condone. I for one would not wish to go out for water, milk or food, only to get hit by stray bullets from a gun raid going on in the next block over. Therefore I could afford not to go out for a while.

*Bio-Terrorism

The fact that we cannot easily detect the release or presence of bio-weapons with the naked eye speaks volumes about the usefulness of this method of terrorism. It can be used quietly, concealed relatively easily, and coupled with an efficient method of distribution, it could be devastating.

If I were lucky enough to survive the initial biological release, I would not hesitate to tape up all the doors and windows and stay in the house for an extended period of time until the danger has passed. Im ready to do just that. Would you be?

*Overvalued Stock Market & Government Debt

As evidenced by the stock market plunging on the 3rd and 4th of January 2000, the world economy is highly volatile, and a serious disruption could cause a depression the likes of which the 1930s never imagined. As I write this, the Dow just went over a 300 point loss on the day and is still sliding. It could continue tomorrow, it might not. The point is we really don't know how its going to go.

The US Government continues to sell its Treasury bonds to foreign countries, exporting debt all over the place. If the dollar were to take a really big hit, these countries could decide to cash out of the dollar in favor of the Euro. Where is the US Government going to come up with the massive amounts of money to pay off all those bonds in days? Just like the fractional reserve banking system, the US Government doesnt have it all in cash. If the trend were to continue, the word Default may be spoken of on the news. If so, the banking system could experience panic bank runs like the 1930s. Only this time, there wont be a half decade long World War II to assist in the recovery.

Inflation could eat up all the value of the fiat currency that modern man places so much faith in. Backed by nothing except the full faith and credit of the United States Government, what happens when credit ratings are non-existent and faith in is completely gone? Its happened in countries like Weimar Germany in the 1930s, Russia in the 1990s, and repeatedly in Latin America. Your life savings might just be enough to buy you a loaf of bread.

It could be a minor bump in the road, short term recession, it could be a long term depression or the end of the world as we know it. No one really knows what the outcome would be.

Just like Y2k. No one has any idea how it will turn out. The best laid plans of mice and men oft go astray.

Thats why Im holding on to my preparations. I'm not dropping my guard. I'll probably be called a crackpot or worse, but I won't be called a blind, or a Polly. I might just end up being rich or poor, in relative terms, but at least I know Id be alive.

(Rant Mode Off)

-- Powder (Powder47keg@aol.com), January 04, 2000

Answers

I agree with Powder. With Y2K, it was never (or shouldn't have been) about being right or wrong. Nobody knew (and still doesn't) what the new year would bring or how we would be affected. It was always about personal risk management. For the people who didn't do anything to prepare, they were willing to take more risk than someone like Powder or myself. If in the next couple of months there turns out to be significant enought disruptions that we would have cause to dip into our preps, then we will be glad we have them (and I hope would be willing to share with those who didn't have the foresight to prepare). But if we get through the year without major enough disruptions to cause us to dip into our supplies, then we'll do exactly what Powder mentioned: use, save, and/or donate them. Why is this issue so polarizing that we must attack each other depending on how we determined to prepare?

I, for one, wouldn't consider myself a "doomer", as I never believed that this would result in TEOTWAWKI. I've never known exactly what, if anything would happen - but I felt that there was enough of a possibility of disruptions that I wanted to have "insurance" on hand for me and my family. Maybe we'll "need" it now, maybe we won't. Either way, I've lost nothing. But if something does (or had) happen(ed), I would've gained everything. It seems logical, responsible, and even conservative. Anything but extreme.

-- EricE (ready@for.anything), January 04, 2000.

Powder, Eric,

Well said. I agree with every word.

-- No Polly (nopolly@hotmail.com), January 04, 2000.

Here's my $0.02

Okay we have avoided the acute Y2K problems. We will see how the cronic, lower impact, economic problems play out. With the infrastructure intact they will be vastly easier to fix on failure. I would point out that due to legal liability, it would be better for upper management, for a company to go broke than to admit that Y2K is a problem.

There is a lot of venom out there if you listen to Chuck Harder's radio program to read the posts on TB2000. I think I know why.

On Y2K there are two beliefs and two actions yielding four results. A person either believes that Y2K could have been a problem or it's totally trivial. A person either prepared for their percieved level of problem, or did not. If a person honestly believed that Y2K would be trivial and did NOT prepare, this would be a moral action. If a person belived that Y2K could have been a problem and did prepare to whatever level they perceived the problem to be, this would be a moral action. If a person believed Y2K could have been a problem and did NOT prepare, this would be a very immoral action (if they have a wife and children). If a person beleived that Y2K would be trivial and prepared, this would be immoral (a waste of valuable family assets). Please note that this is all in the past now. It can not be changed.

From the Havamal: Cattle die, Friends die, Thou thyself shalt die. I know a thing That never dies. Judgement over the dead.

The only way a person that did not prepare can prove his actions as moral is to prove that that either Y2K was never a threat (depending on where one lives) or that it all was taken care of. Considering the actions of organizations and governments, this is a hard row to hoe.

Meanwhile, my preps have improved my life. I have learned a lot on many subjects and am vastly better prepared for life's normal problems that occur on a regular basis, utility problems, weather problems, and the ocassional earthquake.

I've owned a small one cylinder gasoline genset for a decade and a half. It is inadequate for long term use but then I don't have that much gas stored, just enough for short term emergency use and not enough power to run the A/C. Storing gasoline has always scared me. I now have a nice diesel unit with enough power to run some A/C which my wife requires intermitantly for health reasons. Previously she would have had to sleep in the suburban for cooled filtered air. Safer, healthier, I like it.

We will be eating our storage food if the spring's crop season passes with no problems. This will give us better diet than is usual around here. The bags of grain I purchased for neighbors will be given to food banks and a tax deduction taken.

We now have better camping equipment than before. I probably could have spent less time and less money and gotten near the same results. I percieved a threat to my family and took precautions to protect them. For this I have no need for apology.

-- Ken Seger (kenseger@earthlink.net), January 04, 2000.

I agree totally (with all the above).

However, in the spirit of forgiveness and brotherhood, I am more than willing to apologize to any and all I may have inconvenienced or offended by my personal decision to prepare as best I could for an event I could neither exactly predict the date of nor the manifestations of.

As soon as hell freezes over.

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), January 04, 2000.

I was listening to WLW, 700 AM in Cincy a few days ago when something made my jaw drop. Mike McConnell was interviewing a security consultant (didn't get his name) that does security consulting for federal, state and local government agencies. He has just had a busy season setting up security measures for a bunch of Y2000 celebrations.

He made a matter-of-fact statement that 'it is known to the US government at 20 or so small nuclear devices have been smuggled into the continental US'. There was no hesitation, no hint of doubt in his voice. It was just like saying the sky is blue, so what?

Why isn't this front page news? If he's making it up, why isn't he being burnt at the stake for inciting panic?

The 'DOW 36000' new paradigm goes you-know-where in a handbasket if some Death-To-America nutcase plants a mushroom in a major city. The resultant social, political and economic chaos would be TEOTWAWKI, even if it's not TEOTW. All it take is just one teensy weensy nuke.

I'm sitting on a lot of canned meats, beans, rice and other sundries. Have been for years, and will continue. Pollies be darned. Their 401K's and day trading excellent adventures are just so much amber phospor if the balloon goes up. Many credible analysts are predicting such events. People like Powder, whether they believe in such events or not, stand a good chance of coming through to the other side, maybe minus some hair, but alive. With a chance to rebuild.

I wear the Y2Kook label proudly! Stock up on your tinfoil, preferably with some lead in it.

Radio-active Kook

-- Y2Kook (Y2Kook@usa.net), January 04, 2000.

EXCELLENT!!!..well stated,couldn't agree more..way to go Powder

-- Dennis Case (OAKHILL15@YAHOO.COM), January 04, 2000.

Hear, hear! Well said by all. I will add that I call myself a doomer because my understanding is that a doomer is a person who cares about the security of his family and prepares to provide for that security. Not a person hoping for "doom".

-- Mr. Pinochle (pinochledd@aol.com), January 04, 2000.

It's not a matter of 'if' a small nuclear device will be detonated in some large American city in the future, but when.

-- ~***~ (~***~@earth.ebe), January 04, 2000.

Powder, In you post you said,

"Only this time, there wont be a half decade long World War II to assist in the recovery. "

Would you consider a WW3 to aid recovery?

With firm belief in the wisdom of the Founding Fathers,

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.com), January 04, 2000.

Thanks, everyone. I'll try to clarify once more: The gullibility to which I referred is not whether or not one should be prepared for emergencies--that's a personal issue, and has been going on for assorted reasons across the millennia. My (personal) belief, stated publicly for two years, is that Y2K would never be a large-scale issue, and I believe that a significant gullibility is required to buy into the hype over Y2K. I'll try to lay this out in a later post, but essentially the point is this: Y2K could only cause large scale disruptions if all computers failed at once, and this has never been a likely scenario. Incremental degradations spread across time--well, that's just computers. No matter what they are saying now, the tenor of the panic rhetoric from those who were the "leaders" in Y2K rhetoric (Yourdon, for instance) has been that there will be a point disruption, or at least a grouping of disruptions proximate enough in time, to take down a big chunk of the civilized world. That is ignorance and naivety, and therefore it requires gullibility to accept it. Most of society wasn't "lucky"--they used common sense and an intuition that a book labeled "Time Bomb Y2K" probably contained a lot of hype. Sure, it sold, but it didn't sell its message of doom to those with common sense.

-- Jim Thompson (jimthompsonmd@attglobal.net), January 04, 2000.

Frank,

IMHO - WWIII, if it happens, and goes nuclear, would likely do much greater damage than any Y2k or depression could do. I would also think that it wouldn't last more than a few days at most. The damage resulting from a nuclear exchange would likely last decades. Truly TEOTWAWKI.

If it were to start out conventional, how many nuclear powers wouldn't escalate to nukes if it looked like they were going to be conquered? Where would it go from there? Downhill fast I think.

-- Powder (Powder47keg@aol.com), January 04, 2000.