<How about that?> Is that like,"How about dem apples"? <g>
Actually, I never said, or at least, was implying anything different.
But, I believe I have nailed down the key difference between many of us doomers and many pollycrackers:
I/we see the entire senario unfolding as a TOTALLY INTERRELATED, INTERDEPENDENT, SYSTEMIC result, PREDICATED ON COLLAPSES OCCURRING DUE TO THE RESULTANT DOMINO EFFECTS (DOWN, UP AND CROSS STREAM), i.e., ALONG THE ENTIRE CHAIN IN EACH POTENTIAL CASE, INCLUDING INTERRELATED LINKS OF EACH CHAIN, AND THE INTERRELATIONSHIP OF THE GLOBAL DIVISION OF LABOR UPON WHICH ALL IS DEPENDENT, while you guys:
add the number of projected conpliant entities, minus the non-compliant, NOT factoring in the above, or at least to any significant degree:
RESULTINGLY, your predicts are based on more simple 'additive' senarios, while ours are based on potential 'arthmetic', actually 'exponential' disruptions.!
As you guys see each announced major y2k- ready or even compliant reports and get more and more rosy-cheeked, we see each such one as:
1. relatively unimportant, as the systemic nature and results will be unaffected significantly by a dozen, hunred, or thousands of such
'happy smile' reports, and/or:
2. based on other reports we read, we do not accept any/most/all of such "be even happier today people than ever before, because our company will be ok as long as our vendors are okay!" statements of any company, or govt agency, as containing either truth, full disclosure, or even accurate statements.
In a fly's eye, there you have it.
|
