Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : 2000: Y2K Civilized Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken who wrote (210)	8/14/1999 6:13:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 662

For example, I believe the max period you advise anyone to prepare for is 60 days of food, right? What if a family of 4 relying on such runs out of food on day 60 and food delivery chain is disrupted longer and this family can not locate any more food? Part of why people have such a DIFFICULT time overlooking your rudeness is that you selectively, and constantly, take people's statements out of context or ignore the caveats they PURPOSEFULLY include in order to prevent such behavior as yours. For example: Message 10948473 But overall, each person has to assess their family situation and requirements. Obviously, those with young children must prepare more, or have a safe-haven to go to with family (thus making sure those relatives can handle the additional needs). I'm not responsible for anyone let alone 4 people, especially when I make such an exception as above. People should be prepared for ANY emergency. What Y2K concerns have taught me over the past 3 years of following the topic, is that it is better viewed as just one more event that COULD create disruption in our lives, not the end of the world. It is my guess that the "end of the world" will likely happen in a manner far less predictable or forseen. And we won't have 2-3 years to consider how we'll be preparing for it, or even if we want to live in such a world. Y2K is no different for me than if some terrorist hacked into the local power grid, causing such havoc and damage that they brought it down for a month. Or it is no different than were we to suffer a major nor'easter this winter that iced up the entire area and brought the infrastructure to a grinding halt. I simply don't believe in the "TEOTWAWKI" scenario when it comes to Y2K. And that is my perogative just as your believing the world will face an economic and social collapse is your perogative. I can understand why you are so hestitant to discuss how people should be preparing for the end of the world. Re: your insistence that I give advice. I believe this to be a tactic on your part, to slice off something I say so you can ridicule it, as some kind of tit-for-tat, correct or not??? Yeah... I know how it feels. Especially when you try to lay some guilt trip on me about how I might be responsible for 4 deaths from advising people to prepare for AT LEAST 1-2 months. It is certainly better than your not offering your advice at all. After all, the end of the world is a very serious state of affairs to find oneself in. In fact, as you well know, in preparing for the end of the world, WE MAY ACTUALLY MAKE IT A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY. Would that satisfy you?? Do you have any reason to believe that 260 million Americans can suddenly go out and store 1-2 years worth of food and water without bringing far greater disruption on the economy than anything Y2K can result in?? That is why your doomsday scenario is so superficial, Ken. Because in preparing for your end of the world scenario, people fully realize we would quickly bring it down upon each and everyone of us. That makes your revelations or perspective pretty much irrelevant You can't prove anything and you're getting hard up for information when you have to post 3 year old Coast Guard Y2K memorandums to support your hypothesis. As for me, it is very difficult to hide political stress in this city, the nation's capital. It's pretty unlikely that I won't be able to catch a sense that people are more worried than they are officially letting on. And I ain't seeing that yet. So if you think you know more than John Koskinen or Joel Williamsen, WHO GET PAID to monitor Y2K issues, instead of just doing it as something to spend your spare time on, then I suggest you send your resume to the White House and tell them how you would handle this. Until then, you and I are just voices in the wind, who's opinions are only as relevant as anyone elses. I'd certainly believe Koskinen over you. And I think others probably do as well.