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 : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeptic who wrote (530)	11/25/1997 5:25:00 PM
From: C.K. Houston	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 9818

Skeptic, <Ed Yardeni said there is a 40% chance of a global recession. That's a long way from an inevitable economic crisis.> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news ... BUT ... Yardeni changed his stance Nov 4: "In fact, in Yardeni's eyes, the risks are so large that the chances for a Y2K-induced recession in the Year 2000 were a whopping 100%." News article: y2ktimebomb.com Full testimony: techstocks.com FYI: Tony Keyes, who wrote the article ... well, he & Ed Yardeni were both speaking in front of Senate Subcommittees the SAME day (Nov 4). They know each other pretty well. If you take issue with Tony's article, please contact him directly. If you want to read Tony's testimony, check out that link I gave you. He's a friend of mine. You can use my name. Cheryl

To: Skeptic who wrote (530)	11/25/1997 5:42:00 PM
From: Bill Ounce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

re: Y2K religion versus a logical approach P.S. Maybe you thought I was questioning your credibility. I wasn't. Posts such as techstocks.com will lead many to question C.K.'s credibility. Y2K looks to be a real problem. But, arrogant "Y2K Religion sermons" will convince people NOT to take this issue seriously. Skeptics prefer an argument where one can examine the premises. You know, how about something like: P1: International banks don't make Y2K compliance. P2: FED shuts down transactions to these banks. P3: International Banking ceases to function normally. P4: No satisfactory contingiencies planned. P5: International Trade falls apart without -------------------------- C: World-wide economic depression If this is valid sequence of events, one can contemplate on P1 and P4. My understanding leads me to believe in P1. I think P4 is where all the action will be. My big question is 'what contingencies are being planned for this (likely) event?' Think a skeptical viewpoint can be used to increase understanding.