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: Eski who wrote (2975)	12/21/1998 2:46:00 PM
From: Ron Everest	Respond to of 9818

A couple of sacks of wheat and a generator would get most through the adjustment period IMO. The survivalist tactics will likely be required if we go into a deep recession caused by economic meltdown. We appear to be on the fringes of economic depression, so.......will Y2K exacerbate the economic situation in a negative manner. I think so, however not to the extent of storing years of food. Best regards, Ron E

To: Eski who wrote (2975)	12/22/1998 12:28:00 AM
From: John D. McClure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

...I would rather eat some crow, and then the stored food, than have nothing stored and find out you Beanie Baby Boomer optimists are wrong. Merry Christmas!

To: Eski who wrote (2975)	12/22/1998 10:55:00 AM
From: jwk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Eski -- as a matter of personal choice and lifestyle --and having nothing to do with a survialist mentality or religious views-- we have always had about a years supply of food stored..... and have never felt the least bit silly about it. We can, freeze, and dry a wide variety of food which is produced in this region because we enjoy doing it and we enjoy eating it throughout the year. It's not a complicated issue to have something extra on hand, rotate the stock, and use and replenish supplies in an orderly manner. What I am concerned about is those who consciously choose to have nothing extra on hand. That to me is the epitome of silly. My concern for potential Y2K glitches is not for myself or wife....we're fit, capable, reasonably well supplied, and not overly dependent on the power grid. My concern is this issue has always been for the most vulnerable and dependent members of our society for whom glitches that I would not even feel or be bothered by could prove life threatening. By what line of reasoning do you suggest that we gamble with their safety and well being by presenting a flip and what-me-worry attitude towards this issue? Better to quietly and clamly prepare and not need it than to place the vulnerable in unnecessary risk. Have you seen any of the reports coming out on the recent SF power outage? It appears the problem was caused by the crew's error, BUT its spread and length were the result of a series of failures in a failsafe breaker system designed to contain the crew's error to a small area. The weather that day was mild and they did not have to go through the night without power. Consider that scenario on the east coast, on a freezing night, with numerous power entities trying to stay on line or get back on-line while various fluctuations are hittng it in a way grid was never desinged to handle. Perhaps it'll work out fine and perhaps any power disruptions will be brief and minimal, and perhaps, all citizens will endevor to be on their very best behavior. I very much hope that is the case. But if it isn't, why should people feell silly for having prepared to sit it out for awhile?