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: flatsville who wrote (3936)	2/17/1999 1:34:00 PM
From: John Mansfield	Respond to of 9818

'The complacency peddlers claim there is an ulterior monetary motivation behind the threat of Y2K. This charge presumably applies to corporate IT departments, computer consultants, and those selling seminars, books, videos, and supplies. This is akin to saying that because life insurance agents have a monetary motivation in selling a policy, there can be no substantive reality in a forecast of death even though we all know that death is inevitable. ' ___________ from previous post. Could be posted again and again the coming months IMO.

To: flatsville who wrote (3936)	2/18/1999 8:47:00 AM
From: flatsville	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

OK all you economy majors out there (lurking or not,) I need your help. In "The Complacency Peddlers" Victor Prolier states: "Approximately 20 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product is based on the import/export of raw materials, foodstuffs, components, and finished goods." Assuming his percentage is correct, should USGDP drop by 3%, 5% or 10% due to y2k disruptions here or abroad what would be (might be?) the resulting % change in the unemployment index? No...No...No...Let's forget about the potential reason for the drop in USGDP. Let's assume a "perfect world" scenario like we have now <ggg.> The question I'm asking is, "What effect will/does a rise or fall in GDP have on the unemployment rate?" Is there in fact an identifiable and recognized relationship? Any help with this appreciated. "flatsville" P.S.--Now I realize this is only part of the equation...