Two important points regarding Y2K. . .

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Point 1-Cnn used to have a section on their home page called simply "Y2K". Each day it featured stories about y2k, some positive...most negative. Anyway, it is now called "Turn of the Century@2000" and isn't even about y2k anymore!!!!! If that isn't the most disgustingly blatent covering up I have ever seen, then I don't know what is...

Point 2-No one has yet to explain this to my satisfaction...people who play the stock market are generally sensitive to even the most irrelevant of news (i.e. the Fed raising interest rates). As well, they are notorious for researching EVERY TINY DETAIL and angle of a given stock. WHY IN GODS NAME THEN DOES NOT ONE OF THEM LIFT A FINGER TO READ ABOUT Y2K?????? I don't understand it.

-garySOUTH

-- garySOUTH (wells@whitebulb.com), October 23, 1999

Answers

As has been documented, there are very few escape hatches for wealth when TSHTF. Why spook the herd? The problem with y2k is that virtually all stocks are a problem is things are 3 or worse (on the 1-10 scale). So best to ignore it. (after all, it might hit all stocks equally. So there is no point in taking y2k into account). Fun logic like that.

Or the reporters may have been ordered to stay away from the topic.

-- David Holladay (davidh@brailleplanet.org), October 23, 1999.


gary,

Y2K is a unique issue with few or no precedents. It's a complex issue that usually isn't understood well unless a person specifically decides to do some research on it. Dr. Edward Yardeni is one economist I know of who has researched Y2K.

Most people tend to think of Y2K as having been a potential problem for utilities that has mostly been solved. The supply chain aspect of Y2K is not generally understood. That shouldn't be a surprise since Y2K is a one-of-a-kind, time specific problem that society doesn't have previous experience in dealing with.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), October 23, 1999.


Also, while a "blatant coverup" is one explanation for changing home page contents, there are other possibilities that may be even more plausible. If there were to be a coverup, you'd think they'd simply eliminate the negative stories.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 23, 1999.

Regarding stockholders,

WHY IN GODS NAME THEN DOES NOT ONE OF THEM LIFT A FINGER TO READ ABOUT Y2K??????

I have personally observed this phenomena up close with personal acquaintances.

There are of course a variety of reasons, but here are a couple of the most common:

IGNORANCE

One person I discussed the subject with who has tens of thousand in stocks said he believes that everything will be dealt with by "workarounds". He mentioned that the date of September 9 (remember the "9999") has passed without any major problems, so he figures Y2K will also be OK (the completely irrelevant media coverage actually worked).

DENIAL

Another person with whom I spoke, who also has tens of thousands in the market, has the personality characteristics of a gambler. She has been getting a real thrill for the last 10 years or so on how easy it is to make money in stocks, and now refuses to back out of the game. Cognitive dissonance, whatever you want to call it, people do not want to think that they could lose, so they risk it all.

And of course, SPIN

A lot of people have an awful lot of faith in Mr. Greenspin. He has managed to carry them along on a market bull ride (no pun intended), through its ups and downs, but nevertheless, a bunch of bull. They trust him because he tries to be on the level about the market, even warning them to be cautious at times. The big mistake they are making is that they are trusting him on Y2K, when this is not his field of responsibility. He's doing his best to patch up that hole in the bow of the Titanic, but eventually the water is going to come gushing in, and DOWn she goes!

-- @ (@@@.@), October 23, 1999.


Re: CNN coverups--

FWIW, I have noticed that the past couple of weeks their main page has shown the DJIA on days when it is up, but I need to go to the CNNfn page to track the Dow when it is in tailspin mode. This has not been absolute, but enough to make me wonder why. I thought perhaps the small graphic could not handle 5 digit numbers, but it then showed up indicating 100+ gains. Or maybe they run out of room from time to time.

-- Pete (phytorx@lanset.com), October 23, 1999.



Yes, it's pretty sickening to read CNN's articles, they're nothing but spin - they don't even try to appear unbaised.

Now, speaking of stocks, take a look at this post I received on MSNBC's board (I think it'll explain why no-one researches about Y2K - they DON'T want to know!):

>Mon Oct 18 08:04:35, User wrote:

> Anything can happen, but hopefully our head of steam will slow any downturns in the economy. As always, the biggest problem when the economy is getting worse is the public fear. The only way to avoid depreesions and recessions is to not tell the public about it. Makes sense, but is probably impossible.

Here's my response to User: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Doesn't that bother you... Deb M. Mon Oct 18 08:24:03

"...that the only way to stop the economic downturn is to "not tell anyone about the problems"?

"To me, this indicates a serious fundamental flaw with the way that our current financial policy works. It's all speculation, and too much of our economy and way of life is dependent on this speculation being positive... There isn't enough "hard currency" - it's mostly "electronic money" - tied up in the stock market." "Look at it this way, when your money is deposited in the bank, they turn around and invest your money. If the investments go sour, then the bank loses the money, but it hopes that its other investments will make up for that loss. If that doesn't work, then the FDIC kicks in to cover the losses. The unknown variable is how many people were in the funds/portfolios that went sour. If too many people are affected, then its going to cause problems with the FDIC paying out the cash in a timely manner, not to mention accurately."

"Way too "iffy".

Deb

Of course, this didn't take into account our gubmint allowing banks and securities to join together. More "good news" for the stockmarkets - layoffs and paycuts are sure to follow, too bad it's us that will suffer for their greed.

-- Deb (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), October 23, 1999.


Why did CNN remove Y2K from their web page? By now everyone has learned to equate Y2K with something bad, either as the butt of jokes or as a real problem facing us.

But if you're Time/Warner's Klintoon Propaganda Network you don't want to impart any hint of something bad with the century date transition. So you've got to remove Y2K from the Millenium change.

Kinda like Stalin having all his rivals removed from all the official photographs of Soviet leaders.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), October 23, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ