Do you doomers even know the meaning of that statement? My guess is no. You can see the interconnectedness but you can't tell the difference between odds and stakes. All mishaps in life have odds and stakes associated with them. The odds are the chances or probability the mishap will occur. The stakes represent the outcome. All mishaps (weather related, earthquakes, plane crashes, car accidents) have pretty significant stakes, death, but very low odds depending on where you live and how you travel. So, do you doomers not fly airplanes because of the stakes (the odds don't matter)? Do you doomers live in any severe weather or earthquake prone areas? My guess is no. You travel based on convenience not stakes. How 'bout you, Diane? The stakes are pretty high in California for earthquakes (with the odds being higher than North Dakota), yet you choose to live there. Doesn't seem prudent given your concern for the stakes.

My point, the stakes are high in all disaster situations, nothing new here. So, Y2K should be treated as any other life situation, nothing more.

-- Maria (maria947@hotmail.com), November 10, 1999

Answers

Great, YOU go ahead and do just that.

-- Ludi (ludi@rollin.com), November 10, 1999.

Maria...I agree with you 100%. I think the thing that gets lost in the translation somewhere is that we should be treating y2k like any other event in our lives...that we should be prepared for everyday disruptions - not just focusing on y2k. It's a bigger issue.

Do you agree?

-- dan (dbuchner@fdxsupplychain.com), November 10, 1999.

Sorry, you guessed WRONG!!!

Try again.

-- snooze button (alarmclock_2000@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

Maria:

If I were somehow able to block out all the evidence that sets this issue apart from the rest, like you seem to be able to do, I might agree with you.

Learn how to think outside of the box, Maria.

-- eve (123@4567.com), November 10, 1999.

North Dakota is dubbed "Tornado Alley."

You're not very bright dear. No offense but it is true. Are you sure you want to continue this pursuit of seeing yourself as "smart?"

-- Paula (chowbabe@pacbell.net), November 10, 1999.

Maria, to be quite frank, you are a complete idiot.

BTW, good to see you posting again. Have missed your informative posts. LOL!

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), November 10, 1999.

So, Y2K should be treated as any other life situation, nothing more.

So why isn't the government treating Y2K as indifferently as you are, Maria?

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19991108/ts/yk_usa_1.html

White House Readies Y2K Center

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House lifted the veil Monday on a $40 million operations center designed to track how the world fares as it enters the technologically challenging Year 2000.

The center, in old Secret Service premises two blocks from the White House, will launch 24-hour operations on Dec. 28 continuing through the first few days of the new year or longer if conditions warrant.

Brian Kilgallen, head of the center's public outreach arm, told reporters that Y2K-tracking operations ``probably'' would continue at a reduced pace until March 15 to monitor any Leap Year complications for automated systems.

Jokingly dubbed the Y2K ``bunker'' by congressional staff members, the facility is on upper floors at 1800 G St. N.W. It will coordinate data collected by existing government emergency centers and, for the first time, the private sector.

Arrangements have been made for the sharing of centralized information by the following industries: electric power, banking, finance, telecommunications, oil, gas, airline, pharmaceuticals and retail industries.

I'm tired of seeing that it's OK for government and businesses to get prepared but not families. Prepare but prepare early.

-- Prepare (but@prepare.early), November 10, 1999.

Maria,

How much do you spend a year on insurance of all kinds: health, car, homeowners, life? If you don't have a serious illness, car crash, house fire, can you get that money back later?

I buy those kinds of insurance because of the stakes, not the odds. Probably you do too, unless you're a gambler.

I can eat my Y2k insurance next year, and put it in the tank of my car. How about you?

-- (fiver2000@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

Maria, you've been away for awhile and it appears your brain has atrophied.

-- a (a@a.a), November 10, 1999.

Back to the days of Floyd I happened to see a press conference by one of the FEMA reps. He said: "Let's hope for the best, but prepare for the worst." Can you, Maria, or any other polly for that matter explain to me why shouldn't we use the same logic now? Two million people hit the road in Florida, as it came out, completely unnecessary. Was it overeaction on the part of FEMA and local governments? Are those people pissed off for having to waste time in traffic, or are they thankful that Floyd missed Florida?

-- Brooklyn (MSIS@cyberdude.com), November 10, 1999.

In a situation where the odds of a given event can be calculated, (or even reliably estimated), through statistical analysis or actuarial tables, (as in the insurance industry), you have a valid point. My response should be appropriate to the severity of the threat AND it's probability of actually happening.

But.

The effects of Y2K are not like that. We can't calculate the odds (probability) OR the severity, so a reaction based on the stakes is really all I have to go on. That and Trust. Do I trust the IT industry will pull this off? Do I trust political and financial interests to provide accurate status reports?

The IEEE made a good argument that the bell curve is a good model of even unknown events, i.e. the midrange of possibilities is the most probable.

http://www.ieee.org/organizations/tab/Y2kFocus_tisrel11.PDF

Beyond that, we are in the dark and my kids aren't poker chips. I haven't moved to Montana, cashed out my savings or purchased automatic weapons. But we could stay inside for a month or two if we had to.

I've tried to prepare a reasonble defense against an unknown situation. I have prepared up to my comfort level. Others have made different judgements. Are they wrong? No way to tell from here.

So ante up.

-- Lewis (aslanshow@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

And when you begin a paragraph with the "do you doomers,..." thing, even if your paragraph has good information, many people are going to stop reading, Maria....

You might be better received if you learn a less bullying writing style.

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), November 10, 1999.

I've read a few of Maria's posts from the past. From my admittedly limited experience reading her, she seems to have a tendency to post an outrageous or bizarre statement and then disappear.

I'm not sure she's serious, so let's try not to get too worked up over her.

-- eve (123@4567.com), November 10, 1999.

Hey, guys, do you wear a helmet when you drive? The "stakes" are your life... why not wear one?

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 10, 1999.

Sure, let's talk stakes and rewards, and work out some odds from there. I'll deal with my bank account as it lends itself well to numerical analysis.

Let's say I take my money out of the bank. The earliest I can put it back is Jan 3rd, so I'm losing 53 days interest. That makes my "stake" (what I am paying to make the bet, the interest) about 0.007 of the "reward" (which is not losing all my money). If you like, you can leave your money in and gamble your capital as a stake against the reward of the interest. The numbers work out the same, it's just a different view on what's the stake and what's the reward.

What odds are we talking about here? To break even, I'm betting that - as of today's date - if Y2K happens 143 times, my bank will go down once, or in other words, I'm saying that I'm less than 99.3% confident that Y2K isn't going to crash my bank either through a genuine bug, or in a bank run. And, whether you like it or not, you're betting using the same odds. At the moment, I'm happy to admit that I think the odds are higher than that. Shall we say 10,000:1, or 99.99% confidence that it's a non-event? Can you concede that if Y2K were to happen ten thousand times, you might lose your money ONCE? Are you 99.99% confident (but not 100.0% confident) that your bank won't crash?

If you concede there's even that tiny, tiny chance of a Y2K bank crash, you'd be smart to withdraw your funds on 21st December. You're staking all your money on a vanishingly small reward. The reason why I have drawn mine now - even though I admit the odds aren't in my favour - is that I am taking a REASONED GAMBLE.

Does this help you to undertand? I'm not looking forward to Y2K, I'm not a survivalist or a trumpet of whats-his-name zealot, I'm a scared software developer who's doing his best to minimise the risk to himself and his loved ones.

-- Colin MacDonald (roborogerborg@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

Odds & stakes? Every decision in life has odds and stakes - and, I might add consequences. All I can say is - I'm prepared to be wrong. :)

-- April (Alwzapril@home.com), November 10, 1999.

http://www.wbn.com/y2ktimebomb/DSA/VP/vp9913.htm

[snip]

Life is filled with risk and surprising outcomes. That is why we pay insurance premiums to cover improbable, but not impossible surprises that can damage our health, homes, cars, and businesses. Every such situation requires a personal assessment. Should your car insurance include a collision rider? If not, you can reduce your current out-of- pocket expense. How risk averse are you?

Right now, people are attempting to assess Y2K risk.

[snip]

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), November 10, 1999.

Maria,

I know this may send you into tilt mode, but personally, I pay little attention to odds OR stakes.

Prefer to follow intuition and inner guidance. (Its what works for me).

What also works is to... be prepared for anything... expect the unexpected... be aware of vested interests and the things people/ businesses DO to avoid the spotlight and taking responsibility... remember that shift happens on a daily basis... watch for smoke signals (indicator of fires)... remember my spirit... and remember to help the community of humans (being) that I choose to live in... when called upon.

Living on shaky ground has and many useful lessons to teach (or not for those who sleep), which can be extrapolated into Y2K... and beyond.

A suggestion Maria... "Think globally... Act locally."

Y2K just might be the turning point that transforms some heavily ossified thinking on this planet (i.e. sustainability and renewable energy works too).

;-D

Namaste

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

I AM treating Y2k as any other life situation. I was ready for tornadoes when I was 6, I was ready for hurricanes at 20. We're ready for an earthquake (more or less) and we're ready for Y2k. No difference.

For each of these, we look at the odds AND the stakes, figure out our possible responses, and take reasonable precautions. For Y2k, reasonable precautions include personal preps, a full pantry, figuring out how to avoid panicky people, getting neighbors ready, warning family, etc. That all makes sense, given what we know and cannot know about Y2k.

For hurricanes, that includes personal preps, a full pantry, figuring out how to avoid panicky people, getting neighbors ready, warning family, etc. For earthquakes, that includes personal preps, a full pantry, figuring out how to avoid panicky people, getting neighbors ready, warning family, etc. Gosh, there's a pattern here.

The biggest difference between being ready for an earthquake and being ready for Y2k? Well, for Y2k I'm not making any special effort to bolt the bookcases to the walls ...

-- bw (home@puget.sound), November 10, 1999.

"Do you doomers live in any severe weather or earthquake prone areas? My guess is no."

Let's see. Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, etc., and all the Gulf and East Coast states are prone to hurricanes and floods. Alaska and all the other West coast states are prone to wildfires, mudslides and earthquakes. A bunch of states in the Mid-west and those adjacent are prone to tornadoes. Just about every state is prone to drought. The northern and mountain states are prone to blizzards. Some of the middle states are prone to the New Madrid fault earthquakes. Are you telling me that the so-called doomers all live somewhere else?

One of the reasons I chose to live in central North Carolina is because I've experienced Camille, severe Atlantic flooding, ice storms, droughts, and a killer tornado in various states. By living here I can reduce the odds but I can't reduce the stakes.

I may not wear a helmet when driving but my seat belts are securely fastened and I damn sure have my insurance premiums paid up to date. In addition, the car we chose has a good safety record. We minimize ALL risks as much as possible. It's not just Y2K, you know.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), November 10, 1999.

Thanks for all your responses. Youve been so kind in letting me know your feelings. But you seem to miss the point. The statement Its the stakes not the odds (which someone wrote in an earlier thread) is false. Life is filled with high stakes that you experience every day. You may be struck by lightening; you may get hit in a drive by; you may get a heart attack. The high stakes, death, in all these incidents. How do you prepare for this? By living in a bubble. So its not about stakes; it is about odds. The odds of lightening strikes, drive bys, or heart attacks are pretty low.

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. What does that mean. According to Old Git, just putting on a seat belt and driving a car with a good safety record are preparing for the worst. I say it's not. Preparing for the worst is driving a tank down the road and wearing a full suit of armor. In preparing for the worst that can happen with Y2K you have put yourselves in that "bubble", something very hard to attain.

You dismiss the stakes in these situations and prepare according to the odds.

The odds for Y2K failures can be determined. No one knows what will happen; thats absolutely true in any life situation. But we can determine the probability of failures based on implementation failures, metrics for numbers of defects, missed Y2K trigger dates and progress made on Y2K remediation. Everyone determines the odds for Y2K; doomers see the odds as high, pollys see the odds as low.

I'm prepared for life's disasters if they come my way; that's my lifesyle pre-Y2K and will be my lifestyle post-Y2K. I have seen some bad situations and have made a full recovery in all cases. No matter what Y2K brings, I know I'll make a full recovery there too. I won't die.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), November 10, 1999.

Hey Ken:

On Sept. 30 I went to the Texas Motor Speedway in Ft. Worth and went eight laps in a Winston car.

Because the incidence of accidents increases at 145 miles an hour, I wore a helmet, a neck brace and a five-point harness system.

I also spent more than an hour getting *prepared* to drive the car by going through an instruction and learning process.

See any correlation?

-- Vic (Rdrunner@internetwork.net), November 10, 1999.

What happened to my previous post? I commented on "hope for the best, prepare for the worst" and used Old Git's example to prove my point. Funny, is this the free speech thing at work again???

Well, here's my response to the rest of the posts:

Ludi, thanks for your approval.

Dan (fdxsupplychain), I agree, life is a much bigger surprise than Y2K could ever be. Did you hear about the zoo keeper who died in a pile of elephant dung while trying to help the elephant with its constipation problem? Yeah what were the odds?

Snooze button, I could give you another guess but I shouldnt talk that way in public.

Eve, thanks for your wonderful advice on my cognizant abilities. However, Ill refrain from giving you some much needed advice. Again, I shouldnt speak that way in public.

Paula, Tornado Alley eh? How many tornados hit that area in the last thirty years, smarty pants?

Ah and my favorite KOS, talk about informative! And your background is ah, ah. Oh yeah thats right, mud wrestling By the way, do *you* ever have any information to impose on this forum?

Prepare, government and businesses are putting contingency plans in place for political and legal reasons. Y2K got big press. Contingency plans for Y2K are a little beefier than the normal recovery procedures currently in place. (All businesses and gov orgs have recovery procedures and contingency plans for any number of disasters that could occur, nothing new here). They are not doing this because of the *stakes* or *odds* but for protection against lawsuits and for public perception.

Fiver2000, I have enough car insurance to be within the law, nothing more. I have no medical insurance and the minimum house insurance to meet mortgagee requirements. I have term life insurance, so my heirs have something when I die. Thanks for asking. You can eat your Y2K insurance but can you eat that gun or ammo?

A, to repeat what you worte to me on another thread, I hate you and you are a dumbass. Well, I dont really hate you.

Brooklyn, my above post commented on the hope for the best, but prepare for the worst statement.

Lewis, my post above commented on calculated the odds. Youve prepared up to your comfort level (your predetermined odds which may be a conscious or subconscious calculation on your part). You havent prepared for the worst or the stakes.

Donna, youre absolutely right. I shouldnt have started the post that way.

Eve, LOL, you know me after reading a few posts???!!??!?!?!? You think I hit and run???? Based on what????? And by this ability you have, you can see the interconnectedness of Y2K, I bet.

Ken, keep on posting, I really appreciate all you have to offer this forum.

Colin, Im not 100% sure about anything in life. Im not 100% sure I wont die from a heart attack tomorrow. No one is. But Im extremely confident that my bank wont forget I have money invested there. Im leaving it exactly where it is.

April, we all have to deal with the consequences of our decisions. I can deal with mine.

Link, risk and odds are the same thing, that is the probability something will occur. I take risks everyday with high stakes. Thanks for the info.

Diane, Ive come in contact with your angels. Dont worry, you couldnt possibly put me in tilt mode. Thanks for your input.

BW, Thanks for your comments, I agree.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), November 10, 1999.

I see, the system must have been updating with Vic's comments when I brought up the thread.

Vic, So you prepared based on the odds, not the stakes.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), November 10, 1999.

I don't have a big brain like Maria and Decker, nor am I arogent enough to display that in each post, so lets just see if this makes sense to us "common folk".

I have always practiced self sufficency. I keep next months's meat "on the hoof", and next winters vegetable soup takes a great deal of my personal effort to bring from seed to pantry. The neighbors might think this a tad strange, but living with the seasons suits me.

My husband is older than I and has health problems. I knew this 18 years ago when I married him, but throwing caution to the wind...

Right after we where married, he was sick. We ended up living in our automobile with a newborn baby. Not good.

Several years back, he was ill, in the hospital 7 days, and unemployed for 6 months. He required full time care for a portion of that period. When he was finally able to go back to work, the savings acct was drained, the pantry was low and I was exhausted; but for six months my family existed without much outside help and where able to concentrate daily on the things that mattered, his care and making each day "count".

So you see, with out intentionally beginning to plan for a day of need on the honeymoon, I realized that day might come, similarly it may repeat tomarrow and statistically most women spend the latter part of their lives alone. If, and this is a big if, prescription medicine supply is disrupted, I have some very difficult days ahead soon.

I think I have handled my personal stakes and odds pretty well up till now without having them "defined" for me. Likewise, my decision to prep for y2k was my (our) choice. So go ahead and debate my actions and motives, but don't assume you know why I make my choices, and I will leave you the same respect.

P.S. What the hell does geography, tornadoes or auto accidents have to do with comparing odds for y2k? The optimists lack of consideration for the "average" preparer, and semi-silent majority, on this forum is growing so tired.

-- Lilly (homesteader145@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

Odds v. Stakes? That's an easy one, Maria. My elderly parents (who now live with me) have the same odds as I do to be impacted by a power outage. However, an extended outage would have been life- threatening to them, whereas it might have only been an extreme annoyance to me. Based on what THEY have at STAKE, the only responsible response was to prepare for it and ensure my parents would not have to go to a shelter or suffer Decker-style in my home, even though I consider an extended outage to be unlikely.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), November 10, 1999.

Ooohhh...how do we solve a problem like maria? From the sound of Music. I Believe the Von Trapp Family saw a serious problem on the horizon (german occupation), and risked their lives trying to escape it. I believe they made the right choice.

-- solongfarewell (karlacalif@aol.com), November 10, 1999.

"NO MATTER what Y2K brings, I know I'll make a full recovery there too. I won't die."

This has also been your problem, Maria. There are many people who absolutely COULD die, depending on what Y2K brings.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), November 10, 1999.

No, Maria. During the instruction period before I actually drove, the instructor said, very deliberately and seriously: "What you are about to do is very dangerous. You can die doing this."

The way I looked at it, I was staking my life on the quality of the car, the onboard fire suppression system, the seat belt and harness system, the helmet, the neck protector and my own driving abilities with 630 horses under my right foot.

Danger existed, so I prepared for it. There were no odds. The instructor didn't say, "OK, it's 2 to 1 you won't make it."

-- Vic (Rdrunner@internetwork.net), November 10, 1999.

No, Maria. During the instruction period before I actually drove, the instructor said, very deliberately and seriously: "What you are about to do is very dangerous. You can die doing this." The way I looked at it, I was staking my life on the quality of the car, the onboard fire suppression system, the seat belt and harness system, the helmet, the neck protector and my own driving abilities with 630 horses under my right foot.

Danger existed, so I prepared for it. There were no odds. The instructor didn't say, "OK, it's 2 to 1 you won't make it."

Do you do this every time you drive a car?

-- (duh@duh.duh), November 10, 1999.

"You may be struck by lightening; you may get hit in a drive by; you may get a heart attack."

So I do not play golf in a thunderstorm or go near drive-by vulnerable areas. Now the heart attack--yes, it's true, 75% of diabetics die of heart disease. So I watch what I eat, get regular check-ups and take a baby aspirin every day, as recommended by my doctor. Prudent precuations. Just as my Y2K/disaster preps are prudent in their context.

"According to Old Git, just putting on a seat belt and driving a car with a good safety record are preparing for the worst. I say it's not. Preparing for the worst is driving a tank down the road and wearing a full suit of armor."

I don't consider my Y2K/disaster preps the equivalent of driving a tank and wearing a full suit of armor. They are appropriate to the situation, as is wearing a seat belt, driving a safe car, and keeping insurance current.

Answer me this, Maria. Pretend your mother needs life-sustaining medication. Without it she can die within 24 hours. The insurance company won't let you renew the one-month prescription until there's only 7 days left. Do you shrug your shoulders and not worry about any kind of delay in the JIT pipeline? Or do you find a means to stash away a little emergency supply? What would YOU do?

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), November 10, 1999.

Vic, the instructor said, "What you are about to do is very dangerous. You can die doing this." Take a closer look at those statements. What makes car racing dangerous? By your previous post, the increased speeds. Driving at increased speed is dangerous because of the decrease in reaction times. This is also true on the road. Looking at statistics, you'll find that more fatal accidents occur with increased speeds and drivers loosing control. What do statistics tell us (in any situation)? They give us insight into the odds and in this case, that the probability of dying in an accident increases with increased speeds (hence the speed limit placed on roads).

The stakes, "You can die doing this" holds true in numerous other life situations. The stakes are the outcome of life events. This part of your instructor's statements represents the stakes involved. You can die walking down the street tomorrow. However, the odds (probability) are extremely low in this example with the stakes being the same, death.

You have exactly proved the title of this thread to be false. Based on the odds of an accident occuring during the race (which are much higher than normal controlled driving), you prepared accordingly. Based on the odds of your judgement of Y2K, you have prepared accordingly.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), November 10, 1999.

Old git, I know it's hard but try to understand the words that get posted. If my life (or any member of my family's life) depended on medication, I would ask the doctor for an additional scrip and pay for the drugs (screw the insurance). I have done exactly that when my life didn't depend on the medication. So, you can bet if my life depended on it, I'd follow through. This falls into the "other life situations" where the stakes are high.

"I don't consider my Y2K/disaster preps the equivalent of driving a tank and wearing a full suit of armor. They are appropriate to the situation, as is wearing a seat belt, driving a safe car, and keeping insurance current." Based on the odds, my dear. Appropriate based on the odds. Obviously you feel the odds of Y2K disaster are much higher than a fatal car accident. Thanks for proving the title of the thread to be false.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), November 10, 1999.

I have no difficulty understanding your limited vocabulary, Maria, thank you. So you would stock additional medication, Y2K or not. Then why not stock additional water and food as well? If it's possible the medication supply lines might go down for any reason; it's equally possible the food and water supply lines might go down. I'm dead in a day without medication, dead in three days without water. Come to think of it, I have only a small store of drinking water, certainly not one-third the amount of medication I have stashed. I guess I need to stash more water then.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), November 10, 1999.

BW and Lewis, Thanks for the insightful post.

Whoever said that if they are wrong they can eat their preps is the worst kind of DGI. SOOOO foolish to prepare that way for Y2K. Learn to make a lifestyle change and STAY prepared for ANY emergency. Throwing preps away after Y2K is just plain DGI.

-- Walt (walt@lcs.k12.ne.us), November 10, 1999.

I am genuinely surprised at how contentious a discussion of what seems to me like simple concept can be. I'd be happy to agree to disagree, Maria. You care for your loved ones as you see fit and I will do the same.

Good night.

-- Lewis (aslanshow@yahoo.com), November 10, 1999.

Why on earth are you fine people bothering with this moron?

May as well try to discourse with Stephen Poole.

Maria fails to tell us she IS already prepped for a month +.

[will fish up thread on request]

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), November 10, 1999.

Colin MacDonald

Hmmmm, All of you have it wrong...except Colin MacDonald.

Don't any of you play poker? It's not about the stakes or the odds individually, it's about balancing the odds to the stakes. If I have a 1:10 chance of drawing to an inside straight, the dollar I bet better net me at least 10, or if I do this over and over again, I'm sure to lose money! I may get lucky once or twice, but if I bet consistently on the long odds / short return side of the ledger I will not possibly come out ahead.

Now, in terms of Y2K, each discrete possibility has to be weighed against the stakes. The stakes in the case of food and water disruption for a month could be death, right? If it's only a .01% chance, the stakes are high enough that I'll prepare. Simple enough.

Now, it gets much more complex at say a one year disruption in food and water. The odds are maybe .00001%. The stakes are high, but the odds longer. The stakes still make it worth preparing, but now variables come into play. If we really went that long, then society would be breaking down....If I had enough food and water for my family for a year, I would need to protect it...I would have to fight with my life. I don't own a gun, and never will. I won't kill people over my food supply.

If this really happened, communities would need to band together to grow food and share. The government (yes, the gov't) would in some way assist, even if 6 months into it. (Probably through confiscation and redistribution!) So, anyway you slice it, I probably (short of moving to a fortified cabin in the woods) would not be able to maintain my stash for that long. So I won't prepare for that long.

It's somewhere in between, right? Maybe three months, maybe six. I won't get a generator because I live in GA, and can do without. Also the stakes change with a generator because I can become a target....not good!

I won't consider myself a doomer. On the scale on described on this link:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001k70

I would probably say a 6-8. I believe people will die as a result of y2k somewhere in the world.

Am I a doomer? At least one nuke plant will release radioactivity somewhere in the world. At least one chemical plant in the world will experience a life threatening problem...etc. People will die.

Maybe one has already! When the city of NY did their backup systems 911 testing in the early summer, and the system went down, one man in the Bronx or Brooklyn was it, died as his girlfriend could not get through to the 911 system....over 20 minutes. Is this Y2K related? I believe so. Would he have lived if prompt action were taken? Who knows?

In the end, I think "it's the stakes not the odds" isn't quite the right phrase, but if anything, it more closely approximates the call to prepare, not ignore.

-- Duke 1983 (Duke1983@AOL.com), November 10, 1999.

This thread is a keeper. Rarely on this forum do you see a polly self-immolate in public so successfully. Great thread, and good job Maria!

-- a (a@a.a), November 10, 1999.

Maria fails to tell us she IS already prepped for a month +.

Based on the odds as well as the stakes, apparently. Thanks for proving her point.

-- (duh@duh.duh), November 10, 1999.

I live in South Dakota. The odds of getting hit by a blizzard at least once during the winter are fairly high. The stakes are extemely high--like freezing to death. During a blizzard you are pretty much stuck wherever you are, be that at home, at work or on the road. Wind, white-outs, snowdrifts, windchills of minus 40 or worse--you ain't going nowhere. No one is going to rescue you.

They can't.

If you are not prepared you are SOL.

Two years ago we had a "three day storm" every 12 days or so. Some areas were without power for weeks at a time. Stores did not get deliveries, propane could not be delivered to homes, roads could not be cleared before the next storm hit, banks were closed. We had to carve steps in the snowdrifts to get to the barn. One day the power went out while I was in the barn and I couldn't see the house to get back. I had to burrow into the hay bales with the dogs and cats (quite warm actually) till the power came back on.

If you're not prepared for a South Dakota winter, you are coyote bait.

If you're not prepared for possible y2k disruptions during a South Dakota winter you are stupid coyote bait.

-- Sam Mcgee (weissacre@gwtc.net), November 10, 1999.

Some risks are acceptable risks I choose to take-like driving a car or getting in an airplane. I prepare accordingly for them to my knowledge of what is prudent. The stakes of not preparing for infrastructure disruptions might make the difference on my life continuing fairly normally, or watching my children be hungry or cold. The stakes outweigh the odds when you think of it that way, at least for me. I personally think its a good bet to be as self reliant as possible for short term interruptions when it comes to heat, light and water and food, even if Y2k werent around, since electricity and all the rest isnt guaranteed, even on a good day. The bottom line: I can sleep at night, knowing I've done my best to meet the needs of the people I am responsible for. Some peace of mind in a can of beans, even more in my bookshelf full of how-to texts. Funny how people want this to be a crime.

-- LauraA (Laadedah@aol.com), November 10, 1999.

Thank you for starting this thread, Maria. It gave Lilly somewhere to put her views. And I consider what she has written to be of great value. Do you have eyes that see, and ears that listen?

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), November 11, 1999.