Thanks to the faithful lurker who emailed me this thread:

Will this bomb ever explode?

I walked into a grocery store yesterday and was not stunned to find the shelves fully stocked. The subsequent trip to the gas station was equally uneventful. During my travels, I did not see a single crime (aside from a few minor traffic violations). The few people on the streets seemed more intent on enjoying the warm weather than on pillaging the local stores. It was, by any measure, an unremarkably average day.

Flint, Hoffmeister and other "pollyannas" predicted this--that 2000 and 2001 would be pretty similar to 1999. The economy has cooled off a bit, but we still have stumbled into a recession or stock market collapse. Unemployment is still low and inflation modest.

Y2K was a nonevent. The slight turbulence in today's economy is not due to Y2K. The "doomsayers" were wrong, as was evident to most objective observers in late 1999. The online debate about Y2K was shrill and there was poor behavior on both sides. Admitting I may not be entirely objective, I found the heated rhetoric of the "doomsayers" far more nasty and personal. "Pollyannas" were accused of condemning children to death by their failure to "get it." A few "doomsayers" gloated over the idea of "pollyannas" slowly starving to death.

In the aftermath of Y2K, Yourdon and his sysops fled to EZB. Interested "pollies" like Flint were denied entrance. "Doomers" who were far more hateful in their rhetoric were allowed in. Like any closed system, EZB eventually failed.

The latest incarnation of EZB shows the usual cast of characters, and a fair amount of revisionist history. To those who want to live as neo-homesteaders (or survivalists), may you all prosper. You do not need to manufacture fictional crises to justify your lifesyle choice. You will also learn far more if you consider the past with a measure of objectivism. The opposition provided by the pollies was generally thoughtful, grounded and relevant. This same opposition would make the new EZB a far more interesting and vital place. In short, it would become more like this forum.

-- Remember (the@ld.form.com), April 26, 2001

Answers

Errata - we have NOT stumbled into a recession...

-- Remember (the@ld.forum.com), April 26, 2001.

Errata - we have NOT stumbled into a recession...

Is that a prediction that GDP figures for the first quarter of 2001 -- when they're released tomorrow -- will show an increase?

-- (Predictions@are.risky), April 26, 2001.

Let me be more precise. If we stumble into a recession (and we will at some point), it will have nothing to do with Y2K. The structural economics problems of 1999 and 2000 are coming home to roost. It has been a softer landing than I anticipated so far, but we'll know more by year's end. Oh, and a recession is nothing compared to the Great Depression/Civil War scenarios predicted by the "doomers."

-- Remember (the@ld.forum.com), April 26, 2001.

So what do you want - a medal?

-- (@ .), April 26, 2001.

Remember (the@ld.forum.com) = Ken Decker

-- nice try (bonehead@kendeckerworld.com), April 26, 2001.

Be nice, "a," or I'll post your predictions from May 1999.

-- Dismember (the@ld.forum.com), April 26, 2001.

A quote from the king of delusion.

-- Former doomer (Former@doomerz.con), April 26, 2001.

Zog speaketh.

" And for the record, the polly's were WRONG, WAKE UP AND LOOK AROUND. THE ECONOMY AND INFRASTRUCTURE ARE COLLAPSING. The doomers were slightly wrong on the timing, not the over-all results. Not "all" the problems were y2k related, but a boatload were and are, which lead to other problems, then others, the inflated bubble economy caused by decades of neglect resulted in billions and indirectly trillions of dollars of not needed in the first place totally stupid repairs that could AND SHOULD have been avoided in the first place, and millions of manhours and dollars that should have been used to fix other problems, or do other more practical and responsible things, but instead got diverted out of necessity because of bottom-line this quarter profits and just plain lazy IDIOTS who could program and/or sell things but NOT THINK,not REASON past a coupld of simple steps, over-specialised time wasters, from the top levels of industry and government on down. It was a man-made created problem that NEVER had to happen, but was continually created and carried out until the last minute, akin to setting fires in your house just because you know you got some tap water you can squirt on it later.Yes, squirting water on the fires can be considered a "job", but it's LAME. It would have been MUCH better to not create the problems in the first place, like could have happened, if people who could THINK made the decisions of import, but NO, that was too inconvenient or something. It most definetly helped bring about massive global financial damage that is GOING TO AND IS RIGHT NOW resulting in massive infrastructure and social damage.. If you can't see that I can't help you, it can't be explained much clearer than that. When talking about the big picture pollys were WRONG, they were right in only some of the finer and smaller and more technical aspects of the timing, but as to the big picture, ostriches at best."

-- Former Doomer (Former@doomerz.con), April 26, 2001.

Zog is an economic illiterate. The economy and its infrastructure are just fine, far better than during earlier decades. There was no "boatload" of Y2K problems, however Zog does have a fleet of delusions. Well, perhaps a conspiracy of multinational companies is keeping the power on, the phones working, businesses humming along and all economic indicators fairly positive. If so, I hope this conspiracy continues its excellent work into the future.

-- Remember (the@ld.forum.com), April 26, 2001.

Jonathan,

I think you being banned must have had something to do with you using your real name, you had a web-site which refuted a lot of the doomer arguments, and even though you were always polite you ripped the doomer arguments apart.

I, on the other hand, was not banned. Although it was well known that I was the "Doomslayer" troll for awhile. I guess they thought I didn't matter because I mostly threw out one liners rather than long essays debating point by point.

As far as I'm concerned, there wasn't much logic to either the Y2K-doomer position or the way the "sysops" handled the forum. I wouldn't look for any logic now given their track-record.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), April 26, 2001.

"before I became an op anyone on tb2k "banned" for other than quite frankly being in "violation" of netiquette common sense rules such as failing to refrain from, as indicated above, trolling, hacking, spamming, swearing, threatening, etc."

Not agreeing with Ed was considered a Violation of netiquette. Contacting him directly was a sin.

Banned One

-- Banned One (Beenthere@done.that), April 26, 2001.

I agree with Buddy, Jon. If the neo-"doomers" are delusional about today's economy, it's hard to expect them to be objective about the old forums. Posters like "Ex Cop" (Invar or Hardliner) have to invent "hate" email to justify banning "pollies."

The real problem for "doomers" is that the circle has grown smaller. Even Saint Yourdon has left for greener pastures. The reasonable people who were just scared have all departed. The only folks left are those who have made survivalism a lifestyle choice. The last thing they want to hear is actual real world data suggesting we may all live to a ripe, old age... without the benefit of 100,000 rounds of ammunition.

-- Remember (the@ld.forum.com), April 26, 2001.

Jonathan, your quote, "a computer..." reminded me of the one from Andy but I can't recall it fully. "One blank, two bytes, blank, blank" It's that old age thing.

Buddy, I wasn't actually thrown out, but Diane (the sweetheart that she is) deleted a number of my posts. Yeah, only smoke and mirrors can find any logic in doomer actions.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), April 26, 2001.

Good to read you again, Jonathan. *I* wasn't banned either, and everyone knew that I spent as much time posting at Debunkers as I did at TB2000. Buddy probably has a point about your website, but I never COULD get a grasp on the logic involved with the pre-formation bans.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 26, 2001.

Banning wasn't the only solution used to quiet those that disagreed with the allmighty sysops,they'd just lock your thread and delete further comments,questioning or attempts at discussion.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), April 26, 2001.

Greetings Jonathan! Been a long time. Here's hoping you stick around and chime in more often.

As for your getting a reasonable explanation as to why you were banned... There is no explanation that could even remotely be considered "reasonable" and therefore you won't receive one. Even more blatantly hypocritical was the case of Patricia. She never even posted to the old Timebomb forum yet they banned her. I'd love to see 'em try to use their "rules" to explain that one. LOL

-- CD (costavike@hotmail.com), April 26, 2001.

What's interesting is the direction of the grudges. Those willing to express optimism and even (horrors!) defend it were, uh, not treated nicely in those days. Clearly, those who locked themselves into a ghetto, banned anyone who got it anywhere near right, and "disappeared" both people and comments regularly, did all this to protect a party line from the ravages of rampant reality.

Meanwhile, those who suffered the worst treatment, both from the posters and (increasingly as time went on) from the moderators' policies, cheerfully set up wide open discussion groups to discuss anything and everything, everyone welcome. I certainly don't care what might have motivated all the excitement various people experienced before the rising sun showed the boogeymen to be imaginary. I'm willing to talk to anyone who has anything interesting to say.

Sysman finally (after 16 months) questions whether it's any longer necessary for those who were so very wrong to bear such bitter grudges against their more insightful ex-fellows. He senses that by prohibiting or evicting anyone who gets things right, his shrinking club is self-selecting for those least willing to view their world with a jeweler's eye. The level of quality in the resulting discussions has fallen below even Sysman's minimum standards, and he craves the kind of thought so assiduously excised from his little group.

And clearly, the dregs he is beseeching have banned all but those of deaf ear. Why would he even bother with the appeal? Why not simply come over here and join in wherever his fancy strikes? What's special about Sysman is that, while he seems to have no ability to predict the inevitable, he can (at long last) recognize that it has come to pass. This clearly sets him apart from the likes of Zog, for whom the real world is an unnecessary inconvenience, and who livesa frightened life in a post-armageddon world nobody else even notices.

So it's fascinating looking at the remnants, the truest of the true faithful, exercising their immutable denial to the very end and beyond. Watching them is one of those priceless little gems life hands us for free every now and then.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 26, 2001.

Strange, but it takes me about 10 minutes per page at EZboard to either load it completely (1/4 of the time) or get a "server not responding" error (3/4 of the time). For me, this makes that site impossible to navigate. Life is too short.

Does anyone else have this problem?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 26, 2001.

Flint, the ez boards are being abit erratic since they migrated. Sometines I get an error message and sometimes it's pretty fast loading. It will probably take a few days to work the bugs out and fine tune. BTW, you are UNBANNED at TB2000, as are anyone in the past who have been banned.

-- Marg (okay@cutaway.com), April 26, 2001.

Flint:

I am connecting from high speed ethernet on fiber. I did look when they came back up. I saw what Marg described. Sometimes I could open a board quickly and then not open a thread. Sometimes one board would be open and not the others [there are a number now].

Me; unbanned. Unfortunately, I must begin to travel again. Won't be around much after the first part of May.

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), April 26, 2001.

It's good to see the familiar names and handles again! Hello Jonathan, CD, Maria, Flint, capnfun, and Anita.

[RANT ON]

The doomers who ran the old boards pre-non-event comprise a study in the power of delusion transmitted across open media. They were wrong in so many ways on so many levels that it is difficult to sum it all up.

But alas, I will try...

Intellectually, they were bankrupt. They shunned the scientific method in a way that would embarrass the most gullible member of any self-respecting religious cult. They ignored facts, manipulated and misreported evidence, and attacked anyone who dared hold their precious meme beneath the light of a legitimate question.

Socially, they were inept. I suspect this to be the main reason they sought (and found) refuge in a group seeking to isolate itself from society at large. They were isolationists in search of an isolator, and they found their gem in Y2k hysteria.

Morally, they were indecent. Each leader had some good or service to sell, along with their memetic fancy. They plundered an under- educated public with their fear-mongering; parading their degrees, book credits, and their "years of programming experience" in front of a populace largely ignorant of the power and influence of the computer in modern life. They cited everything from the writings of Nostradamus to the New Testament to legal rear-covering by insurance actuaries; and then cross-posted these same illegitimate and illogical arguments a thousand times over - and then used the fact that the number of hits one received when performing a search on the subject as empirical evidence of the growing nature of the problem.

It was ludicrous.

The only pity is that Mr. Yourdon and Mr. North and their cohorts in this fraud have not yet been named in a class action law suit and held personally responsible for the monies utterly wasted in the name of their pet fears.

As for the conduct of the Hysterium (may it rest in peace) staff and supporters and it's "uncensored" (laughing as I type, yet again) and later demised cousin, they will stand as monuments forever attesting to the fact that fascism works but for a while...and then turns on the hand that fed it with a vengance. To the sysops of the Hysterium, Mr. Yourdon, and all who supported their actions, I have but one thing to say:

ha

[RANT OFF]

Vindicated Regards,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), April 26, 2001.

Sigh. One little step at a time. I finally got the complete page to load that's linked to in the opening post on this thread. However, nowhere on that page do I see any button that even vaguely suggests making a respons to the post. I can start a new topic with the topic button, I can move to the prior or next thread. But how does one contribute another answer to that thread?

I've run out of buttons to poke, at about half an hour per button to see what it does! Is there a reply button that simply isn't loading on my system or what?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 26, 2001.

Greetings back at ya, Andy Ray. Been a long time. Pull up a chair and sit a spell.

Flint- Just an FYI, I couldn't find a reply button anywhere on that forum either. (Perhaps "registration" is required?)

-- CD (costavike@hotmail.com), April 26, 2001.

I don't know about Zog's forum, but I was able to reply to the forum of Dennis by clicking on a little "reply" word. There wasn't a BUTTON. Then again, I'm already a registered EZBOARD user [under a few names.]

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 26, 2001.

Anita:

Yes, that worked fine for me on Dennis' forum, and my reply actually showed up! (I retried enough times and waited long enough so I could actually see it).

Zog's is still a mystery, though. Maybe CD is right.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 26, 2001.

Flint: Trying multiple times and WAITING is the story of my life here on Greenspun. I clean my cache, log in at odd times [like 4am], and STILL I must refresh several times to get to the bottom of long threads, just to find that the new posts are engaging in the same vendettas of the old ones. EZBOARD loads are NOTHING in comparison, although annoying in their popups.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), April 26, 2001.

Thursday April 26, 6:06 pm Eastern Time

Fed Less Optimistic About Quick Rebound

By Marjorie Olster

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. (Reuters) - Federal Reserve officials sounded less optimistic on Thursday about the chances for a U.S. economic recovery early in the second half of the year, saying that rebound might now be delayed.

In an onslaught of Fedspeak, two Fed board governors and three regional bank presidents appearing at several different events around the country offered current views on the economy following their surprise interest rate cut last week.

The speeches left a clear impression that the Fed stands ready to lower rates further in the near future if economic weakness persists. Hopes for further rate cuts boosted stock prices moderately.

A few months ago, when the Fed began to lower rates in the face of a sharp deceleration in growth, central bankers had sounded confident the economy would spring back in the second half of the year. But they now seem to be changing their tune.

``For the nation, I am expecting a faster growth rate by the end of the year. The turnaround probably has been delayed somewhat,'' Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President Robert Parry told reporters after a speech in Santa Barbara.

``I think that the recovery is going to be perhaps in the initial stages somewhat more moderate,'' he added.

Philadelphia Fed President Anthony Santomero, speaking to financial analysts in Philadelphia, said he expects ''unacceptably slow'' growth through the first half of 2001 with a rebound likely in the second half of the year. But growth would reach more acceptable levels only in 2002, he added.

Both businesses and consumers have cut back heavily on spending recently, confidence has fallen and layoffs are mounting. Meanwhile, the manufacturing sector is contracting, the stock market has dropped sharply, energy prices are rising and California is mired in a severe power crisis.

Explaining the Fed's shock rate cut last week, Parry said recent data had confirmed the economy was experiencing a significant slowdown and the Fed thought lower rates would boost spending and confidence.

RATE CUTS LIKELY

The Fed has lowered interest rates aggressively since the beginning of the year to try to get the benchmark overnight bank lending rate down to a level that is commensurate with an economy that has slowed to a near standstill.

Last week's half-point cut in key rates was the fourth in four months and brought the federal funds rate to 4.5 percent.

Using language that Fed watchers usually interpret as a signal of further rate cuts, Parry said the Fed would continue to be '`especially alert'' in monitoring the economy.

Santomero read from the same script: ``Should further unexpected weakness in spending materialize, the Fed has the latitude to again respond quickly and effectively -- just as I believe we have in the past four months,'' he said.

Wall Street is anticipating another reduction on May 15 when the policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee meets.

Parry said he does not expect the economy to fall into a recession and estimated the current growth rate to be a small positive. He predicted a more ``respectable'' pace by year-end but added the economy would not likely return to its full potential this year.

``No doubt, the road now and immediately ahead may be rocky, given the fact that there are some downside risks,'' Parry told regional business and political leaders.

RISKS ABOUND

Further declines in stocks or confidence could exacerbate the slowdown in spending and investment, officials said.

Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig said a number of risks still clouded the economic outlook, including an overhang of business inventories and a possible slowing in retail spending as consumers increase their saving.

He also said historically high levels of business and consumer debt could be a drag on the economy if incomes fall.

Hoenig is a voting member of the FOMC this year while Parry and Santomero are not.

Santomero said an uncertain outlook for business is likely to depress capital spending.

U.S. growth slowed to an anemic 1.0 percent pace in the fourth quarter of last year and has stayed very weak in the first months of 2001 after years of booming consumer spending, business investment and huge stock market gains.

Preliminary first-quarter figures for gross domestic product growth are scheduled for release on Friday, and economists polled by Reuters forecast a rate of 1.1 percent.

Though the Fed is primarily concerned right now with averting a debilitating recession, Parry said there were clearly inflation pressures arising in certain parts of the economy, energy prices being one of them.

But Parry and Santomero both said the slack building up in this current slowdown may provide room for growth to pick up later without generating much inflation.

Highlighting one of the few bright spots in the economy, Fed Vice Chairman Roger Ferguson said the housing sector was holding up well despite the slowdown. Ferguson and Hoenig both spoke at the Levy Institute's conference on financial structure in upstate New York.

-- doomer forever (doomerforever@doomeer.proudofit), April 27, 2001.

They were wrong in so many ways on so many levels that it is difficult to sum it all up.

But alas, I will try...

Intellectually, they were bankrupt. They shunned the scientific method in a way that would embarrass the most gullible member of any self-respecting religious cult. They ignored facts, manipulated and misreported evidence, and attacked anyone who dared hold their precious meme beneath the light of a legitimate question.

It was still the official point of view even late in 1999 that economic and, yes, infrastructure problems as a result of Y2K remained a possibility.

http://www.businesstoday.com/techpages/y2kchronic11051999.htm

At the same time, a working group led by the Treasury Department voiced concerns about the Y2K readiness of key public and private institutions and the infrastructure of many countries including China, India, Russia.

The President's Working Group on Financial Markets cited concerns about small- to medium-sized enterprises worldwide, including in the United States, and about ``the financial sector in several small European markets'' that it did not name.

``One risk is the potential for a 'domino' systemic effect brought about by significant disruptions to these groups because of the Y2K rollover,'' said the working group, which consists of the Treasury, Federal Reserve Board of Governors, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Many of the countries that are least prepared for the Year 2000 are important energy exporters, said the report, prepared at the request of Rep. John Dingell of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the House Commerce Committee.

ENERGY EXPORTERS THREATENED

``Any significant disruptions from the century date changeover that impact (the energy) industry locally could have a negative impact on the U.S. and global economies,'' the report said.

Be charitable and be slow to judge 'doomers', Andy Ray. Some of them are in high places.

-- (Risk@manage.ment), April 27, 2001.

Jonathan! Long time no see. Welcome back. :)

I've told you before what I think about your banishment from TB2000-IIA3: guilt by association. While you yourself are a splendid fellow, you were associated with me, CPR, Paul, Cherri, et. al. -- and that was enough to do it.

There was certainly no logic in it, I'll give you that.

And by the way, just for the record -- Sysman's post is the first confirmation that I've had that I was, in fact, myself banned. I assumed that I was, but since I had absolutely no desire to post there (I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that I've visited the board in general), I didn't even bother to see.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), April 27, 2001.

Wow!

Lots of old handles! Glad to see yall are still kickin'!

So Buddy was Doomslayer.......ya learn something new everyday.

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), April 27, 2001.

Errata - we have NOT stumbled into a recession... Is that a prediction that GDP figures for the first quarter of 2001 -- when they're released tomorrow -- will show an increase?

-- (Predictions@are.risky), April 26, 2001.

Yes, it did increase by one percentage point to 2.0, one full point above the Year 2000 4Q, so we didn't even have one quarter of negative growth.... but still came to damn close for me as I was one of the several hundred thousand laid off in the Tech Industry. This was in March 2001. I found a better job in two weeks! Goes to show that every cloud has a silver lining....

-- Rob (celtic64@mindspring.com), April 27, 2001.