The Next Recession
Shelton Garner
Well, apparently the media has decide we're due for a recession. The
"meme" that started with articles in The Economist and USAToday is
beginning to bounce around the media food chain.
Despite low inflation, low unemployment, and low interest rates,
because people are beginning to buy big houses and generally feel good
about the future, a recession is just around the corner.
In large part, our current economic good times are the result of the
bullies of the world playing nice. But all bets would be off if
suddenly North Korea attacked the South (or simply collapsed for that
matter) or some other unexpected world event were to shake the
markets.
The thing I'm wondering about what a recession will do to the Net. It
seems to me that it's reached the point where even a recession isn't
going to prevent its continued percolation through the general
populace. It might slow or change the momentum, but it won't stop it.
In fact, it might speed up certain aspects of it.
Namily, people might turn to the Net for deals on books and other such
goods. Also, there is a chance that the trend towards "a networked
world" is so great that the downturn in consumer spending caused by a
recession would cause the computer industry to come up with a true low
cost "Internet Appliance" many of us have been speculating about.
Heck, TV went through any number of recessions and _that_ didn't stop
its speed of adoption. (Heck, maybe enough people will get fed up with
Microsoft's prices that they'll begin to turn to Linux in droves...)
But what about those hefty stock valuations for Net companies? Will
innovation be stifled 'cause they'll lose the ability to use stock to
buy other companies? And how will the Y2K bug factor into all of this
-- if we're in a recession already by 2000, could it knock us even
farther into deeper one?
lee
L. Shelton Bumgarner -- Keeper of the Great Renaming FAQ
Nattering Nabob of Narcissism * http://www.nottowayez.net/~leebum/
ICQ#: 9393354
Jeremy.
In net.current-events.general, Shelton Garner
(lee_s_b...@yahoo.com) said...
[Recession]
Hey Neil...
What are your feelings about cross-posting? How about multi-posting?
-J.
deja vu all over again.
--
No lover's ever faithful / No contract truly signed...
Never take a stranger's advice / Never let a friend fool you twice...
Never stay a minute too long / Don't forget the best will go wrong.
--"Nobody's on Nobody's Side", _Chess_
Shelton Garner
On 1 May 1998 22:49:00 -0700, whi...@caprice.Stanford.EDU (Jeremy.)
wrote:
>In net.current-events.general, Shelton Garner
>(lee_s_b...@yahoo.com) said...
>[Recession]
>
>Hey Neil...
>
> What are your feelings about cross-posting? How about multi-posting?
>
>-J.
>deja vu all over again.
Jeez, I only posted to _one_ other group! 8-) And how much more on
topic can you be than "net.general"?
Jeremy.
In the ongoing pursuit of being off-topic...
In net.current-events.general, Shelton Garner
(lee_s_b...@yahoo.com) said...
>On 1 May 1998 22:49:00 -0700, whi...@caprice.Stanford.EDU (Jeremy.)
>wrote:
>>In net.current-events.general, Shelton Garner
>>(lee_s_b...@yahoo.com) said...
>>[Recession]
>>
>>Hey Neil...
>>
>> What are your feelings about cross-posting? How about multi-posting?
>>
>>-J.
>>deja vu all over again.
>
>Jeez, I only posted to _one_ other group! 8-) And how much more on
>topic can you be than "net.general"?
Well, yeah. Given the rule of three and that I don't recall any specific
crossposting rules harsher than that here... I didn't really need to read
your article twice trying to figure out if there were any differences.
-J.
although I thought on top for net.general required off-topic everywhere
else.
Jim Kingdon
> I didn't really need to read your article twice trying to figure out
> if there were any differences.
I didn't really need to read it once. Skim, maybe....
Neil Crellin
While bad journalists might consider it news to write about themselves
or each other, I'd like to point out that discussion of on-topicness
or rules-adherence of this posting doesn't constitute what I as czar
consider to be a current event, and as such, I'm setting follow-ups
back to net.general. If you want to talk about current evidence of a
recession or current economic events, come on back. If you want to
talk about Lee, try another group. And Lee, if you're going to
multipost the same thing within net.*, cross-post instead. Just stay
within the rule of three and try to be on-topic is all I ask. And yes,
I consider your original post on-topic, just not the meta-discussion
of how you posted it.
-Neil Crellin <ne...@stanford.edu>, net.current-events czar.
whi...@caprice.Stanford.EDU (Jeremy.) writes:
> In the ongoing pursuit of being off-topic...
> In net.current-events.general, Shelton Garner
> (lee_s_b...@yahoo.com) said...
> >On 1 May 1998 22:49:00 -0700, whi...@caprice.Stanford.EDU (Jeremy.)
> >wrote:
> >>In net.current-events.general, Shelton Garner
> >>(lee_s_b...@yahoo.com) said...
> >>[Recession]
> >>
> >>Hey Neil...
> >>
> >> What are your feelings about cross-posting? How about multi-posting?
> >>
> >>-J.
> >>deja vu all over again.
> >
> >Jeez, I only posted to _one_ other group! 8-) And how much more on
> >topic can you be than "net.general"?
>
> Well, yeah. Given the rule of three and that I don't recall any specific
> crossposting rules harsher than that here... I didn't really need to read
> your article twice trying to figure out if there were any differences.
>