The Y2K problem , whilst I hope the worst case scenario does not occur, many supposedly "intelligent" people I talk to about the subject stare back in amazement (as though I have seen a movie and believe it to be fact) , I get through some of the time.

However people prefer not to believe what they don't want to face (or are afraid of) and perceptions are so out of tune with what could and probably will happen…. Throw enough money at a problem and it will go away…..? with the UK Government talking in millions rather Billions they have still not grasped the reality of a problem with an immovable deadline. Hence the artificial smiles ("prime minister") for the millennium dome (monument to political folly).

I will laugh now at the lights going out at midnight on 31st December 1999 as I feel there will be too much on my mind then to laugh on the Eve of the Millennium.

As a youngster I remember reading how STALIN went from Villain to Good old Uncle Joe within 6 months by manipulating the publics perception. Is it that there is so much hype and propaganda, which is believed when it suits and not when it is unpalatable…? After all, there are a lot of gullible folks in the USA who believe Wall Street will go up forever.

Even if the US, UK and a bit of Europe and India get their acts partially together in preparing to avert the brunt of the Y2K problem (and there is no harsh winter), there must be a hell of a downturn in the world economy due to the looming problem.

Politicians derive most of their information and advice from their so-called "expert" civil service advisors. They were totally unaware (or worst considered it unimportant) of the implications of Y2K, when they picked a date for European Monetary Union ( fiasco ) …presumably it was bulldozed through ( Kohl running for Bismarck der Zweite ) nothing can go wrong nothing must go wrong….but what if (and when) it does what happens? Keine Antworte..maybe not Bismarck but Schicklegrubber?

And the US rearrange their tax ?

Well as most computers will revert to 1900 maybe, we should adopt this at least for a while (but then maybe that would be like driving on the other side of the road - with a gradual transfer to the other side).

Why we should have no faith in politicians…they are too power hungry (and hope for monuments to their achievements (stupidity) ?

Europe's ability to address Y2K is due to the preoccupation with bulldozing EMU into play, coupled with the ability to waste resources and subject Europeans to their petty bureaucratic non democratic idea's.

As an example of the trivia (straight banana's on one side).

Two years ago there were 60,000 words written about ducks eggs - translate that into 9 languages and numerable copies and you realise a lot of tree's were processed into paper - to remain unread… the mind boggles at what they must have written about the Ducks.

If they (Europe's Bureaucrats) were to address Y2K, there is not the time to write the report let alone attempt contingency plans....

Maastricht, the treaty of moving goal posts (not to say motivator of creative accounting) that wants whatever the cost and suffering to merge differing economies that are not ready for such a move. With no contingency plans should there be failure (in other words if theses Eurocrats are not as smart as they think, chaos will result) the only consolation is the Euro gravy train could be derailed.

The late Sir James Goldsmith tried so hard to wake Europe up to the waste duplicity and bureaucracy that devours resources in order to keep the gravy train moving - and still this train chugs on.

As banks will shut down for longer than usual from December 31 1999, will the derivatives markets be unwound?? And of course after the currency traders have had a field day with Europe .( and hopefully screw up the ECU once and for all ).

We should expect the problem (Y2K) to be sensibly addressed by our politicians, but in reality that has to be wishful thinking …….Politicians love spending tax payers money on whatever makes them look good, and enables them to live in a style to which they were never accustomed ( except a few) before taking "office." Furthermore, they frequently address problems to which they have little or no understanding.

Sadly, Y2K is the only event I can recall where an "I'm all right Jack " attitude will achieve nothing (even short term), yet could have been an opportunity for mankind to help each other for their mutual benefit.

USA

A recent survey in the US claimed that only 15% knew the difference between a growth stock and an income stock. However, 43% believed Wall Street would compound 20% to 30% risk free for the next 10 years. At least that tells me why Wall Street is scaling such highs. Add to this the Mega-Takeovers/mergers we are seeing, and without doubt the classic credit bubble is nearing its bursting point.

It would appear that so few people understand profits/earnings are needed to sustain a market (they can have little idea as to how profits are made, nor the effort required to convert 15 to 20 cents on the $ to the bottom line.

The Legal System is of course getting geared up for Mega-Bucks from the inevitable litigation.

Alan Simpson – (http://comlinks.com/edit.htm) sums up the inability of many CEO's to grasp what may happen. And it would make many appear to think that they are compliant (when they may not be), but still do not consider their customers/suppliers. A company's debtors ledger is not much of an asset if there is little chance of it being paid.

Well, if there are any remaining doubts about gold's ability to reach new peeks (I mean 1980 ++++) just a little more patience ….hang on what fiasco will follow ownership of Gold mine shares with so many Nominee accounts (something a lot of folks in the UK are very wary of)? Another + for physical Gold.

http://www.cybermetrix.co.uk/dti.html offers the results of a recent survey conducted by Tate Bramald Consultancy Ltd. –this offers up lots of statistics and is perhaps the best I have read to date - 12 pages. If that's too long, read the conclusion on pages 11 and 12. It shows how 75% of participants CLAIM to have a good understanding of the issues involved. However, this is not the same as actually understanding - and could possibly lead to some complacency (as in Alan Simpson's example of CEO's rubber stamping year 2000 compliant when suppliers/customers ask if they are).

http://www.cybermetrix.co.uk/news.html offers 18 pages for those who take Y2K as a serious disaster waiting to arrive.

Maybe not appropriate Risks are in general now taken more seriously, however, the following point I hope will show how the simplest thing overlooked can magnify a problem into a disaster.

A London bank claimed to have identified risks, and made appropriate plans (not tested of course). On the day of reckoning the systems went down, their planned solution was to park a truck with banks of pre-configured PC's. What they had over looked was it would take 2 weeks to get parking permission for the truck..
Security is only ever as good as the weakest link.

An interesting related commentary late last year. The following was published by the Financial Times on Friday, November 28th 1997 - and written by George Parker.

"Tony Blair insisted yesterday that the government was on course to tackle the millennium bug in public sector computers in a program for around £1 billion.

An on Friday, January 2nd, 1998 Financial Times stated:

"Tony Blair will signal his determination to use the UK presidency of European Union to highlight the need for action to avert serious economic and social problems as a result of the millennium bomb.

This implies Mr. Blair is opting for more waffle and meetings - which demonstrates HIS lack of understanding of the magnitude and complexity of the problem, and corresponding time scale - not to say the money involved.

Christopher Osborne

United Kingdom

14 April 1998