Hi all,

I have posted a new article titled "The Key Battle of Y2K" on my website at www.JimLord.to (click on What's New).

I will be putting up two articles a week for the next couple of months and will inform the board when they become available.

thanks,

Jim Lord

-- Jim Lord (JimLordY2K@aol.com), October 06, 1999

Answers

Thank you!

Mike

======================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), October 06, 1999.

Jim Lord,

I saw your CSPAN interview, and I've read your column.

You ought to be on a goddamned postage stamp or something. I'm going to be waving your prognostication around vigorously in 2000 and beyond, so folks are aware of the work you did and the risks you took to mitigate the effects of this collossal SNAFU.

You are an exemplary American hero.

-- Dr. Polymorph (Iknowmore@thanyoudo.com), October 06, 1999.

The article is in a PDF file, and I have a hard time downloading these type of files. Can anyone give a summary of the article? Would appreciate it, thanks.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), October 06, 1999.

Jim;

Thanks for all the great work you've done!

We (at least most of us) appreciate the update on your new article and look forward to reading this and future commentaries.

-- TrustHim (ItComes@Soon.now), October 06, 1999.

Thanks Jimbo. Great article. (watch your mouth, Flint)

-- a (a@a.a), October 06, 1999.

Jim,

Thank you for the heads up. I relish all that you write and appreciate the courage you show.

While I agree with you about the Battle for Y2K is a battle for one's mind, ie. perception management to be politically correct, I think there is at least one other facet that has shaped strategy in the first 9 months of 1999, namely:

The powers that be reasoned (correctly I believe) that no matter how Y2K impacts any of us the impact would be more severe if it is preceded by a panic. Some time ago, say 1.5 years ago, TPTB had the option to "declare a state of war on the Y2K menace and mobilize what ever it takes to defeat Y2K." This was not adopted, I believe because it would have been disruptive to the present Y98 and Y99 order. So I beleive "Panic Avoidance" has been the prime directive so far which has stalled grass roots activity and individual preparations. This has bought the Establishment some time to:

a. Get more work done fixing systems and developing contingency plans.

b. Continuation of business as usual, relatively normal market activity until recent Gold Bull Market began, continuation of consumer spending and economic activity. The Powers that Be were able to maintain three good quarters in 1999 so they get their bonus incentives.

At the same time it has had a negative affect of putting the general public to sleep - big time. I agree that the only thing that might get enough people to prepare at all would be either a major leader - Clinton? ??? to come clean on real Y2K impacts or a very obvious Y2K impact that got people to recognoze the potential severity of the whole problem.

Thanks for letting this forum know of new essay on your site.

God speed.

-- Bill P (porterwn@one.net), October 06, 1999.

Well put, Jim.

dave

-- dave (wootendave@hotmail.com), October 07, 1999.

hey bill, another thing, the endless mantra of "three day winter storm" may have something to do witht eh fact that SME's are WAY behind... geee, who has been put to sleep? John Q. public. and who owns all those SME's? Our good friend john Q. looks like kosky's catch 22 just got a whole new dimension of fucked-upedness... excuse the french

-- jeremiah (braponspdetroit@hotmail.com), October 07, 1999.

Test version for those of you who are Acrobat challenged:

The Key Battle Of Y2K

The skirmish lines have been drawn and the troops are in place. The great battle of the Y2K drama is now upon us. This will not be a struggle involving lines of computer code. Nor will embedded chips be at the center of the conflict. In fact, this conflict will have nothing to do with computers or technology. The key battleground of Y2K is public opinion. The prize in this battle is your mind. The government has decided on a Y2K policy and it has now been set into stone. This policy has the following elements.

1) The effects of Y2K will be modest in this country. There will be some disruptions but no serious failures.

2) The most serious Y2K failures will be in foreign countries.

3) Individuals, businesses and local governments should prepare for a three to five day inconvenience.

4) Irrational behavior by individuals and businesses poses a greater threat than computer failures.

The federal government and big business have created a formal alliance to manage Y2K. The government's Y2K web site at www.y2k.gov says a "Senior Advisors Group" consisting of over twenty associations such as the American Bankers Association, the Grocery Manufacturers of America, and the American Association of Railroads are "advising" the government on how to manage Y2K. What does this group do? The web site says,

"The Senior Advisors Group  offers recommendations  on how industries can best work together in critical areas such as providing information to the public (my emphasis) on the status of Y2K efforts, establishing industry-wide emergency response plans, and dealing with international Y2K challenges."

At first blush, it makes good sense for the government to be calling on organizations such as these to help in a situation of this nature. It is now obvious however that a primary objective of this alliance is not to inform the public but to control public perception of Y2K. The mainstream press has been brought in to help in the scheme. Reuters on, Apr 8 says,

"Information is being touted as the most potent weapon in the battle to prevent a possible year-end run on banks, gas stations and mutual funds, and the media is seen as a critically powerful force in shaping public behavior. At a recent Media Studies Center forum in New York called ''Y2K: The Press and Preventing Panic,'' two of Washington's leading Y2K trouble-shooters urged reporters to be generous with reassuring news and helpful advice (my emphasis) on do's and don'ts. ``The issue to deal with is panic. The issue is overreaction ... that's where the risks are,'' John Koskinen,  said."

John Koskinen, of course, is Bill Clinton's Y2K mouthpiece The other troubleshooter referred to in the article was Edward Kelley, a senior governor of the Federal Reserve. And now the key question - why are they working so hard to control the public perception of this issue? First and foremost is protection of the banking system. I have written about this before but just to recap:

a. For every $250 on deposit in the banking system there are just three dollars in cash within the banking system.

b. If the Fed put all reserve cash in existence into the banking system, then for every $250 on deposit there would be $15 in cash.

c. Current surveys indicate 30% of the public intends to make large cash withdrawals this year in preparation for Y2K.

This eggshell fragile banking system is seriously threatened by Y2K. If these polls come true, the banks will run out of cash and there will be an old-fashioned banking panic. (An upcoming article will be about an electronic run on the banks.) A second threat to the financial system involves the soaring stock market, which continues (until the past few days) to reach new "nose-bleed" highs day after day. The concern here is that Y2K-induced panic selling might crash this market into the dirt. It is critically important to the government that the markets not fall in an "uncontrolled" way, which could bring down the entire global financial engine.

There is even a special team of high-ranking insiders set up to prevent this problem. According to a Feb. 23, 1997 article in the Washington Post (which first coined the phrase), this "Plunge Protection Team" is formally called the Working Group on Financial Markets. Its members are the secretary of the treasury and the chairs of the Federal Reserve Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The article states,

"The Working Group's main goal, officials say, would be to keep the markets operating in the event of a sudden, stomach-churning plunge in stock prices -- and to prevent a panicky run on banks, brokerage firms and mutual funds. Officials worry that if investors all tried to head for the exit at the same time, there wouldn't be enough room -- or in financial terms, liquidity -- for them all to get through. In that event, the smoothly running global financial machine would begin to lock up. "This sort of liquidity crisis could imperil even healthy financial institutions that are temporarily short of cash or tradable assets such as U.S. Treasury securities. And worries about the financial strength of a major trader could cascade and cause other players to stop making payments to one another, in which case the system would seize up like an engine without oil."

You see folks, these dangers don't come from Y2K computer failures. They exist because our systems are so fragile they cannot withstand the turmoil of the marketplace. Over and over, the government whines about needing to control our irrational behavior. This is an insult. The code is broken. Our well being is threatened by this fact. It is entirely rational to store food, accumulate cash and get out of the stock market if you understand the dangers of Y2K. To call us irrational because we are not willing to subject ourselves to these dangers is arrogant and deceitful.

The fact is you and I did not create this dangerous situation - they did. If these arrogant insiders don't like the consequences of falling off the high wire, they should stop building systems so high off the ground. Fractional reserve banking does not benefit you and I. It benefits the bankers at our expense.

I once heard a banker say, "Well, of course we don't have your money in the bank. We lend it out to other people. That's how we make money after all." This statement is true but incomplete. The fact is the bank lends your money out EIGHTY-FIVE times. That's how they end up with just three bucks in cash for every $250 on deposit. If you or I did business this way we would go to jail. The fractional reserve banking system is a government-protected scam perpetrated by private fat-cat insiders. It is the final stage in a decades long debauchment of the currency.

There is no reason why you or I should stand around looking up at that piano hanging over our heads by a thread. Step aside. When this crash occurs you must be well back out of the way. Most of all keep your head down and your helmet in place. The bullets are beginning to fly in this battle for your mind.

Y2K is Dead (?)

The sad news is the government's efforts to mold and control this story have been almost entirely successful. The press is bombarding us with a steady stream of stories about successful Y2K tests many of which are nothing but public relations stunts. There is no investigative reporting being done of the important, underlying technical issues. Nobody in the press is asking the hard questions. As a result, nothing is getting out to the public but the good news.

Remember, Y2K problems today are going to be like Herpes. Nobody will admit to having them. "No, no, that's not Y2K on my lip. It's just a cold sore."

There are other signs as well - sales of dehydrated storage food, gold coins, and generators have dropped like a rock. Community preparedness groups across the country are reporting their growth has slowed to a crawl. Meanwhile, dozens of "hoarding" stories are showing up in the press. Most of these snicker at these foolish, survivalist goof balls (like me) who are telling people to put aside some extra food and water. Y2K is not dead but it will probably stay in hibernation until a large, splashy computing failure occurs that affects lots of people in some important way. That might be months away. I can only advise that you continue with your preparations and steel yourself to take abuse from your friends, neighbors and loved ones who are unable to withstand the onslaught of the government propaganda machine. You'll have to be strong. Things will probably get worse before they get better.

-- a (a@a.a), October 07, 1999.