I posted this story to csy2-k yesterday, but nobody seemed to care. Anyway, *I* thought it was interesting, for the following reason:

It appears that the US government has large stockpiles of wheat, and for some reason, they are not giving this wheat away as they usually do. Is it because of the "budget issues" that need to be "worked through" for fiscal '00? Or is it because they want the wheat at home?

If the formatting for this article is all messed up, I apologize profusely.

Jo Anne

----------

http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/991202/xd.html

Thursday December 2, 11:45 am Eastern Time

USDA says FY00 wheat donations abroad on hold

WASHINGTON, Dec 2 (Reuters) - U.S. budget managers have not determined how much wheat the United States will donate to foreign countries in fiscal 2000 from stockpiles of U.S.-owned grain, a U.S. Agriculture Department aide said Thursday.

The aide, who asked not to be identified, said the Clinton Administration still has not worked out how much money should be allocated for the transportation and the administration of wheat donations or which countries will receive the grain.

``We can't proceed with new donations until the budget issues are worked through,'' the aide said.

Not only is USDA unable to negotiate new donations for fiscal 2000, which began more than two months ago, but some agreements that were hammered out at the end of fiscal 1999 can not proceed until the funding is secured, the aide said.

For example, an agreement to donate 300,000 tonnes of U.S. wheat to Jordan has not happened due to the budget holdup, the source said.

The source stressed that the delay of the shipment to Jordan has nothing to do with Jordan's complaints of infestations in a cargo of 47,500 tonnes of U.S. Hard Red Winter wheat delivered in October, the aide said.

USDA in October said it could buy up to 3 million tonnes of U.S. wheat for its Section 416(b) foreign donation program in fiscal 2000, which began Oct 1.

In fiscal 1999, USDA bought about 5 million tonnes of wheat for donation to Russia and a long list of other countries.

-- Jo Anne (joanneslaven@home.com), December 03, 1999

Answers

Perhaps the Clinton Admin. anticipate additional transportation and administration problems within those countries because of Y2K and truly have no idea how much it could cost ?...

Also, if TSHTF real bad...some countries could change priority on the list...maybe, even as you suggest...USA will be #1?

-- eubie (eubie@my2cents.com), December 03, 1999.

wow, thanks Jo Anne!

Very interesting!!!

For what ever reason it looks like we're going to be getting wheat but someone, somewhere else isn't.

Mike

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

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), December 03, 1999.

To me, at least, it seems that because they do not know which areas of the world may suffer "humanitarian disasters," they might just be postponing business as usual.

Just my two cents. Worth what you paid.

-- Aunt Bea (not@in.Mayberry), December 03, 1999.

By the way, Joanne, how have you personally held up to the criticism that the "Joanne effect" was a bust (at least as the Pollys would tell us.)?

-- Aunt Bea (not@in.Mayberry), December 03, 1999.

Aunt Bea -

I never expected the fiscal '00 problem to be a huge issue. Only a wake-up call for some companies that had done absolutely nothing. (I'm speaking strictly of accounting general ledger systems, because that's my area of expertise.)

There are a lot of work-around procedures that might be used to enable a company to continue operating even if their system tanks completely when they try to roll over to fiscal '00. The most obvious would be to set the year-end date to 12/31/99, and continue as usual. Upgrade your software in the meantime. Worry about setting a correct fiscal year-end sometime after January 1.

I've noticed *a lot* of companies making announcements that they were officially changing their year-end date to December 31, btw.

Jo Anne

-- Jo Anne Slaven (joanneslaven@home.com), December 03, 1999.

Jo Anne: As one of our "net wits" pointed out some time back:"Pay attention to what they do, not what they say".

-- Neil G.Lewis (pnglewis1@yahoo.com), December 03, 1999.

Yep, we were posting re that little trick in January, and got swarmed by scoffing polly trolls, but after all it *was* in the newspaper. Besides we were told by several .gov bozos that "Oh the fix is easy we just trick the computer with the dates."

Nice to see you posting here, Jo Anne.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), December 03, 1999.

Nice to see that y'all remember me :-)

Jo Anne

-- Jo Anne Slaven (joanneslaven@home.com), December 03, 1999.

Jo Anne

Good to see you "on board" still!

It would be interesting to see Canada's position on this. If both countries are in lock step, that would reveal a pattern.

I remember you explaining the "Jo Anne Effect" what a mountian out of a mole hill eh?

And now Koskie is saying the embedded systems are at risk. Well I think it is about time someone told BKS *VBG*

Comeback and don't be a stranger, oh and bring some beer to :o) My cousin owns Sleemans so that would be a good start.

-- (imager@home.com), December 04, 1999.

Wheat/flour will become the cociane of the 21st. century--the Ag War.

THE WORLD CRAVES OUR WHITE POWDER! WE CAN NOT BE STOP! scream the aggie terrorists.

A radio show about vice cops fighting the grain cartels of Kansas will become a hit with hundred of peoples!

-- Ocotillo (peeling@out.===), December 04, 1999.