Seek Community Relief -- Y2K & The L.A. Times

Good job L.A. Times -- creating community is a good way to go! -- Diane

Los Angeles Times http://www.latimes.com/sbin/iawrapper?NS-search-set=/36654/aaaa003z9654408&NS-doc-offset=3&NS-adv-search=0&

Monday, November 30, 1998 Got the Y2K Blues? Seek Community Relief Computers: Panic is the wrong response, but a few precautions are certainly in order. By DONELLA H. MEADOWS

I keep running into scary Y2K discussions, which I suppose will continue right up to Dec. 31, 1999, when the year 2000 computer bug will kick in and End the World as We Know It. Which is what some people say it will do. Others say it's all hype, a weird modern version of end-of-the-millennium hysteria. Every discussion I hear starts with those two positions. As the talk proceeds, the alarmists recite stories about chemical plants blowing up, trains screeching to a halt, even missiles launching themselves. They scare the bejabbers out of the scoffers. That doesn't mean the alarmists are right, it just means that images of impending disaster have more psychological punch than sunny statements of faith in computers, corporations and governments. So I watch perfectly practical people get converted within half an hour from "surely this is all overblown" to "hmmm, maybe I should stock up on canned goods and get my money out of the bank and buy an electric generator." At the latest of these meetings, involving charitable foundations, someone suggested we should pull out of the stock market completely so our portfolio doesn't take a dive. The Y2K problem--the fact that computer programmers long ago settled on two-digit representations for years and that, as a result, many computers could read "00" not as 2000 but as 1900 and either malfunction or shut down--worries me a little; these conversations worry me a lot. If all foundations (and pension plans and university endowments) pull out of the stock market, they will cause the very dive they're trying to shield themselves from. If we all empty the supermarket shelves, demand cash at the banks, drain down the tanks at the gas stations, if even a few of us hole up in the hills with rifles, it won't matter whether the computers go down on millennium midnight or not. We'll create our own catastrophe. Reminds me of Honolulu during the oil embargo. Hawaiians, 6,000 miles from their sources of almost everything, are jumpy about shipping interruptions in any case. In1974, their gas lines were longer than anywhere else. I got around by bicycle and avoided the lines; what bothered me was the toilet paper panic. Store shelves were bare not only of toilet paper, but of tissues, paper towels, any reasonable substitute. Whenever an incoming shipment was announced, lines snaked through the store. Even at one roll to a customer, toilet paper sold out within the hour. This went on for weeks. Finally the increasingly frantic orders of the store managers started to flow in. Toilet paper began to stay on the shelves. Once people saw it there, they stopped buying because, it turned out, each household had stockpiled something like a five-month supply. The stores sat on paper mountains for months, until household stocks were worked down and everything returned to normal. This self-induced crisis makes a useful point about Y2K. Our possible responses to that or any other threat fall into three categories. We can do things to protect ourselves individually, which, if everyone does them, will guarantee real problems. We can do nothing, which is inadvisable, because there could be real problems. Or we can do things to protect ourselves collectively, which will calm us down, bring us together and prepare us for other disasters, even if this one turns out to fizzle. I suggested to the charitable foundations that they announce jointly that they will not make any unusual investment swings during 1999. If they get the university and pension and mutual fund managers to join them, that would defuse most if not all investor panic. What I'd most like to see is a communitywide effort, spearheaded by local newspapers and/or TV stations, to check out systematically the supply streams that keep my community running--water, food, electricity, gas, cash. If we all knew from a reliable source (not the government) that the stores won't run out of food, the banks won't wipe out the records of our accounts, the lights will stay on, the Social Security checks will arrive, the hospitals will function and the sewage plants won't fail, we could enjoy a historic New Year's Eve without creating all sorts of unnecessary problems for ourselves. - - - Donella H. Meadows Is Director of the Sustainability Institute and an Adjunct Professor of Environmental Studies at Dartmouth College

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 02, 1998

Answers

What a complete muddlehead Donella H. Meadows is! There is nothing, unfortunately, that we can do "collectively", at least not above small, rural communities -- its too late for that. The ship is sinking, there is nothing that can be done, and there are only a few lifeboats. Of course, for those who are aware of this, the only sane thing to do is to stock up, withdraw from the banks, etc. "Think local, act personal."

And this is not panic. Panic is what will happen when people figure all this out for themselves, and realize that the situation is hopeless.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), December 02, 1998.

Jack, the situation will be hopeless if you persist in thinking and acting that way!

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 02, 1998.

Diane, Unfortunatly you are asking for me to put my faith in systems that could have fixed this problem 10 years or more ago. Now I need to be sure our family will have food, water, and heat here in Wisconsin. I am all for comunity but when I talked to the man from Emergency Government he said we will be having a meeting next spring would I like to come to it. In our conversation there is no food.They just 6 months ago threw away food from the bomb shelter days. The schools are not heated with wood. The city water???? So I tell every one I meet go get stuff now so we are not stressing the systems next year.

-- (hittner@tznet.com), December 02, 1998.

OK, Diane, blame the whole thing on me, then! ("Dang that #$@$$** Jack! He caused all this by saying that it was hopeless, and would happen!")

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), December 02, 1998.

No. I'm NOT blaming you Jack. You just, for the moment, represent a prevailing "Attitude" that needs to shift if we are ever going to make it through Y2K somewhat intact. You're an Archetype, Jack. Placing blame on anyone or anything is counter-productive. Lighting a global fire would be more useful before the lights go out.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 02, 1998.

If I get red hair and freckles, have a buddy called Jughead, go out with Betty and Veronica and live in Riverdale, could it then be said that I was an 'Archietype'???

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), December 02, 1998.

Diane, no one works harder than you to promote awareness of Y2K. If this were 1994, it would make sense. But its 1998 -- the last month of 1998 at that -- and its too late for Global Anything. Sadly, very sadly, the posts that are most reasonable (once you filter through extraneous garbage) at this late date are coming from Paul Milne. And I hope that his words provide the last ditch electroshocks that might convince others to head for a lifeboat while there is yet time for personal preparation.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), December 02, 1998.

If we all knew from a reliable source (not the government) that the stores won't run out of food, the banks won't wipe out the records of our accounts, the lights will stay on, the Social Security checks will arrive, the hospitals will function and the sewage plants won't fail, we could enjoy a historic New Year's Eve without creating all sorts of unnecessary problems for ourselves.

IF indeed! There are no reliable sources. Who could possibly give these assurances? "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride." What will happen within the world-wide, interlocking, interacting constellations of computer-based systems simply won't be discovered until they are all operating in real time using dates in the year 2000. Some will be 'fixed', some won't; some will be 'fixed' wrong, and fail; Some failures, and some 'fixes,' will induce failures in other systems. These are not statements of possibilities. The scope and effects of any failures that may occur are unpredictable, ranging from trivial to catastrophic. Donella H. Meadows didn't do her homework.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), December 02, 1998.

Tom, at least she has started to do her homework and may have impacted others to start.

Jack, it's never too late. Who is your FAVORITE all-time hero (not Paul)? What would your rolemodel do? Really?

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 02, 1998.

I saw that too - and this from a University Professor! -

So is she admitting that the administration has no credibility about anything? If so, the public will react (as you, she, and Diane, and others mentioned) by growing into a "self-caused" panic mode - which is panic -any way you look at it - because they (60-80%) will figure out the same thing.

If you can't trust the government to protect you, and to inform you correctly, then literally "its every person for themselves". Can a "community" as a group survive or grow?

Yes. If I (as a member of the community) trust (or can enforce) the "societial rules" of that community = be moral, follow the moral code, be fair, follow legal authority, do not kill, do not lie, do not steal, do not temp others .... any of these sound familar?

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 02, 1998.

>> I suggested to the charitable foundations that they announce jointly that they will not make any unusual investment swings during 1999. If they get the university and pension and mutual fund managers to join them, that would defuse most if not all investor panic.<<

This alone sounds like a recipe for economic disaster, given the world financial situation, *without* stirring Y2K into the mix!

Diane, surely you are not in agreement with this???

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), December 02, 1998.

Why is this article listed as an "advertisement"? Does anyone know what page it was on?

-- M.D. (md@here.com), December 02, 1998.

Community relief is the only way to go. Unfortunately, things have to evolve in patterns. In the pattern that we have now we're used to a contracting circle. Government (the outer ring) is the initiator and provider. Provisions (welfare, medicare, entitlements) flow inward -- to the individual or family unit.

Y2K survival calls for reversing this entire process. It begins with individual preparation, to the extent of the indiviuals ability. Then, like a ripple from a pebble tossed into a still lake, it spreads outward, first to neighbors, and then to small communities and neighborhoods, then to ever larger towns and cities.

The idea tossed about above short circuits the individual preparation. Why? Because it may disrupt society as we know it today. So let's all jump into a commune and prepare as a community, with no thought to individual preparedness.

Sorry, Dianne, it doesn't fly.

-- rocky (rknolls@hotmail.com), December 02, 1998.

I adore Donella. She is one of the foremost environmental thinkers of our day. Her book, "Beyond the Limits," is a seminal work in the environmental literature; that frightening graph on Jay Hanson's homepage (www.dieoff.org) results from computer modeling of volumes of research. She is also one of the more advanced systems theorists currently publishing in the environmemtal field---and she is WRONG.

Actually, I think Tom is correct in observing that she hasn't done her homework. I share Leon Kappelman's frustration with the ignorance of the tree-huggers when it comes to Y2K. It is equalled by my frustration with Y2K aware people who seem to have no sense of or feel for environmental thinking even as they use similar research techniques, dialectic and processes to support their positions.

Environmentalists have been staring TEOWAWKI in the face much longer than than Milne, Infomagic or Cory. They should have a great deal to offer the concerned world right now in terms of preparations, lifestyle adjustments, community and philosophy. But, just as the Y2Krew generally has not researched Earth issues, I fear that the environmental leadership (as opposed to individuals)has not seriously looked into the dangers of Y2K. Not everyone can know everything, of course. But why are there so few of us here (and mostly on this NG, I might add) who understand the relationships between and similarities of these important issues?

I guess each of us has an investment in his or her own flavor of Armageddon. What else explains the mutual blindspots surrounding these important issues?

Hallyx

"What if from the beginning of life, nature were perceived as teacher, guide, source; as important to us as our families? How differently would we live?"---Anita Barrows

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), December 02, 1998.