So if our computers get beat with the Global FUBAR Stick (Any VAX 11/7XX series veterans out there?) what good will it do me to have cash? Why wouldn't I instead just buy necessities that I can use no matter what happens. You know, buy your groccieries for next year this year. Or buy gold and silver. Or buy items for trade (except if nothing happens these you'll likly be stuck with). Why should I run out and get any more than 60 days worth of cash? Can't see a reason to. I might want to adjust my investing stratigies or steer assets away from things that depend upon consumer confidence. And I certainly want to pay down my debt. (I HATE owing people money).

To wrap this up, it seems to me that the sort of conditions that would preclude you being able to access your money within, say, a week, would take the "fiat" out of our cash. And you know what they say. "Woe to ye of little faith".

Regards, and keep your...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), June 30, 1999

Answers

I'm also planning to have mostly supplies, not cash. I'm not so sure that bank runs would make cash worthless. If electronic money collapses, that's a dramatic shrinkage of the currency, which could make paper money worth a lot more...in any case, the "60 days" you mention would be enough for massive bank runs right there, so if you get that much you're part of it.

-- Shimrod (shimrod@lycosmail.com), June 30, 1999.

Shimrod's right. If electonic money goes blooey (a sophisticated financial term), cash will be king ... at least in the short run.

Supply and Demand. There will be drastic reduction in the supply of money (cash only, rather than cash plus credit cards, checks, other electronic promises to pay, etc.), therefore the demand for currency and it's purchasing power will skyrocket.

-- rick blaine (y2kazoo@hotmail.com), June 30, 1999.

Hey eyes_open,

You and I see things much the same way. I wont be part of a bank run for many reasons.

The real problem is that a whole of people will be part of the bank run panic. And, most people who are active in making preparations will not contribute to that chaos because they have already become aware, understand the issues and make decisions accordingly.

Unfortunately, there are a majority of people who don't understand the issues, will make sudden, rash judgements or simply panic when they see the news. Those are the people that worry me. Those are the people that will directly affect consumer confidence, etc.

If you do pull out two months of cash do it now.

Have you thought about the ramifications if there is a sudden rush of people doing this same thing? There just isn't enough cash available for everyone. So, people will be left without. People will become angry. Panic will spread. The whole entire situation then becomes even worse. It will be a vicious cycle.

And, I know it will occur. No matter how much confidence I have that the banking industry will be fine the fact is that I'll be in the minority. I'm not saying I think the banking industry will be fine, by the way.

Gage reaction by how you see your neighbors in that kind of situation. Think about how family members might behave under those conditions.

The industry is spending millions of dollars for public awareness because their fears are legit. They're doing statement stuffers, full page ads, bring trolls into discussions in forums because their fears are substantial.

So, if the question of faith should be directed at anyone, perhaps it is at those financial institutions who simply waited too long to fix their problems, who've not come out and stated directly that they are 100% certified compliant in all systems, etc.

You cannot operate a business so heavily dependent upon confidence when you don't work hard to preserve the confidence based upon tangible data. Spin, manipulation, advertising only can do so much for so many.

Any good ad person will tell you that if you reach only make an impression in a small percentage of your target audience your work is a success. The problem here is that in this campaign the stakes are higher and the bottom line is no matter what is done there is no way possible to get 100% of that target audience, spanning all demographics by the way, to react in your favor.

Mike (who's worked as an art director for many financial accounts) ========================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

The assumption you're making is that all the "bad stuff" is going to happen instantaneously. Uh uh. It's going to take a while to shake out.

Remember, there's a lot of momentum. It may take weeks or even months for it all to collapse.

Then again, it may not collapse at all.

But until you know for sure, cash will become the most desired commodity. Later, if things *really* get bad, cash may become worthless.

Jolly

-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), June 30, 1999.

I'm planning to have mostly supplies too but having a few weeks worth of cash is not a bad idea. It's easy to stuff your pantry full of canned goods -- it's harder and more dangerous to store extra gasoline which could be in short supply. Cash could be the edge you need to buy gas. Checks and credit cards could be an iffy proposition in January.

You also never know when you might suddenly need some kind of medicine like Kaopectate (sp?). Cash could be the edge you need. Or all-purpose supplies such as toilet paper.....

-- (grocery@shopper.yes), June 30, 1999.

I'm going to stick my neck out here and express a few opinions. What the heck...flames from my computer don't actually jump out and burn me, right?

I think it was last year sometime that the FDIC did a survey on the progress of U.S. banks. They were all graded. These grades were NOT to be divulged (for obvious reasons.) If Bank A had remediated 98% and Bank B had only remediated 50%, folks might just take all their money from Bank B and put it into Bank A. Thereafter, Bank A might just get the bug of complacency and Bank B just might get a fire under their butt and out-perform Bank A. What was to be gained by allowing banks to disclose their grades early? Nothing, so the FDIC put all banks under a gag order regarding revealing their grades.

Later, the Weiss folks decided to query the banks. They wanted banks to reveal their grades, despite the gag order. In SOME instances, bankers threw these queries into the garbage. In SOME instances, bankers queried banking authorities and were advised to NOT respond. In SOME instances, the Weiss folks interpreted the lack of data as meaning that the banks were in deep trouble....despite their stating that no responses were not included in their survey. Of course OTHER banks chose to disregard the gag order and respond to the Weiss survey anyway.

I read some posts on another thread that discussed things such as "If banks weren't ready in 1997, why would I believe they would be ready today?" The assumption on that one was that banks STARTED remediation in 1997. Some may have, but many others started LONG before 1997. Banks are NOT a government entity. They're a business, just like any other firm. They don't wait until the Feds say "start" to go about remediation (in general.) There are ALWAYS exceptions.

It's my feeling that soon we will hear news of 100% compliance by banks (including the fears that international banking won't corrupt their systems.) It's my feeling that the FDIC has been waiting for ALL banks to be able to make this statement before coming forth....for the above-mentioned reasons. Again, on another thread, someone asked the question regarding banks that were NOT FDIC insured. My response to that poster would be to move your funds to a bank that IS FDIC insured.

Regarding liquidity come end of year, I find it fairly short-sighted for folks to consider withdrawing 2 months worth of funds now. No flame is intended for those who choose to do so, but I must ask where you've been for the past several years? I've been stashing away 5's and 1's for quite some time now. The way *I* saw it, there could be a shortage of small bills to pay for items if everyone had the typical ATM 20's.

Much of the banking fear has been promoted by Gary North's site. He's made no secret that he wishes the banking system fail. More fear has been generated by those that despise the Rockefellers (sp?) and other families that have been associated with big banking throughout the centuries. I won't even go into the gold/silver vendors that tell folks that this will be the only currency available.

I, personally, don't see bank runs unfolding beyond the folks who have already withdrawn their money. I certainly don't intend to withdraw MY funds. Since I control my elderly mom's account, I won't withdraw HER funds either. My oldest daughter (much like another poster here) makes runs on her bank every time she sees something she wants.

The FEARS of such a happening, combined with the assured comments by those who DESIRE banks to fail will certainly create a small amount of havoc at banks. The folks with the greatest money in the banks, however, will typically NOT withdraw their funds.

In summary: I see all FDIC-insured banks announcing compliance in the next few months. Just in case local merchants have no change, I would suggest that folks have small bills to offer.

Okay...I'm done with my epistle and will now don my asbestos suit.

Anita

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 30, 1999.

Anita,

I'l gladly follow your opinion just so long as the banks drop that mandated diclaimer on every page of their compliancy reports. I have never seen any institution cover their butt with such a steel clad saftey net in my life.

"This statement contains Year 2000 Readiness Disclosures as defined in the Year 2000 Information and Readiness Disclosure Act, P.L. 105-271 (October 19, 1998). This disclosure, in whole or in part, is not admissible in any state or federal civil action to prove the accuracy or truth of any Year 2000 statements contained herein."

I may be naive when it comes to the banking institution but I just can't trust anybody who would post that on the front door of their corporation. Be it an auto parts manufacturer, telephone company, natural gas provider, hell I'd be nervous of the Pez Corp. had a such a blatantly "legalistic" attitue towards their product (in this case my money). Anyone who has faith in what they are saying doen't need a disclaimer warning. Sorry, called me old-fashioned.

-- (AtlantaAS@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

Atlantas:

First of all, thank you for not flaming. I consider it a blessing each time I dare to post on this board.

I totally agree with you. The disclaimers get in the way of our trust. Many firms, banks, etc. use those disclaimers because they're not sure that the electric companies will be compliant. Once we see more regarding electrical compliance, I suspect that SOME of these disclaimers will vanish. It may take a while, however. There will probably be some disclaimers left (particularly for banks), as they query those to whom they've lent money regarding THEIR compliance. In addition to that, there will ALWAYS be the disclaimers that the corporation lawyers INSIST on, so lawsuits will be minimized. I have to agree with the poster that wondered why MacDonalds hadn't put a warning on its coffee. When I see law suits by folks who drank hot coffee from MacDonalds and WON, I can certainly see why corporate lawyers error on the side of caution.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 30, 1999.

I hope your right Anita,

In this day and age of legal battles it is clear that we all need a little more extra protection in the courtroom. Maybe my fears are unfounded but at this point I have to be somewhat skeptical. I'll change my tune if in fact after 1/1/00 banks (etc.) start exhibiting better trust with their clientelle.

(e.g.)- I once heard that a woman sued the Weather Channel because they said it was going to be clear in her area that day. She claims that when she went out with her umbrella (trusting the WC's forecast) it rained on her and she caught a cold, missing three days of work, which she wanted to be compensated for.

It's not surprising to see so many legal warnings in this era, just disturbing. It sets precedents all over for people to lie and cheat and not have to be held responsible. Like I said, I hope your right. Until I know for sure I will take what you said into mind and tone down my rantings.

-- (AtlantaAS@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

oops, without her umbrella

-- (me@again.com), June 30, 1999.

I thought about leaving a substantial amount in the bank for mortgage payments. I figured, hey, if the loan company can't get the EFT from my account, its their TS. Then I read that during the bank failures of the 30's, people were foreclosed on when their bank accounts vanished even when the loan was with the same bank. Now I may take the "Flint" route.

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

Anita, I'm afraid you *are* part of the problem - you are intentionally hoarding the two denominations ($1 and $5 bills) that are already in short supply. There will be public perception problems if they dry up.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), June 30, 1999.

Anita,

Thank God you are not looking after MY life savings - how on earth can you be so cavalier with your own Mothers'....

Has it occurred to you that you may be flat out WRONG - you are waiting for the banking cavalry to come over the hill and announce worldwide compliance (!)

Bwwwwwaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Anita - please reassure me, you cannot possibly be this stupid, this naieve, can you?? please tell me that your post was a joke...

My life savings are being yanked as soon as I get the go ahaead, within the next month.

I don't want to be the one that said I told you so, but I will, in a little while...

Sleep well Anita - you know what you're doing, oh yes :)))

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 30, 1999.

Anita,

I appreciate your perspective and I even believe that the financial industry is well ahead of the rest of the other industries but I don't share your particular view regarding the reaction of the average banking customer. Furthermore, I don't think bank runs will be a one time event. There may be many. After all, all the issues with regard to Y2k glitches will not unfold at 12:00 am on 1/1/00 but unfold over at least the whole year of 2000. There are many other critical dates in the year 2000 that are causing concern.

Personally, I believe it wont take much to pull the hair trigger on this situation. In fact, if you read and keep up with those nearly weekly polls (no doubt partly funded by the financial institutions themselves) then you understand that even people who view Y2k as a non-event, bump-in-the-road situation are still planning on withdrawing money, closing accounts, dumping stocks, etc before the end of this year "just in case". These are the people who are aware enough to make a decision that they believe Y2k will be a non-issue!

What about the millions, yes millions, of other depositors, investors etc. who don't even have a clue? All they'll do is react to the situation in either a position of fear or anger or panic or prudent judgement.

You say that you believe that the industry will be 100% ready. My thoughts lead me to the conclusion that NO industry can be 100% ready. Why? Perfection is not a realistic goal which can be achieved with regard to Y2k remediation. Heck, Microsoft is still finding bugs in Windows 98. How can you believe that the more complex systems that institutions such as these depend on will be error proof?

There are too many different fixes, too many different definitions, too many points of possible failure. So, let's say that 98% of the industry will function without issues. Well, how will that 2% that suffer through problems effect the other 98%? How will confidence be challenged? How will the 2% of those affected react? How much stress will that 2% put on the rest of the system? How will flight to quality affect the individual businesses that the financial industry holds paper on? What about the possibility of defaults? What about the possibility of massive foreclosures? True, just possibilities but they make the mind want to shut down in a heap of bloody pain just thinking about them.

I don't want the system to fail. In fact, I'm very happy with seeing the current economic situation continue. However, if you're cruising along doing very well and all of a sudden you're hit with a fear you weren't prepared for such as a sudden bank holiday, a limit on withdrawal amounts, etc. how would you react? I suspect it would be with fear, panic, and concern for a percentage of the population. What kind of stress can that percentage, even if it's just 2% of the population, put on the banking system?

Regardless, I think having a 2% problem rate in the industry is optimistic and it'll be higher. And my thinking is that with Y2k perception IS reality.

Self-fulfilling prophecy means nothing to a person who had no clue, came to the party late and didn't make it to the front of the line to withdraw their $20.00 before the bank closed. They didn't know anything about this "y2k" business yet they'll suffer, their confidence will be shaken and they'll react in ways that aren't fun to think about.

Mike ======================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

Ok. So. I'll cut down the amount of cash I get to 30 days. Perhaps that will help. (Sound of drop going in bucket)

Now explain this to me. If people are still going to accept cash, why not checks? It's about the same thing. Actually, I would become highly insulted if anyone said they trusted the government (who stands behind the cash) more than me (who stands behind the check). After all, I pay my bills on time, pay back all loans, only take risks with my own money, never run up deficits.

But anyway, what conditions could exist that would make checks worthless but cash still viable?

Keep your check books and...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), June 30, 1999.

Okay, you guys. I still have my asbestos suit on, so I'm "armed" for this.

Brooks: I felt guilty about this one for a LONG time. Each time I cashed a $20 I expected a clerk to tell me that they had no ones or fives. It hasn't happened in two years now. I have enough now, so have discontinued the process.

Andy:

Yes...I AM being this cavalier with my mom's money, not to mention my own. I'm not being so cavalier with the monies that my brother has reserved for my mom...in that I asked him when her C.D. was approaching termination whether he would like it to be withheld or redeposited. His response was to redeposit it. He fears not the banks failing. To each his own? You don't have to like it, Andy. You surely don't have to do the same.

Mike:

I understand your basic premise and agree completely. There is NEVER a bug-free system. There isn't one NOW. I simply don't see this changing with Y2k and the banking arena.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 30, 1999.

>Now explain this to me. If people are still going to accept cash, why not checks? It's about the same thing.

They're not the same thing at all. If the BANK IS CLOSED due to runs or other Y2K-related problems, your check won't be worth anything, as the receiver wouldn't be able to cash it. I hope this is simple enough for you.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), June 30, 1999.

Alright, would some of you "financialy" literate folks comment on this:

Lets say the GI's do not withdraw "cash". Instead they purchase their preps with credit cards? Now that's not hard currency, which seems to be the thorn in the Banking institution rump. Would that not diminish the affects felt by the world banking system? After all, those cyberfunds are transferred AS cyberfunds. This is a very important question.

For Anita,

Anita, are you on tranquilizers? You dont seem to be your old hell- raising self?

Flint, Y2k Pro, the Poole Man and, Mr. Regards, chime in here, even you Anita, although I think we might have a some pinhead troll trying to make you presentable to this forum). Throw in your $0.02. Big Dog, Will continue, Taz, Mad Monk, Milne, Unc D, a@a, .ah shit I cant list all of you but I would appreciate your input as long term GIs. We have to stop this impending flood on the banks. If it happens we will have a 10. Many of you long timers have read my posts. Ive never been mimicked to my knollege, Im no Polly and do my best to spread the truth as we know it. But we need new tactics, mom and pop are not able to come to grips with our message. You all see that. We all have stories of ostracism . It hurts. But we as caring people know we will find it extremely hard to refuse our nieces and nephews when they are in need. Tell me thats not true

Help........

-- Mike (midwestmike_@hotmail.com), June 30, 1999.

Anita,

Please explain the folowing balderdash you posted - please reassure me that you are on the planet earth and that you are an experienced computer professionsal.

Please explain in details your thought processes, we are all on tenderhooks until you do...

This is what you blathered...

"It's my feeling that soon we will hear news of 100% compliance by banks (including the fears that international banking won't corrupt their systems.) It's my feeling that the FDIC has been waiting for ALL banks to be able to make this statement before coming forth....for the above-mentioned reasons..."

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 30, 1999.

eyes: Aside from the possibility of losing it in a bank error, the thinking is that, in a bad situation, cash would be king for a while. People should readily accept it while banks and credit lines were inoperable. After that, one of three things would probably occur:

Deflation: Cash remains king.

Hyperinflation. Your dough would be worthless. Monetary system shifts to precious metal and barter.

Recovery. Put your cash back in the bank vault.

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

Mike:

I can clearly state that this is one of the threads where my imposters aren't present...YET. I'm sure if I give them a minute, however, there will be some. I've purchased things via credit-card for the cache, Mike, but have always paid the bill when due...to the dismay of the credit-card company. I don't take tranquilizers, Mike. You must have me confused with some others who have posted using my name.

It's unclear what the rest of your post meant. I'll let others respond.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 30, 1999.

Let me absolutely concur with a, who concisely broke this all down, simply, into the three obvious cases. Let me state that what this means is: Take your money out of the system (except what you feel you will be spending in the near term, such as your preps) by stockpiling cash in denominations of $10 and less, and also gold and silver coins. Now, you are protected. Its really, truly that simple. It can be done. In fact, I have done it.

And this is your money we are talking about, nobody elses. The fact that there is any question, with six months until the Y2K rollover, on the readiness of banks should be enough to convince you to take this obvious step. In fact, I would say that the banks have brought this upon themselves -- they should be able to say, "Oh, the Y2K problem? Yeah, we saw it coming, and we took care of it years ago", instead of the silly BS that we are getting.

Look again at what a posted. Think about it. Look again at what I just posted. Think about it. Then do something about it. While you still can.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), June 30, 1999.

Andy:

I feel as though I've already explained my reasoning regarding banks. I'll reiterate since you feel it necessary, however. The FDIC put all banks under a gag-order. Not everyone comes up to speed remediation- wise at the same time (as you should well know if you've been involved in remediation.) It's MY feeling that the FDIC did this so that bank B didn't have an advantage (or disadvantage) over Bank A.

It's my feeling that once banks have an equal leverage (whatever THAT means) that the FDIC will announce compliance by all...with the exceptions that I mentioned previously regarding NO software being now or ever having been before 100% working bug-free.

I have absolutely NO problem with you taking out your lifetime savings, Andy. We ALL do what we feel correct based on the information available to us at the time. I don't believe that anyone on this forum (or elsewhere in the world) wakes up in the morning and says "I'm going to make the biggest mistake of my life today."

Your experiences with remediation efforts may be completely different than mine, and it serves no purpose for me to extrapolate on mine, nor you extrapolate on yours. We all live in different places and we all see things differently based, perhaps on those experiences.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), June 30, 1999.

Lead tends to increase in value in direct relation to chaos.

You're cash won't buy you squat without it.

Besides, wht are you planning to buy? From whom?

-- Jim Smith (cyberax@ix.netcom.com), June 30, 1999.

Truly there is no real protection for large sums of money. If it all goes squash, the money goes with it. I'll leave some in the bank--no problem. In the bank or out of the bank, no value, right? I will have paper cash which I am slowly obtaining and uhhh, well, stockpiling ..or hoarding, if you will. As for the rest, and I do have some other savings, it goes into Treasuries. Hey, I'll give it a shot.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWAyne@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

Anita,

I also think that MOST (more than 90%) banks will do quite well in their remediation efforts (better than the power companies, that's for sure). Nevertheless, I have almost completely cashed out. Why? Because the bank runs are INEVITABLE, as in CANNOT BE AVOIDED! Come Sept, maybe Oct the rest of the country will start to get seriously scared about Y2K. Justified or no, they will not trust the banks or the govt. They will want their money, period. And when the banks close (even temporarily) cash WILL be king.

Remember, when the banks close ALL commerce other than cash STOPS. Your credit card might work, but stores won't take them if there is no way for VISA/AMEX to credit their accounts so that they can pay THEIR debts (not to mention meet payroll). They just can't let goods walk out the door without having any idea when they'll get paid for it. With cash, the deal is done. Heck, you might even be able to get some real bargains if you pay with cash.

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), June 30, 1999.

Thanks to everyone for all the great responses. It is a great help. I acknowledge a dept to you all for helping me keep my...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), June 30, 1999.

Anita,

I'm going to say this as politely as I can; you do not know what you are talking about!

I think it was last year sometime that the FDIC did a survey on the progress of U.S. banks. They were all graded. These grades were NOT to be divulged (for obvious reasons.)

The FDIC did not do a survey on anything. The FDIC sent bank examiners to the banks and did on-site inspections of their Y2K programs. As one who has participated in a large number of these over the last year, I can tell you why the "grades" (ratings) were not divulged: they would have panicked the population.

The FDIC put all banks under a gag order regarding revealing their grades.

The FDIC has not put any bank under a "gag order." The findings of the Y2K Assessments were considered confidential information covered by Part 309 of the FDIC Rules and Regulations, and therefore not available to the public. But the FDIC has continually encouraged banks to communicate their Y2K remediation efforts to their customers. For a large variety of reasons, many banks have failed in this aspect of their Y2K program so far.

...OTHER banks chose to disregard the gag order and respond to the Weiss survey anyway.

Since there is no gag order, and all that banks are prohibited from doing is revealing their Y2K Assessment rating, then those who responded to Weiss did NOTHING wrong. No violation of Part 309 came about from answering this survey.

It's my feeling that soon we will hear news of 100% compliance by banks (including the fears that international banking won't corrupt their systems.) It's my feeling that the FDIC has been waiting for ALL banks to be able to make this statement before coming forth...

This has to be the funniest (and most naive) statement I've seen on banking. The 100% compliance statement CANNOT ever be made honestly (which doesn't mean it WON'T be made).

I, personally, don't see bank runs unfolding beyond the folks who have already withdrawn their money.

Then you are very short-sighted, or intentionally blind. The latest Gallup poll (which can be accessed from the FDIC website in Adobe Acrobat format) shows a large portion of the population (almost a majority) disagrees with you. Look up the information and try to UNDERSTAND what the numbers are telling you. I can assure you, the FDIC brass is taking this poll and others like it VERY seriously.

Anita, you may have a lot of knowledge about other topics, but regarding banking and Y2K you are decidedly uninformed. I don't say any of this to change your mind, because I doubt there's anything I can say to do that. But hopefully some of those who read your cavalier comments will read down this far before basing their monetary decisions on your opinions and assurances.

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

Thank you Nabi.

Anita - just to finish you off while you are on the ropes, does the FDIC have jurisdiction on the 189 OTHER countries in the world that are singularly failing to get their banks in order. Think GLOBALLY Aa or is this too difficult for you.

Think about it, my oh my how blinkered some Americans are - yep, everything revolves around the USA we are a law unto ourselves, we are the centre of the universe - really, Anita, you should know better - we live in a global society with multiple interdependencies on multiple levels - just 'cos your bank in Bumfuque Indiana says they're compliant doesn't mean the whole pack of cards isn't still teetering... worldwide...

a and Jack have it spot on.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 01, 1999.

Here is the link for the Gallup banking poll mentioned above for those of you having trouble finding the information:

Poll

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), July 01, 1999.

Nabi:

Thank you so much for correcting my "survey" term. You're correct. It was an on-site inspection. Thank you also for providing the Gallup poll information, but I didn't see anything there to suggest that folks intended to withdraw all their funds. In fact, I saw quite the contrary. At the time of the poll, March 1-14, 1999, 47% considered it "likely" that people will panic and withdraw all their funds. When further queried on what THEY would do, however, 6% stated that they would withdraw enough money for several months and 2% would withdraw enough money for a year or longer. The remainder of those polled stated that they would withdraw only enough for a few days or a few weeks. I've already forgotten much of what the document contained, but wasn't it 80% that said at that time that they'd not heard ANYTHING regarding Y2k from their banks? I did note that only 46% reported seeing or hearing anything specifically about the likely effects of Y2k on banking services.

Regarding the "gag" order, perhaps that was a sensationalist term used by the press last year after the on-site inspections occurred. It was certainly the term that Mr. Milne used. (grin)

gag order or not?

As I told Andy, Nabi, you have EVERY right to do what you feel correct with your money. I hope you'll allow me the same right to do what *I* feel correct with mine.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 01, 1999.

anita,people are not taking exception to your opinions,they are taking exception to your ADVICE posted as your opinions.Relax,Andy won't devour your soul

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), July 01, 1999.

Anita,

You have every right to do what you wish with your money. Regarding the Gallup poll, I think the implications of this poll have scared bankers and bank regulators. Here a few snips from it:

"With respect to public response to Y2K threats, nearly half (47 percent) consider it likely that people will panic and withdraw all their funds prior to years end, compared to 37 percent who consider it unlikely" (p. 14).

So about 47 million American households think their neighbors are going to get all of their money out of the banks. Will this have any effect on the way this 47 percent reacts in the latter part of the year? We'll see, I guess.

"Barely one respondent in five believes that the entire banking system will be forced to shut down by computer problems" (p. 16).

Creative way to phrase the results! "Barely one respondent in five..." means about 20% of Americans think the entire banking system will be shut down in January. What will this 20% do if they continue to believe that as the year comes to an end? The last quarter of 1999 could be very interesting...

The survey also says that only about 25% of the public had heard about Y2K from their banks by March 1999. Personally, I believe this indicates that people aren't paying attention to the Y2K statement stuffers banks are sending out with deposit accounts. From what I've seen, more than 25% of banks have in fact contacted their customers.

The poll takers also said:

"The first quarter of 1999 saw the publication of more and more frequent feature articles across all media (including mass communications) suggesting that public panic behavior about Y2K problems is a considerably greater threat to social and economic systems than that posed by the possibility that some systems will not be fully remediated by December 31, 1999" (p. 22).

This isn't such great news. With the media telling people that public fear is the biggest threat, actual Y2K compliance becomes a moot point. This message will encourage depositors not to pay any attention to the banks' assurances that they are compliant. I can see many saying, "Who cares if my bank is compliant? My next door neighbor has pulled out his money, so I better get mine." This message to not panic could in fact cause mass panic later this year.

We'll all see in six months (or less), I guess...

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), July 01, 1999.

Zoobie:

You wrote "anita,people are not taking exception to your opinions,they are taking exception to your ADVICE posted as your opinions.Relax,Andy won't devour your soul"

I'm not a financial advisor, Zoobie, and never said I was. The thread began with eyes_open expressing opinions, and mine followed. Others have different opinions, and that's what makes the world such a wonderful place. As Big Dog once told me: This is simply a forum. If folks make decisions based on opinions offered, it is NOT the fault of the poster. Bottom-line: I was not attempting to advise anyone. I'm perhaps more guilty of engaging in what Ray describes as "yada yada" in explaining why I believe what I will do is the best choice for me.

-- Anita (spoonera@msn.com), July 01, 1999.

eyes, are you crazy??? you don't have to actually be in line but why would you want to miss one of greatest shows on earth. i plan on sitting outside the bank watching all the dgi's with tears in their eyes and pee in their pants. i'll be able to see the light in their eyes shift from dgi to gi. might be worth some pictures. isn't that what this gang clamors for? being able to face the sheeple with a churlish grin implying,"...we told yo

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), July 01, 1999.

Corrine

That would be a very sad day indeed. I doubt anyone here, even those expressing frustration at being mocked when they try to warn people, would be doling out "I Told You So" at lines of people who can't get their money.

And if they did they would be lynched!

Watch six and keep your...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.net), July 01, 1999.

whew! glad you cleared that up, eyes. was i ever under a false impression. maybe i'll just watch it on tv.

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), July 01, 1999.

Andy, This thread is pretty cerebral and honest, except for your needless namecalling and flame-baiting. Too bad you are a fundge-packin' troll. Every now and then when I wade through your detritus that you pass as writings I can see some logic and thought. But not too often. Too bad. You've got a peabrain in there just dying to get out but the diarrhea of your fingers takes over.

Anita, Hang in there.

For the rest of you, As I've said before, I work for a Fortune 500 financial services firm. We have been audited by the FDIC, OTS, and others because we let them (we don't fall directly under their supervision, but our clients do). I know what is behind the audits, and I can tell you that some auditors are better than others. But it's better than nothing, and it has had the real effect of shoring up Y2k projects and keeping things straight.

Lemme tell you something: Your financial data gets hosed all the time. You don't know about it because institutions react quickly and catch and correct the errors. I can promise you that financial institutions consider themselves ongoing concerns, meaning, they would like to stay in business in the future. Something about bankers and cushy jobs that go together.

The biggest risks these institutions face are not technical, but human. Fear and panic can bring them to their knees faster than a Y2k bug. Financial institutions have know about this for a long time (you know, a mortgage IS thirty years, and people DO pay early, and instituions DO like to forcast what their cash flows will be from intrest).

Yes, I recognize there are turkys out there who will lie, but not many. Smaller banks are at risk, not the bigger ones.

And, the FDIC has quietly been making contingency plans for moving non-compiant banks over to new ones (and the big banks and related IT vendors are licking their chops at the thought of that). If the banks go down, the boys at FDIC will loose their cushy jobs, too.

Everyone has a dick in the fire. No one wants to get burned.

Do you all forget that boards of directors and CEOs (and other officers of a corporation) are PERSONALLY liable for misdeeds? I know that the majority of CEOs at financial institutions are taking this seriously. They must to stay in business.

-- JAW (clueless@pollyanna.com), July 01, 1999.

Wow, nothing like a bank run thread to really get the polly trolls going. Keep up the good work, JAW, you have the makings of being the next Decker.

Moron. You tell me how the liability of a bank officer is going to make a damn bit of difference when TSHTF. Having CASH IN HAND is what is going to make a lot difference!!

Everyone: Here is a great thing to do this upcoming long weekend -- if you haven't seen it, rent the movie THE TRIGGER EFFECT. Observe what happens when people are suddenly have no electronic payment capability, and checks are not accepted because nobody knows when they will be back up. Then re-look at this thread, especially the comments by Andy and a.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), July 01, 1999.

Speaking of moron, King, you base your worldview on a movie? tsk tsk tsk.

Hey, I just saw Boogie Nights, now how do I go about getting laid?

If the the poop does hit the air circulation device it won't matter, true. I'm not going to argue that.

BUT IT DOES MATTER IN MAKING SURE REMEDIATION IS DONE. It puts a threat on their money, their livlyhood, their business. It's their responsibility (and best interest) to see that it's done.

Again, we are back to bankers and cushy jobs. They like them.

-- JAW (clueless@pollyanna.com), July 01, 1999.

JAW,

It's not the compliance of U.S. banks that concerns me. My concern is with banks who have made loans to entities which may not be compliant.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), July 02, 1999.

I work very hard for my money. I am not responsible for the irresponsible fiat money system. If I choose to stash my money in pickle jars and bury them, as opposed to depositing it with my local bank, so what? Should I feel guilty for contributing to the coming bank runs? I think not. It seems to me that the government and banking industry (both past and present) should feel guilty for any bank runs which may occur in the very near future, not individuals.

The same goes for food, water, medicine, etc. It is not my fault, nor do I feel the least bit responsible, that we (modern, "enlightened" society) have embraced a concept called Just-In-Time which is highly susceptible to larger than anticipated demands.

I will offer not only an opinion but advice as well:

If you are even remotely concerned about the coming failures, and have not done so already, begin seting aside cash NOW. All of it if it makes you sleep better.

I attended one of these so-called Y2K Community Conversations this past week. So much happened that alarmed me but, specifically as it relates to this thread, representatives from two large banks insisted that we were at great risk if we took our money out of the bank. It occured to me that, in fact, it is the banks that are at great risk and not me. They've created this monster, not me. They refused to issue letters promising, no matter what happens, to make all of my cash available on Monday, January 3, 2000. Instead, they implore us all to simply trust them.

Do the right thing - if you do it now it seems to me that the banking industry should have a better chance of dealing with it and react accordingly - just like food, water, medicine, etc. preps.

-- tangbang (get@yours.now), July 02, 1999.

JAW wrote:

"Smaller banks are at risk, not the bigger ones.

That's the biggest crock of excrement I've seen on this thread. As one who has looked at situations in both areas, the larger banks are much more likely NOT to make it than the smaller banks. This is due to their complexity, interconnectivity (especially with international entities), loan portfolios (larger and many international credits), etc.

Most small banks operate on fairly simple turnkey software packages, whereas the larger banks predominantly have complex custom software. Anyone with any experience in bank Y2K remediation should understand the fallacy of JAW's assertion above.

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), July 02, 1999.

HEY!

When assholes of the stature of JAW get upset with me then I know I'm saying the right things - and JAW works for a bank, an FDIC "insured" institution,.... I rest my briefcase, it's really very very exquisitely simple - it's YOUR momey, do what the hell you like with it - ME, I wouldn't trust bankers, especially gigantic asses like JAW, as far as I could spit (into a gale), last words of wisdom, get your money OUT, get it in CASH, convert some of it to GOLD, have the rest in PREPS and BARTER ITEMS, be ready to move in 2000 according to what transpires.

YOU will be able to, assholes like JAW and (sorry) Anita and her Mother will be lining up at the mall for $100 ... IF they're lucky...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 02, 1999.

dear angie,

did you get the bunny slippers on the wrong feet again? i told you the pointy part turns in. there is warm milk and cookies next to your night stand. wish i could be there to tuck you in but i'm out eliminating all those nasty people that make fun of you.

love, mommy.

-- corrine (corrine@iwaynet.net), July 02, 1999.

you should do stand up corrine, you're a laff-riot...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 02, 1999.