Boston Herald column on Y2K

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Boston Herald article:

http://www.bostonherald.com/bostonherald/colm/cohen08041999.htm

Stop the millennium madness by Rachelle Cohen Wednesday, August 4, 1999

The world seems to be dividing into two camps these days - those who are brooding about the coming Y2K ``crisis'' and those who, well, just can't work up a sweat about it.

For the most part I fall into the latter group, although a recent story on possible champagne shortages for those end-of-the-millennium parties did make me consider stockpiling a case. (We all have our priorities.)

But there are those whose job it is to worry about Y2K on behalf of those of us who refuse to do so. There are folks at this newspaper whose job it is to fix things so that the dinosaurs among us (present company included) can come to work after a long holiday weekend (no doubt spent consuming some of that hoarded champagne), sit down at the same old computer and start writing.

And there are officials whose responsibilities are far broader than our own computer gurus.

Jane Garvey, former Massachusetts transportation official now head of the Federal Aviation Administration, has to, as part of her official functions, reassure the flying public that planes will indeed run more or less on time and not go bump in the night as the clock strikes midnight.

Garvey is actually planning her own multi-time zone flight to prove her point. What with the spate of recent control tower computer glitches unrelated to the end of the millennium, she and her merry band of travelers are probably as safe on New Year's Eve as any other time.

Cathy Minehan, head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, is also a Y2K troubleshooter by virtue of her chairmanship of a financial services working group assigned to deal with the issue and make sure member banks are prepared to as well.

She's in the delicate position of wanting to reassure people that their savings are safe and yet at the same time wants them not to be entirely complacent.

``It's a long holiday weekend,'' she notes. ``People will want to prepare for that.'' But she also hopes that won't mean people taking out their life savings and putting it under the mattress.

Now when the smartest guy I know - a sane and rational human being not taken to overreacting - insists he's going to go to the ATM a few days before New Year's and take out an extra $400 ``just in case,'' I figure Minehan really has her work cut out for her.

``We realized early on that this was much bigger than just a technical problem,'' Minehan said. ``This had to be seen from the public's point of view. We have the job of easing their fears as well.''

Now there are those who are already stockpiling cans of corn and beef jerky in the larder (those stocking caves or old bomb shelters are beyond official reassurance). A continuation of that trend through the Christmas season will make for one heckuva fourth quarter, Minehan predicted, followed by a much quieter first quarter of 2000 as people - and businesses - use up those inventories. (And eat the beef jerky.)

But there is also the simple logistical nightmare of making sure an additional $200 billion or more in cold cash is safely shuttled about the country so that each and every person who wants to go to an ATM to take out an extra $100 or $200 won't come up short.

Some banks have even bought their own armored cars, Minehan said, to make sure they have a way to transport the cash.

It will be a well-choreographed ballet involving blocks of cash, all so that Dorchester grandmothers can get a handful of crisp 20s to put in the grandkids' Christmas stockings and know that there are more where that came from.

``Operationally it's a nuisance,'' said Boston Fed Vice President Paul Connolly. ``But it's insurance.''

``I'm pretty sure we'll get back the same blocks of currency back,'' Minehan added.

Cash, of course, can just go back to the vaults.

Beef jerky, on the other hand . . . would that go OK with champagne, do you suppose?



-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), August 05, 1999

Answers

Would anyone here (Pollies included) like to venture an opinion as to why every optimistic article or post I've read is presented in this flip, glib, sarcastic "voice?" Has anyone ever written a straight positive article without that unseemly, smarmy sneer so typical of debunkers?

Hallyx

"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with catchup."

-- (Hallyx@aol.com), August 06, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ