'WSJ Op-Ed (7/20): Y2K is Money-Driven Hype!
asked in the TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) Q&A Forum
Has anyone read the latest Wall Street Journal op-ed piece on
Y2K (July 20, "To Figure Out Y2K Hype, Follow the Money" by
Paul Kedrosky)? There's really no need to, because the title says it
all. But for those of you out there who wonder why the stock
market is still climbing and people are basically ignoring Y2K, let
me quote a few choice lines from the article.
"...Fixing the problem is well under way at most organizations; it is
already fixed in others. Even the usually glacial U.S. government
has done speedy work squashing Y2K bugs in many systems."
"So if real progress is being made, then why is the Y2K drumbeat
getting louder rather than quieter?"
"Who wins financially if Y2K remains a big problem? The answer:
consultants, software vendors and lawyers."
"An unholy alliance of companies, from information-systems
consultancies... to major accounting firms... to software
companies... and hot software startups... all see the Y2K problem
as a money-making opportunity."
"None of this is to say that there won't be some irritations. Some
problems will cross the line from irritating to embarrassing; some
may even cause damage. But the likelihood of catastrophe, of
global recession--let alone a return to preindustrial society--is slim
to none. People who say otherwise are selling something."
In this article, Mr. Kedrosky (an assistant professor of commerce
at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver) has flippantly
and without evidence dismissed the Y2K problem as overblown
hype. Unfortunately, that is exactly what most people want to hear,
regardless of the facts.
At this point in time, articles such as this one are much more
detrimental than gloom-and-doom articles about the seriousness of
Y2K. "No problem" articles keep many people blissfully ignorant
of the true scope of Y2K. When the full magnitude of the problem
begins to sink in during 1999, articles such as this one will have
contributed to the mass panic which will ensue.
So who's really a bigger threat to the stability of our society: Gary
North or Paul Kedrosky?
Asked by Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com) on July 21, 1998.
Answers
(This is not a 'religious' post, but I would like to use a biblical
example.) Y2K is a lot like Noah and the ark. The people laughed
at him for building it, and were banging on the door to get in when
it started raining.
Even though God told Noah to build the ark, I'm certain that Noah
didn't have a clue as to how big the eventual flood would be. I
think the same is true of Y2K. I don't think anyone really has a
grasp at how big this thing is really going to be. And, that's the
problem. Reporters are generally cynics by nature; they want real
answers before they go to print (unless you're CNN :). No real
answers, no serious concern. No real answers and you get either
silence or scorn, or both, in print.
The same is true of leaders in business & industry, pastors,
teachers, professors, etc. No one wants to look like an alarmist or
an idiot. At present, the conclusions about potential damage from
Y2K are all over the board. This hampers getting a clear message
to the public. The problem is that with every tick of the clock the
time is running out. When we all finally "have the answers" the rain
will have already started.
So, I suggest you all listen to your gut and do what it's saying and
not wait for the "experts" to guide you and lead you by the hand.
They're the ones that will be banging on the door to get in.
Blessings!
-Pastor Chris lifetel.com
Answered by Pastor Chris (pastorchris@lifetel.com) on July 21, 1998.
Good thread Nabi. Coincidentally, I was going to start a post
concerning the same issue. The main argument the skeptics and
naysayers use to minimize y2k is that the consultants are creating a
bigger problem to make money. Well, if this is true and we are all
being duped, (BTW,there are some pretty smart people being
duped), those y2k scammer consultants are going to have a lot to
answer to come D-day when nothing happens. Are Ed Yourdon or
Peter Dejager really that stupid to perpetuate a problem that
doesn't exist just to make money, with fingerprints and a smoking
gun left behind? Have all the fortune 500 companies been sneaked
into spending billions of dollars on a non-existant problem by these
ingenious y2k tricksters?
I think you're right Nabi that these kinds of articles have and will
have a detrimental effect on how this is going to play out. I did not
panic when I discovered the truth 6 months ago, if I were to
discover it 6 months from now I'm not so sure I could say the
same.
Answered by Tom Scully (2scully@concentric.net) on July 21, 1998.
If I'm not mistaken, a number of the Y2k consulting firms are
refusing any new work. So how would that fit in with the theory
that they are trying to make more money off of it?
Answered by Amy Leone (aleone@amp.com) on July 22, 1998.
Contribute an answer to "WSJ Op-Ed (7/20): Y2K is Money-Driven Hype!"
greenspun.com |
