<< Panic is a legitimate concern, but ya know what? Most panic springs from a simple lack of information of any sort. >>
Ken,
Re Panic: Let me add that the immediacy of the threat is also an important factor in determining whether panic ensues. This has been Ed Yardeni's and Douglass Carmichael's argument for governmental openness since sometime last year: Inform the public now, while Y2K is in the distant future, and there will be a minimum of panic. It would also help if the government leadership would give some individual preparation instructions/suggestions and if the government would announce contingency plans (e.g., like stocking public schools with a generator, water, and foodstuffs, etc.)as a backup just in case there is a long-term problem, say with the power grid.
Unfortunately, none of this happened; and the government is clearly more worried about avoiding panic than in putting out the straight story. (I refer the reader to Ms. Abrams' call for "honest, but calming messages" and Mr. Koskinen's search for a PR firm.) The nearer Y2K approaches, the greater the probability of a panic, given our government's present course of spinning Y2K.
Still, with 10+ months to go, we have time to get the message out without creating a panic, IMO. When we're down to 30 days, it'll be too late.
Re Europe and Natural Gas: Seems I read somewhere in the last month or so that Germany gets 40% of it's electricity from Russia. Hmmmmm.
Appreciate your posts.
Regards,
O. H. |
