Many people heard of the computer problem for the year 2000, but a few know that this problem will take place as early as 1998 and 1999.
For some people, the year 2000 represents the dawning of a "New Age", the Age of Aquarius, which is to be, according to them, an era of unprecedented prosperity for mankind. On the other hand, for other people, this same year 2000 will bring with it apocalyptic catastrophes, announcing the end times and the Second Coming of Christ. (It is true though that the recent multiplication of "natural" catastrophes like tornadoes, ice storms, earthquakes, etc., looks strangely like some of the signs mentioned by Jesus in Chapter 24 of Matthew's Gospel, which are to precede His Second Coming.)
However, from a strictly scientific point of view, even those who do not believe in the Bible have to admit that the arrival of the year 2000 brings with it the risk of an unprecedented worldwide crisis, created by what is known as the "millennium bug" (even though the next millennium actually begins in 2001), or the "Year 2000 Problem": On January 1, 2000, millions of computers will either shut down or malfunction, being unable to recognize the new year.
The only unknown factor in this upcoming catastrophe is its magnitude, which will depend upon the quantity of computers that will have been fixed and made compliant in time for the year 2000. There is one point however on which all the experts agree: most computers - even those of the banks and of government agencies won't be ready in time, which will cause the most disastrous situations for the whole of the population. Along the years, society has practically made a god of technology. How paradoxical and ironic it would be to see that god come tumbling down at the onset of the year 2000, but what a nightmare it will be for those who will live it!
What is this much talked about "millennium bug" or "Year 2000 computer crisis"? When the first computers were created in the 1950s and 1960s, the cost of operating mainframe computers was very expensive; those big computers took up whole floors, whereas today, thanks to miniaturization, they can stand on the top of a desk. In order to save storage space in the memory banks of mainframe computers, programmers made sure to keep input data as short as possible. This is why years were recorded with only two digits instead of four ("70" instead of "1970", for example), which meant a great saving of time and money.
The snag is that after midnight December 31, 1999, all the computers that will not have been yet fixed will erroneously translate the year "00" into "1900", instead of 2000, for they had always operated on the premise that the two first digits of the year that were not recorded were "19" which will bring about either false calculations, or a complete and final shutdown of the computer, with the complete loss of all of its data. One can barely imagine all of the problems that this computer meltdown will create, since about every economic activity today is regulated by computers.
So, why in the first place did programmers use two digits instead of four to record years, knowing that computers could not recognize, in this way, the year 2000? Even in the 1970s, nobody imagined that one could have problems with the year 2000, simply because no one believed that the systems used at that time would be still operating at the dawn of the 21st century. Computer programmers thought that these programs then in use could last a maximum of ten or fifteen years, and would be replaced by new ones (that would eliminate this problem) well before the year 2000. But this is not what hap-
pened. Instead of replacing the first programs, programmers built on top of them... to save money.
Programmers thought that they were saving money, but they now realize that their negligence in coping with the year 2000 problem will cost a lot. For even if it looks like a trivial problem that is simple to solve (adding the two first digits "20" in this case), the task will require a colossal effort, with astronomical costs. The Gartner Group, a firm specialized in computer technology research, first estimated that fixing the "millennium bug" will cost $600 billion (then $75 billion for the U.S.A. only), but this global cost is now estimated at $1.6 trillion (with over $30 billion for Canada only). And this price tag does not include all of the possible lawsuits against businesses that will lose data with the passage to the year 2000, and thus cause irreparable losses to their customers: the total of these lawsuits could amount to several trillion dollars... and, of course, the closure of all of these businesses.
Why such astronomical costs? Because to solve the problem, inserting a floppy disk and pressing a key is not enough. No, the solution is much more complicated, and its scope, mind-boggling!
Each program used by a computer is made up of several thousand lines of code, which instruct the computer what to do. (An average business can have up to 12 million lines of computer code, but a large corporation, like AT&T, has 500 million lines of code.)
Then EACH line of code must be searched, fixed, and tested manually (line by line), for each system. The typical financial institution can have between four and six hundred different systems, all interconnected. Make only one mistake in one forgotten line, and all of the systems will be paralyzed. One must therefore check EVERYTHING, make the changes, one by one, and verify their effects immediately.
What complicates things even more is that most of the programs written 20, 30, or 40 years ago for big computers were done with computer languages that are no longer in use today, and that present programmers do not know nor understand. For example, most of the mainframe computers were programmed with COBOL, a language that has become obsolete for more than 20 years... and there are over 500 different computer languages! Moreover, to be able to test these old computers, one needs an equivalent amount of free space on their memory, which is impossible, since their memory is already used to full capacity.
One realizes right away that the manpower needed to fix the computers is not available, and even if this was the case, there will not be enough time to fix all the computers before the Jan. 1, 2000 deadline. Corporations and governments have reacted too late, having not taken this problem seriously enough. Thousands of businesses will therefore be forced to close because of this.
In October, 1997, Canada's General Auditor, Denis Desautels, raised the alarm, saying that only 30 percent of the departments of the Canadian Government had worked out a strategy to cope with the millennium bug. Mr. Desautels said that he feared that the Government could no longer offer in the year 2000 the main programs and services that are essential to the population, like the delivery of the various government cheques. He added that for the agencies and businesses that had not yet undertaken anything in 1997 concerning the year 2000 problem, it was too late, and that it would be impossible for them to be ready for 2000.
Last March, Robert Guenier, the head of Taskforce 2000, the independent Year 2000 organization in the United Kingdom, said about the same thing, claiming that, with just 21 months to the end of the century, a satisfactory outcome to the computer date-change problem is now impossible, and that damage is inevitable, which will potentially affect millions of people.
In the United States, as of February 15, 1998, only 35 percent of the almost 8,000 computer systems labeled "mission- critical" were ready for the year 2000, and according to Rep. Stephen Horn (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology, at the current rate of progress, only 63 percent of those systems will be ready for the year 2000. (Europe and Asia score even worse as regards computer compliance with the year 2000 Europe the problem is compounded by the fact that they have to reprogram millions of computers for next January's introduction in eleven countries of the euro, the new unified currency.)
The Department of Social Security (one of the best prepared to cope with the year 2000 problem, according to Mr. Horn), began fixing its computers six years ago, and programmers managed to fix so far six million lines of code. The trouble is that there are still 200 million lines left to be fixed before 2000... At the present rate, the Department of Defense will be year-2000 compliant in 2012, the U.S. Treasury (in charge of the income tax) in 2004, etc.
According to this committee chaired by Rep. Horn, one of the sectors that is the most behind schedule for the year 2000 in the U.S.A. is the banking sector, where the interconnection of the various banks is of the utmost importance. Even Alan Greenspan, the head of the Federal Reserve, said that 99 percent compliance is not going to be enough, since false information supplied by non-compliant banks can paralyze the entire financial system, and lead to a worldwide recession. According to the Government Accounting Office, as many as 700 banks will be forced to close their door on Jan. 1, 2000. Edward Yardeni, chief economist of Deutsche Morgan Grenfell, a New-York based global investment banking firm, now sees a percent chance of a global recession due to problems associated with the millennium bug.
This is all no good, but it is only the peak of the iceberg. There are some 25 billion chips embedded in various devices (elevators, telephones, power stations, water systems, nuclear reactors, air traffic control system, etc.). Many of them are date sensitive, and will stop functioning on Jan. 1, 2000 if they are not replaced. Most of these chips are extremely hard to locate, and documentation regarding their location is almost nonexistent.
As it has been mentioned above, almost every sector of human activity is now regulated by computers. The following sectors of the economy will therefore be hit by the millennium bug: utility systems (electricity, water, gasoline, etc.), telecommunications (radio, TV, newspapers), transportation (trains, airplanes, etc.), retail and wholesale distribution (including food), manufacturing, finance and banking, government services (social security, hospitals, etc.). The upheaval in the lives of the citizens will be incredible, and without any precedent. On January 1, 2000, it is very possible (and likely) that all the sectors mentioned above will be hit, and even completely paralyzed.
As a matter of fact, many computers are already experiencing problems, since they have to make calculations involving the year 2000. Many computers will shut down in mid-1998 because it is the beginning of the 1998-1999 fiscal year for many countries. Several other computers will shut down on Jan. 1, 1999, because "99" is a shorthand for "end of run", which means a complete and permanent shut down of the computer. As soon as it happens in one State or province, panic will become widespread in the rest of the country. People will run to the banks to withdraw their money, but they will be able to get back only a mere fraction of their savings, being banks keep in cash reserve only 2 or 3 percent of their total deposits.
This crisis expected for 2000 will probably take catastrophic proportions, but there is a solution for governments in order to avoid chaos, and be able to continue to supply services to the population. This is what you will read about in the article on the next page.
Jacek Morawa
In this special issue of the journal, MICHAEL, the reader will discover who are the true rulers of the world. We discuss that the current monetary system is a mechanism to control populations. The reader will come to understand that "crises" are created and that when governments attempt to get out of the grip of financial tyranny wars are waged.
An Efficient Financial System, written by Louis Even, is for the reader who has some understanding of the Douglas Social Credit monetary reform principles. Technical aspects and applications are discussed in short chapters dedicated to the three propositions, how equilibrium between prices and purchasing power can be achieved, the financing of private and public production, how a Social Dividend would be financed, and, finally, what would become of taxes under a Douglas Social Credit economy. Study this publication to better grasp the practical application of Douglas' work. 
Reflections of African bishops and priests after our weeks of study in Rougemont, Canada, on Economic Democracy, 2008-2018
The Social Dividend is one of three principles that comprise the Social Credit monetary reform which is the topic of this booklet. The Social Dividend is an income granted to each citizen from cradle to grave, with- out condition, regardless of employment status.
Economic Democracy is a book to explain Social Credit in lessons presented in logical order so it may be easier to the reader to grab the main principles of Social Credit rapidly and somehow easily.
In This Age of Plenty deals with Social Credit, but it does not exhaust the topic. Social Credit principles address social and political matters, as well as, or even more so, than economics and will put civilization on a new course.
From Debt to Prosperity outlines briefly the economic analysis and constructive proposals known as Social Credit.
Rougemont Quebec Monthly Meetings
Every 4th Sunday of every month, a monthly meeting is held in Rougemont.
Subscribe