How does one reconcil the throw-away line in this article;

Supply Chain Revival

With the more detailed analysis of this article;

US Skills Shortage Prompts Integrators to Search Offshore

If companies are wrapping up their remediation, why is there a shortage of programmers in the US? Additionaly, won't this outsourcing create shortages of programmers in their own contries? The US hiring the best and brightest from countries that are lagging behind, can't be good for those countries' remediation efforts.

PS There is another, really strange article from InfoWeek,

Quote; "Ever since the US Senate report on the year 2000 came out a few weeks ago, I've been hearing more people asking if they should stock up on canned goods and water, buy generators, and withdraw all their money from the bank. Suddenly, people who weren't concerned have become paranoid.

"Ironically, the report was supposed to alleviate concerns by suggesting that Y2K problems will be merely a "bump in the road." That's according to Sen. Robert Bennett, chairman of the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem."

Did Stephanie Stahl *read* the Senate report? If it was intended to calm panic, why did it contain *all* those scary words?

-- Alison Tieman (fearzone@home.com), March 14, 1999

Answers

"But is it fair for the Senate to come out with a comprehensive report and to have hearings on potential problems with food supply, national defense, and health care less than 10 months before the year 2000 and expect people not to panic?"

Yeah, I think she read it. She simply didn't want to fully digest it, and to acknowledge that there were real problems. Up until she had to comment on that report she could simply look at things from the standpoint of individual companies.....this one is doing well, this one not so well. She could advise her readers that their companies should be working hard. This might have been the first taste she's really had of the interconnectedness of things.

I love it: FAIR? Is it FAIR for the senate report to even suggest that things might not be the same? Life isn't fair. Coming to grips with Y2K means getting past the "it isn't fair!" point of view. Maybe she just took the first step.

-- De (dealton@concentric.net), March 14, 1999.

I'm really curious about her contention that the report was intended to alleviate concerns. I have sent her the following email...

Stephanie,

Do you have an actual quote from Senator Bennett to qualify this line from your story?

"Ironically, the report was supposed to alleviate concerns by suggesting that Y2K problems will be merely a "bump in the road." That's according to Sen. Robert Bennett, chairman of the Senate's Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem" Having followed the Y2K story fairly closely, I have not seen such a quote concerning the *intention* of the report. Actually, I have seen reported the exact opposite of your contention, from the Detroit Free Press as well as other Knight Ridder papers, who received an advanced copy of the letter that the committee sent to their colleagues in the Senate, stating that "Those who suggest that it will be nothing more than a 'bump in the road' are simply misinformed." ( http://www.freep.com/news/nw/qy2k24.htm )

Again, I would be most interested in seeing verification of Senator Bennett's assertion that the report was intended to alleviate concerns about y2k.

Thank you.

It'll be interesting to see if she responds...

-- HP (none@none.com), March 14, 1999.

Well none,

I don't know what the "intention" of the report was, BUT I was watching C-SPAN when Dodd, Bennett, & company held a news conference after releasing the report. Bennett said at the news conference that Y2K would be a "bump in the road". I was sitting watching C-SPAN and saw it myself.

I figure Bennett & Dodd assume most Americans won't bother to read the report (which is undoubtedly correct), and will rely on sound bites - which the kindly senators supplied with gusto.

Jolly is getting cynical.

-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), March 14, 1999.