Mississippi files $900,000,000 law suit against company who upgraded tax system

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

This report was heard on the morning news in Wichita this morning.It is the ABC channel 10 KAKE News station. (kaketv@kake.com)http://www.kake.com It was stated that the Kansas State tax system was upgraded by the same company (unannounced)which completed the upgrades for the State of Mississippi, three years ago. Apparently Kansas is in the same boat....we're *waiting* for our return that was filed in January........go with it "boys"!!!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 15, 1999


$900,000,000!!! nine hundred million?!? Almost a billion?!? Is this correct or a typo?

-- Y2K poster (address@host.domain), June 15, 1999.

I called the news room to confirm. 900 MILLION....with an M. They managed to hide the problems for three years before filing. They claim the system has never worked correctly and now Kansas is having problems with theirs as well.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 15, 1999.

The government is required to purchase things like these systems from the lowest bidder. And they get what they pay for. At least people in Mississippi and Kansas can know that their precious tax dollars weren't wasted. hehehe.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 15, 1999.

I was just informed the Wichita Eagle stated, the company which performed the 'upgrade' is American Management System. "Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley called the suit very alarming". Sorry, I don't cut and paste OR provide hot links. Just a hairdresser with a "knowing"....

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 15, 1999.

The whole damn country is about to get what they payed for, Flint...God knows we've certainly gotten what we voted for! (not ME I might add)

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 15, 1999.

We may be about to find out just how much government we can do without. I'm willing to bet we can do without about 90% of the government we have, eventually. But the withdrawal symptoms will be grim.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 15, 1999.

Flint, do you possess the ability to relate *this story* to anything other than government systems? Is your mind so fine tuned and narrow as to not be able to "see" the big picture here? Would somebody please open up a can of 'woop-ass' on this person?

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 15, 1999.

Will continue:

Your inability to think is not my problem. Think about "withdrawal symptoms." Think HARD, you can do it, you keep telling us you can do it. Who do these symptoms affect? Can you say 'everybody'? GOOD girl, you're getting there. Next time, try it all by yourself.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 15, 1999.

Flint, is my lack of formal education all you can blather about? Do you honestly believe a college education is a 'requirement' to one's ability to understand the available data? You're so small and pitiful.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 15, 1999.

But, in the middle of you two bickering, neither of you noticed that - if the tax system was upgraded for MS three years ago it measn it completed in the 95-96 timeframe. Allow 2-3 years for specification writing and actual work (error-filled evidently, but work) before that date 96 completion date - and I'm going to bet you it was not y2K compliant in some form or another. Programmers at that tim esimply were not ready then, nor were given good explicit guidelines to prevent y2K errors in one form or another. (More so, since drastic real-time errors are present in these systems that cause them to fail NOW.)

Okay - so the MS program was probably not y2K compliant when written. The KS program has the same problems as MS, so it was obviously NOT rewritten to fix previous bugs - assuming MS noticed the previous errors - all of this is conjecture since I did not write the program, debug it, or test it.

This indicates that the KS program is not Y2K compliant either!

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 15, 1999.

Thank you robert. I suppose the point I'm thinking of is the fact that they've been working on this for 3 years to no avail. Kansas has been fluffing about being ahead of the pack and now we have a 900 million dollar law suit to add to...how many others? How many people have been effected by this "ooops". Flint made the point that this is typical government and a 90% reduction could be absorbed. That remark is beyond *words* for me. It is also beyond me why I would even waste words on this limited and dim view. How does he get away with this and yet, why the heck should I care anyway? What am I doing here in *JUNE 1999*? I've no honest clue.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 15, 1999.

You're taking care of yourself and your family in very troubling, very confusing times. While trying to anticipate and prevent future hazards none of us can be sure of.

Not easy, not easy at all.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 15, 1999.

Robert, you're a champ! I'm here for people like YOU as well! I honestly can't comprehend where folks like you have found the strength to maintain cool heads all this time, while dealing with the likes of professional phoo-phooers. YOU GO, Robert, GO!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 16, 1999.

I am hear for you too, Will Continue. I enjoy your input immensely.

I also enjoy looking at the 'other side' of things, so Flint's input is appreciated. Most times, you two make me read the info over and over, which is good.

-- J (jart5@bellsouth.net), June 16, 1999.

Is it possible to find a transcript on this law suit.


-- Arthur Washington (ARTWASH@webtv.net), June 18, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ