What did I hear today on the radio,concerning the Oct 1 rollover and the government postponing itgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
I was at work and kept trying to understand the news flashes,I understood it as they were trying to postpone the rollover oct 1 ,What up with this?Has anyone heard anthing?I must have gotten this wrong,how could they do that!
-- y2kme1 (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 28, 1999
I didn't hear either. It probably has to do with the fact that the Federal budget hasn't been passed yet...and they (Congress, Administration) may be trying to keep the government solvent to some level...
The fiscal year will end on schedule. Doing all the accounting may take a little longer. And projections/accounting suddenly come into the 2000 year.
-- Mad Monk (email@example.com), September 28, 1999.
Hi, don't really know except that Oct 1 represents the last fiscal quarter, and that mucho programs will start forecasting three months ahead to 00. Is this why gold is starting to move? Possibly....
-- teetime (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 28, 1999.
Perhaps you heard that the budget has not been approved for the Federal fiscal year beginning Oct 1. They (Congress) may have "postponed" the consequences of that tardiness, as they do almost every year, by passing "continuing resolution" acts to keep spending money for a limited amount of time, like a week or two.
-- Ed Yourdon (HumptyDumptyY2K@yourdon.com), September 28, 1999.
I've heard that the federal government plans on pushing the century rollover to sometime in May. So actually this means we are now in April. The flowers are in full bloom and summer is just around the corner. Hee Haw
-- Back To The Future (email@example.com), September 28, 1999.
My tomatoes are coming along nicely, and my zucchini have flowers and fruit upon them. I am a midnight gardener--I hear gun fire echoing in the distance, and I wonder what it was all about as I creep back into my dungeon until the new moon shows it face again to me.
-- bardou (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 28, 1999.
Wow. I just brushed my teeth and am going to bed. How boring. Maybe I should try some midnight milking.
-- Will continue (email@example.com), September 28, 1999.
Will continue--Got cookies to go along with it?
-- bardou (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 29, 1999.
And I think that I will pop in a mudwrestling video and do some needlepointing. Then, brush teeth and bedtime. And remember: You only need to floss the teeth that you want to save!
-- King of Spain (email@example.com), September 29, 1999.
I think Congress should just go ahead and change the fiscal year to January 1. They can call the period between October 1 and December 31 "199B". It may confuse a few bureaucrats, but so will FY 2000 so what's the diff?
If "199B" doesn't sound workable, how about making FY 1999 a 15 month period? Reality has no bearing on how government does business and government accounting is not according to GAAP, so making a mini- fiscal year of only 3 months or a maxi-fiscal year of 15 months shouldn't be too much of a stretch.
Whatever happens, the budget won't be completed before the end of September, and even the continuing resolutions won't be ready in time. All of the agencies will have to pretend they are not out of spending authority. However they have done that before, so procedures should already be in place.
Whattaya wanta bet some Congresscritter recommends this? ;-)
-- Margaret J (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 29, 1999.
Maybey they should cancel October altogether, then it would always be September.
-- . (.@....), September 29, 1999.