Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: The Clinton Administration Loves Y2K

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Naw! First of all, the conservatives are already on the bandwagon to nail
the Democrates for not taking the Y2K issue more seriously earlier in the
game. Note that I did not say Republicans. Where the scare has the greatest
voice is on shows like Chuck Harders "For the People" and even Limbaugh is
jumping into it (even though he professes to have little information and
will be more vocal on the subject when he learns more about it).
Also, if as you suggest, the Democrates would be cutting their own throat to
suggest that the government profit from the Y2K problem.

Good plot for a "Wag the Dog" senerio - much better than assuming Clinton
ordered the strike on the terrorists to coverup the Lewinsky matter.

BTW, I did see the movie "Wag the Dog". If it wasn't for the current events,
I would not really care that much for it. I find it an incredible
coinsidence. Before anyone tries to through credence on this, remember that
the screenplay had to have been written (assuming it did not come from a
novel) over two years ago to allow for time it takes to create the movie.

Sorry, this is off the track so you don't need to respond.


-----Original Message-----
From:	Bill Polhemus
Sent:	Monday, August 24, 1998 7:25 AM
To:	'seaint(--nospam--at)'
Subject:	RE: The Clinton Administration Loves Y2K

-----Original Message-----
From:	Dennis S. Wish PE [SMTP:wish(--nospam--at)]
Sent:	Sunday, August 23, 1998 6:16 PM
To:	seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject:	RE: The Clinton Administration Loves Y2K

Doesn't hold water in my opinion since the conversion to Y2K compatibility
within the Federal Government alone will cost much more than any "windfall"
generated from investment sell-offs.

[Bill Polhemus]

Granted, but consider this:

The Gov has to make the conversion anyway, there's no way around it.

However, "WHAT IF..." the Clinton Administration were to adopt a policy of
"emphasizing" the disastrous effects of Y2K, in order to shake the "windfall
tree", and ensure that all that wonderful capital gains tax money were
suddenly available?

No one loves to spend your money more than the Federal Government, and no
branch of the government more than the Executive as currently constituted
(hey, it's all "for the children...")

Anyway, it sounds very plausible to me.

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>