Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Fowler who wrote (137347)	1/20/2002 8:07:37 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

i don't like to see is another regulatory body that has to be paid for some way by business which is another tax. I don't want to see the Sec over do it with new regulations either, government authorities over time can be a burden, a tax on productivity. But something has to be done, so be it, if will help restore confidence of financial reporting. Would not a simple requirement that all accounting and reporting can only be GAAP work? GAAP does show the income and financial condition of the firm unless the number reported were fraudulent. Thus, there are the auditors that would be help responsible in the event they do not do proper auditing. If the fine is large enough for not proper auditing, the confilct of interest in terms of keeping a client should cease. Also, it seems that when earnings, etc. are mistated the penalty is only a fine. One would get better cooperation if the penalty included some form of jail time. Clearly, true accidents would be an exception.