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.

Non-Tech : The Enron Scandal - Unmoderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: c.horn who wrote (983)	1/31/2002 8:53:42 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 3602

c.horn, Re: Who is defending Enron? From all I read of you rigid dogmatism, you are at least giving Enron a pass. You excuse it as an aberration to an otherwise sensible system. I will submit to you that Enron, far from being an outlier, is exactly what CFO Magazine characterized Andrew Fastow as in its lavish praise in 1999, it is innovative, the new face of American capitalism and worthwhile. Well, we all can see for ourselves that it was all based on lies, fakery, hubris and deceit. This is what is galling to me about defenders of the faith like you. You are seemingly unwilling to admit that capitalism is a savage and uncaring beast that needs tempering, that needs to be reined in in order to protect the stakeholder in this world. Foremost the employees, then the retail shareholders who got deceived, the pension fund managers who were lied to and the general public, who deserve a system that isn't rigged against them by an elite coterie of crooks. Re: You are trying to establish that Capitalism and the free market system is corrupt by virtue of the Enron Scandal. Wrong. I have read history, I know why the Investment Acts of 1933 and 1934 were written, I know why the Investment Company Act of 1940 was written. I know why we have PUHCA. What Enron represents is the use of money to corrupt the system into giving up its defenses from old abuses put into new clothes by the charlatans at Enron and Artful Andersen. Enron isn't particularly groundbreaking. It is fraud on a far grander scale than we've ever seen before. But the real tragedy is that we've seen it all before, we had laws on the books to stop abuses like Enrons and due to the corrupting influence peddling of Ken Lay and his cronies, they stripped society of the ability to stop the crimes that were committed. Re: The system works. The system is broken, and it's going to get more broken before it gets healed. Look, the excesses that led up to the financial collapse of 1929 were not really addressed in any significant way until four years later. This time around, it won't be much different. Congress is in no hurry and the courts will be stymied by issues of discovery for a very long time. The earliest we can expect significant regulatory reform is probably 2004 or 2005, once the present co-conspirator is evicted from the White House. Re: You are wrong. You're not making your case. -Ray

To: c.horn who wrote (983)	1/31/2002 10:40:29 PM
From: bonnuss_in_austin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3602

Are you a shorter, 'c.horn?' Like, always -- or consistently -- play the short side? Which may have made you rich? (Nothing wrong with that and I certainly wish I had done so sooner than I did over the past ... well, let's see, coming 'nigh up' -g- on a two-year anniversary of the NAS plummet to the bowels of Hell -g- (all you religious folks like the appropriate 'vernacular' there? I phrased it that way JUST FOR YOU -- the 'bowels of Hell' -- with an upper-case 'H,' mind you). Although it's hard for retail investors like me to call the market and cash out at just the right times, for instance, as Karl Rove, Dick Cheney (Halliburton and possbily ENE as well), Bush Sr (Carlyle Group), and Jr (does anyone find access ever to his financial info? I don't remember it during the nauseating governorship here) ... Inside information is necessary for that sort of 'market timing,' I believe. With 'knowledge' of pending 'legislation.' The type of insider information to which Phil and Wendy Gramm, for example, were 'privy.' Logically, that's the only conclusion I can make about your 'strong beliefs' that ENE is a harmless, isolated anomaly -- and further, is proof 'positive' that capitalism 'works.' ??????????????????????? bia