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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (226000)	2/7/2002 2:06:31 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

You and Zoltan are arguing two separate but linked issues. He is focused on the political issue. You are focused on the business issue. You are both right about the separate issues you are discussing.

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (226000)	2/7/2002 2:08:01 PM
From: JEB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Point made, ...but, we do not seem to care about actually fixing the problems, we seem to be just wanting to dissect one company who was offered an unprecedented waiver. So, if all we are going to do is fix this one problem with one company, we are wasting our time on a pure political play. This is already turning into a broadway play. Look at the head of the GAO (Arthur Anderson boardmember) asking for information the GAO normally doesn't require and already having received the economic data they normally do require. What kind of sick twisted game is this?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (226000)	2/7/2002 10:09:47 PM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

>>Therefore, an administrative waiver to any SINGLE company could not possibly be as serious an issue as a systemic conflict of interest in the entire accounting industry... upon whose numbers all investors depend. What nonsense. What screwy non-logic. Instead of looking at what went wrong, attack "the system". Such obtuse non-thinking is being used by charlatans to spook the markets - they see Enrons everywhere. The remedy is to find out what actually went wrong and to punish the malefactors. That's better than your non-reform reform - the path that lets the guilty off the hook. The problems with Enron were not hypothetical. They were not "of the system". The problems were particular to Enron. They were not conflict of interest problems - they were of a company being granted an exemption around the law - the law that Congress refused to change. That SEC exemption allowed management to enter those partnerships and to hide the debt. That, by all accounts, led to the downfall of Enron. The cure is to punish those at the Clinton SEC that granted the exemption and to put those at Enron in jail - if what they did was illegal - but thanks to the SEC what they did may not have been.