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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GVTucker who wrote (165447)	5/28/2002 1:26:13 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

OT: You are so biased to direct any attention away from the accountants, that your arguments and positions lose their value. THE ISSUE IS DISCLOSURE. It isn't what is done, BUT WHAT IS TOLD THE THE STOCKHOLDERS that is relevant. STOCK OPTIONS ARE NOT EXEPENSED because they are not an expense. They do not cost the company any money. That is not to say they do not DILLUTE the shares. There is a system of treatment regarding stock options that has been used for the last 40 years. NO ONE dissagrees that stock options should not be disclosed to the shareholders as clearly as possible. I will give you that the accountants at Enron stretched the exiting law. Their problem is that no matter how you slice it they are called CETIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, and no matter what the law was, the should not have condoned the coverup of 12 Billion Dollars worth of hidden loans. This is not ken lay's 30 million dollars in stock options-that was disclosed-that is not material in comparison-that did not cause Enron to crash. The public has a right to expect that a Public accountant acts for them, no matter what laws are bought, and which lawsuits are buried and outlawed that would have put a stop to these kinds of frauds years ago.

To: GVTucker who wrote (165447)	5/28/2002 2:32:33 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 186894

RE:"So why then should stock options be given preferential tax treatment over other forms of compensation? If high risk/high reward projects are the right thing to do, a tax neutral strategy would do nothing to discourage it." Good point... So where's the flat tax...no deductions? <G> Congress has a great track record of manipulating the tax code and getting things way out of whack. Need I go further? Jim