|
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
74 members (bluebilly, accordeur, BillS728, aphexdisklavier, bobrunyan, anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, 17 invisible),
2,088
guests, and
350
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798 |
Any problems that exist will be solved but not necessarily by government. Believe it or not there is a great deal of self-regulation that goes on in our economy that works. As I said before, unless corporations enjoy losses or are brain dead they will take the steps necessary to ensure that these abuses will not happen again. Government is not always the answer.
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness. :t:
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by JBryan: Any problems that exist will be solved but not necessarily by government. Believe it or not there is a great deal of self-regulation that goes on in our economy that works. As I said before, unless corporations enjoy losses or are brain dead they will take the steps necessary to ensure that these abuses will not happen again. Government is not always the answer. How will they be solved without government involvement, JBryan? Simply stating they will does not make it so. Explain how, please.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798 |
Apparently, you believe that government involvement is the only way that abuses are corrected within our markets. I have explained to you that the markets themselves will not tolerate such behavior in the future and that investors and managers will take steps on their own to ensure that these abuses don't happen again. It is a matter of their survival. Worldcom stock will never be worth much (if it is ever worth anything again) until investors are confident that Generally Accepted Principles of Accounting (rules not established by government but by the business community, BTW)are followed and the same scrutiny will be applied to other companies so that there is not "another Worldcom". It seems that it is impossible for you to believe that markets can actually right themselves without government intervention but it happens all the time.
While it may seem to you that I do not advocate any regulation or government involvement in our economy of any kind, it is really a matter of seeing government regulation and new laws as the last resort instead of the first thing we turn to.
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness. :t:
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by JBryan: Apparently, you believe that government involvement is the only way that abuses are corrected within our markets. I have explained to you that the markets themselves will not tolerate such behavior in the future and that investors and managers will take steps on their own to ensure that these abuses don't happen again. It is a matter of their survival. Worldcom stock will never be worth much (if it is ever worth anything again) until investors are confident that Generally Accepted Principles of Accounting (rules not established by government but by the business community, BTW)are followed and the same scrutiny will be applied to other companies so that there is not "another Worldcom". It seems that it is impossible for you to believe that markets can actually right themselves without government intervention but it happens all the time.
While it may seem to you that I do not advocate any regulation or government involvement in our economy of any kind, it is really a matter of seeing government regulation and new laws as the last resort instead of the first thing we turn to. So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that the profit motivation of the market will ensure that these things will not happen again. How do you square this with the fact it was the profit motivation that caused this in the first place? If the market can handle this, how did it happen in the first place? Corporate fraud is not new. It has been going on since corporations came into existence. Why didn't the market principles work to forstall the problems we now have? If the accounting principles are adequate, why did they not work for all of these companies who chose not to follow them? They also have been in place for a long time. Anderson knew them. And yet they did not seem to be enough to stop them. How will this now change through the accounting profession itself? Do you not feel preventive action is a good thing? If you do feel it is good, what preventive action do you advocate? Or do you feel we simply allow catastrophes to happen, let the market play out, and let the victims lick their own wounds and suffer the consequences of other's actions, waiting for the market to right itself when this sort of thing occurs again? At what point do you see us getting to the "last resort" requiring government intervention on some level? Since you do not seem to feel government intervention is required now, I take it you do not feel the crisis in investor confidence we are now seeing damaging the equity markets and hence the economy has brought us there at least in some areas? And you do not feel that the damage done to 1000's of individuals has gotten us to that last resort yet? Or do you feel things are not that bad yet and the economy and people need to suffer more?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 9,217
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 9,217 |
Here's an interesting article that George will like. I think it was George who was crowing about how Bush's poll numbers were dropping, and of course, he's jumping through hoops to try and paint the corporate scandals as Bush's fault as well. This article gives me my faith in Americans again, that people who think like George are in an extreme minority. The poll shows that most Americans blame the current situation on Clinton, and the lax morals he brought to American life. It also shows that while the Democrats have busted a gut trying to shift blame onto Bush, it has had no effect on him at all, and his approval rating has increased, to 76%.
In *another* article that appeared today, polls indicate that Bush would now win most every state he lost last time, by a 2-1 majority. Even California would go to Bush today with a 7% margin. The article says most people (something like 80% I think) said they didn't think Algore was capable of doing the job. Think about *that* one while reading the article below, and regaining a little confidence in the American citizens.
Monday July 8, 2002; 9:41 a.m. EDT APWIRE Gallup Stunner: Americans Blame Clinton for Business Scandals
Despite a coordinated Democratic Party-media push to pin blame for the recent wave of corporate scandals on President Bush, a majority of Americans currently blame ex-President Bill Clinton for the business corruption that has sent the stock market reeling and caused a crisis in confidence in corporate America, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Monday.
51 percent of Americans surveyed agreed that President Clinton's "moral failings in office" contributed to the permissive climate that encouraged corporate leaders to behave unethically.
Of that number, more than half, 26 percent "strongly agreed" that Clinton was partially responsible for the business scandals. The rest, 25 percent, "moderately agreed" the ex-president deserved blame.
When asked the same question about President Bush, only 15 percent "strongly agreed" that he set a climate that encouraged corporate corruption. 31 percent "moderately agreed" with the same proposition, for a cumulative total of 46 percent - five percent less than those who blame Clinton.
Another stunning development: President Bush's approval ratings have actually improved in the weeks since the Democrat-media complex began shifting blame to Bush.
The CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll put Bush's overall job approval at 76 percent - up six points since early June.
"This result alone suggests that the president has been untouched by these scandals," Gallup said.
Gallup surveyed 1,019 adults over the age of 18 on June 28-30. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percent.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798 |
If the market can handle this, how did it happen in the first place? Corporate fraud is not new. It has been going on since corporations came into existence. Why didn't the market principles work to forstall the problems we now have?
If the accounting principles are adequate, why did they not work for all of these companies who chose not to follow them? They also have been in place for a long time. Anderson knew them. And yet they did not seem to be enough to stop them. How will this now change through the accounting profession itself?
You know, george, many of the abuses that have taken place were also violations of existing law but that did not stop them. It is impossible to point out all of the abuses that did not occur due to self-regulation within business just as it is easy to point out the abuses that took place in spite of existing law. Also, let us not forget that it was not any regulatory agency that discovered the shoddy accounting practiced by Worldcom et al, but the accounting industry itself. The relevant question going forward is how best to prevent these abuses from recurring. You seem to gravitate instantly toward government regulation. I believe there are other ways that are even now at work.
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness. :t:
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by JBryan: You seem to gravitate instantly toward government regulation. I believe there are other ways that are even now at work. True enough. I do tend to think one of the responsibilities of government is to protect the weak from being preyed on by the strong. You, of course, can accept economic Darwinism -- allowing the strong to prey on the weak until the strong fear they will lose money. But to me, there are higher values in this society, even for corporations, than making money. And just as we do with street gangs who cannot seem to come to grips with higher values, so also I think we should do with white collar gangs. Perhaps I would feel more confident that existing law was adequate if I had seen more indictments coming out of all of this than the one charge against Andeson. Perhaps I would feel more confident if the Enron gang had been indicted and hauled into court. Perhaps I would feel more confident if the family running Adelphia were arrested and put on trial. Perhaps i would feel more confident if ANY of the corporate executives who perpetrated all of this had been charged. But to date, only Anderson has been charged and only with one count. And yet in all of this -- with all of these companies, literally tens of thousands of lives have been destroyed. Now, perhaps the indictments are coming. Perhaps Attorney Generalissimo Ashcroft has his crack attorneys preparing the cases as we speak. But until I see some sort of government action that will punish severely those who have done this, I have to assume we do not have adequate laws on the books -- and therefore need some. And simply saying that everytime this happens we will give these people a free ride with no charges brought because the system will correct itself against future possible problems is not enough for me. If someone breaks into my house and steals my life savings, I want them arrested, put on trial, convicted and sent to prison. If someone commits fraud and steals my life savings, I want them arrested, put on trial, convicted and sent to prison. The fact no one has been arrested yet, indeed no one has even been charged yet, tells me that either the Il Duce Regime refuses to use the laws we have or we do not have adequate laws. I suspect it is the latter.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,290
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,290 |
Perhaps I would feel more confident that existing law was adequate if I had seen more indictments coming out of all of this than the one charge against Andeson. Perhaps I would feel more confident if the Enron gang had been indicted and hauled into court. Perhaps I would feel more confident if the family running Adelphia were arrested and put on trial. Perhaps i would feel more confident if ANY of the corporate executives who perpetrated all of this had been charged.
If someone breaks into my house and steals my life savings, I want them arrested, put on trial, convicted and sent to prison. If someone commits fraud and steals my life savings, I want them arrested, put on trial, convicted and sent to prison.
The fact no one has been arrested yet, indeed no one has even been charged yet, tells me that either the president refuses to use the laws we have or we do not have adequate laws. I suspect it is the latter. I couldn't agree with you more on this one George. Liquidate their assets, distribute them among their employees, toss them in a cell and throw away the key. Derick
Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats.
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by Derick: [b]Perhaps I would feel more confident that existing law was adequate if I had seen more indictments coming out of all of this than the one charge against Andeson. Perhaps I would feel more confident if the Enron gang had been indicted and hauled into court. Perhaps I would feel more confident if the family running Adelphia were arrested and put on trial. Perhaps i would feel more confident if ANY of the corporate executives who perpetrated all of this had been charged.
If someone breaks into my house and steals my life savings, I want them arrested, put on trial, convicted and sent to prison. If someone commits fraud and steals my life savings, I want them arrested, put on trial, convicted and sent to prison.
The fact no one has been arrested yet, indeed no one has even been charged yet, tells me that either the president refuses to use the laws we have or we do not have adequate laws. I suspect it is the latter. I couldn't agree with you more on this one George. Liquidate their assets, distribute them among their employees, toss them in a cell and throw away the key.
Derick[/b]Thanks for the vote of confidence, Derick. A gentle nudge, though.... If you are going to quote me, please quote me as I write it. If you do not want to do so, just refer to what I said. If my name is going on a quote in someone's post, please leave the quote as I said it. You are claiming them to be my words, so please use my words even if you don't like them. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,290
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,290 |
George,
I didn't mean to misquote, I only changed the name you call the president. I assume that's what you are referring to and not the fact that I left out some of your post. If so, I'll respect your wishes in the future.
Derick
Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798 |
George, now you seem to be arguing for stiffer enforcement of existing law. You won't get an argument from me on that. I do believe in economic Darwinism in a sense. That is that there are winners and losers and that is the way it is meant to be. It seems that our friends on the left are constantly trying to construct a system in which there are no losers. The only result has always been all losers except for a few in charge. Our system is not always pretty but it is the best one around. Of course, that is not to say that I support fraud and corruption but there happens to be, coincidentally, laws already on the books against that. I would agree that those found guilty of such crimes should be sent to the pokey. And not the kind where the hardest thing each day is working on your handicap. More laws that place government ever more into board rooms regulating how CEOs are selected and such nonsense will not have any effect on that, however. It is just more government takeover of our economy.
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness. :t:
|
|
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Originally posted by Derick: George,
I didn't mean to misquote, I only changed the name you call the president. I assume that's what you are referring to and not the fact that I left out some of your post. If so, I'll respect your wishes in the future.
Derick Thank you Derick. I appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798 |
I wouldn't worry too much about it Derick. Oh, George has a point in that you really should not misquote him but we know who he is talking about and why he refers to these people in the manner that he does. Don't get me wrong. He has every right to refer to them in any manner he chooses. The fact is that he intends to push certain buttons in us by this technique even though I really coudn't care less. However, while I may not be offended by the labels he uses, that is his intent and is rather irritating in that, while he is constantly posturing as the one who is above partisanship or rancor, he does so while perpetually sticking his thumb in our eye. I suppose that is just about all we can ever expect so I will continue to simply ignore it.
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness. :t:
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,290
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,290 |
When I do quote George again, I will respect the President as well as George (and his wishes).
Your point, JBryan, about existing laws is valid but why are they not enforced? Why are corporate executives not held to the same standard that would, if we violated them, land you or I in jail in a heartbeat?
Believe it or not, I dislike the idea of more and/or stricter laws. But I don't see how we can expect the system to correct itself.
Today I read an article about one of my favorite companies, IBM. The analyst was saying that the stock is still trading too high at $70/share; last year it was $115. The analyst listed several reasons why he believes it should be trading around $50/share.
One thing that struck me *again* was the fact that IBM used the income from its pension plan as profit. That's perfectly legal. The problem is the pension fund has taken a nosedive with the stock market and IBM doesn't look nearly as healthy as it once did. In fact, it never was healthy. A good portion of their profit arose from smoke and mirrors. Yet the CEO raked in over $1,000,000,000 in his 9 year tenure for his "outstanding performance".
This must stop. Board members from company A scratching the backs of those from company B in turn scratching with company C and back again to company A must stop. Stockholders must DEMAND socially, responsible, performance from company executives.
Socially responsible performance means that corporate executives should be penalized, financially, when they take away from employees to boost the bottom line. Corporate executives should be penalized when they lay off American workers and don't touch European or Asian workers. After all, the American consumer pays for all of this sooner or later.
It still irks me to think that Sir Louis Gerstner, former CEO of IBM (knighted by that idiot Queen Elizabeth), collects a $1,000,000/year pension, $500,000,000 in stock options and full lifetime medical benefits.
The last year I worked for IBM my pension was yanked as were my lifetime medical benefits. My father retired from IBM and my mother is still entitled to collect on his pension and take advantage of his medical plan (he got out before Sir Louis stole from the employees). However, last year, my mother was told she now has to contribute to the health plan. My father's whopping $20,000/year pension does not help much with the $400/month medical insurance bill.
How do we let people get away with this kind of stuff? Sir Louis supposedly goes to church everyday. But I wonder how he sleeps at night.
Derick
Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,798 |
Derick,
I agree that the laws we have on the books have not been enforced vigorously enough nor have the penalties handed down been severe enough. I would like to see some of these guys end up with cellmates named Bubba instead of Armand (if you know what I mean). Your point about corporate executives and their "golden handshakes" is also well taken. Believe me, the people screaming the loudest about these abuses are on Wall Street. I would expect to see a drastic shift in expectations from investors and board members.
I really do sympathize with the employees of these companies whose interests and, all too often, their life savings get lost in the tumult. I would really like to see something that could protect them without sticking government behind the wheel of our economy. However, there really is only so much that can be done to protect workers from the vicissitudes of our market based system. Still, I carry no brief for those who place workers pensions and jobs at risk through fraud and deception.
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness. :t:
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 9,217
9000 Post Club Member
|
9000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 9,217 |
Originally posted by George061875: If you are going to quote me, please quote me as I write it. If you do not want to do so, just refer to what I said. If my name is going on a quote in someone's post, please leave the quote as I said it. You are claiming them to be my words, so please use my words even if you don't like them.
Thanks. Yes, Derick. Whatever you do, don't leave out one of George's perjorative names. That's his entire reason for posting. Screw the ideas! Just as long as you get Il Duce in there somewhere, George will be happy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|