antiquary
|
posted on July 10, 2002 05:47:31 AM new
I've decided that I will support the death penalty when it's equally applied to those whose greedy and dishonest acts suck the lifeblood of thousands and thousands of innocent Americans and undermine the economic health of the nation. Isn't it, in fact, just an insidious form of terrorism?
From the NYT:
The Corporate Scandals: Coming Clean
When George W. Bush speaks about corporate misbehavior and self-dealing by business insiders, he perches on a platform much weaker than the one from which he launched the war on terrorism. Instead of the sense of resolve and determination he showed after Sept. 11, the president is still struggling to prove that his past business dealings have not made him a product of the very system he now denounces. The president dismisses criticism of his record as political. But if he expects to restore confidence in corporate America, he needs to get his own house in order first.
On Monday the president attempted to explain why the methods he employed as an oil company executive years ago are different from the insider trading and creative accounting now undermining the credibility of corporate America. He made the disastrous mistake of arguing that in his case, accounting rules were "not always black and white." For a president whose foreign policy, and entire political outlook, is based on the idea that the world can indeed be divided into good and bad, black and white, nothing could have sounded worse.
The president needs to speak much more frankly about the money he made in selling his faltering oil company to Harken Energy of Texas — and later selling Harken shares shortly before the company's stock price collapsed. Harken also engaged in questionable bookkeeping practices while Mr. Bush served on its board. While the S.E.C. has found no illegalities, he would be a more persuasive advocate of reform if he found a way to acknowledge that this deal, the foundation of his personal fortune, is not a shining example of the stern code of responsibility he now demands that executives follow.
The most sensitive spot in Mr. Bush's résumé has always been the strong suspicion that his success as a businessman was due in the main to his family connections. That becomes relevant if it means that the president places too much emphasis on personal loyalty and team spirit. It is not enough for Mr. Bush to declare that someone in his administration is a good man. He needs to show that he understands that good men sometimes do bad things when they are entrusted with power, and that it is the government's job to keep them accountable.
Mr. Bush has repeatedly failed to make tough personnel decisions about people he regards as part of the team. It is inexcusable that Tom White, a former Enron executive, is still holding his job as Army secretary. And any clear-sighted administration would realize that Harvey Pitt, a former lawyer for the accounting industry, is not the right advocate as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission for tough new accounting standards long opposed by the industry.
The administration was overly permissive when it came to demanding that cabinet members follow the rules for divesting themselves of their personal stock holdings. And Mr. Bush sees nothing wrong with the fact that Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force still refuses to release the names of the businessmen who advised the administration on its energy policy. Now Mr. Cheney's former company, Halliburton, is being investigated by the S.E.C. for practices carried out while he was in charge. The public needs some frank explanations, but Mr. Cheney has declined to comment.
It's far too late for Mr. Bush to go back and demonstrate that he could have been a successful businessman even if his name were George Walker. What we need is a president who sets an example of the standards he wants corporate America to adopt. If he can't do that, his critics will have grounds to poke at that tender spot in his personal history again and again.
|
krs
|
posted on July 10, 2002 06:22:41 AM new
Did anyone find him to be believable during his speech demanding criminal sanctions for these corporate destructive and illegal acts? I thought that he was smirking, and seemed barely able to look directly at the cameras. In other words, he's lying.
Aside that, what program was offered up as a solution? Paying lip service to this problem without firm action to resolve it makes this only another politically expedient ploy.
He needs to stop changing his story about his own illegal acts and own up to it if he hopes to retain any credibility in the matter at all.
His own chief advisor, Karl Rove, publically stated that the American public has a short memory. It's obvious that bush believes that all he need do is make a speech and wait for the turmoil to recede into the past - out of the public eye. Perhaps he's right; and why would he think anything else? He's spent a lifetime in sleazy dealings and both he and most of his family members have gotten away with little more than an insignificant fine here and there.
|
mrfoxy76
|
posted on July 10, 2002 06:27:43 AM new
I am sure all these corporate criminals are shaking in their shoes afters the presidents speech NOT. He is soo lame its a joke....
|
gravid
|
posted on July 10, 2002 07:15:34 AM new
It is a prime example of the executive branch making all sorts of promises about what "we" are going to do when it is the legislative branch that actually has to DO something about it.
Just like all Hillary's great noise about health care reform. Congress was not agreeable so it was a dead issue.
Perhaps he will try the same action by executive decree with this as with declaring informal war. If he does I think you will see a greater response from congress. They don't care what he does to foreign nationals but this is their campaign contributors he is talking about.
[ edited by gravid on Jul 10, 2002 07:17 AM ]
|
Helenjw
|
posted on July 10, 2002 08:28:20 AM new
A Fox is About to Reassure Us Hens Can Bush scold Wall Street with a straight face?
When asked why it had taken him 34 months to file the necessary paperwork on his sale of stock in the Harken energy company, of which he was a director, Bush replied, "I still haven't figured it out completely."
So this corporate criminal is trying to make an "appearance" of cleaning up other corporate criminals while keeping his long criminal history sacrosanct. What a blatant hypocrit.
According to a recent gallup poll, Americans are now more concerned about the economy than they are about terrorism.
[ edited by Helenjw on Jul 10, 2002 09:26 AM ]
|
stockticker
|
posted on July 10, 2002 08:50:46 AM new
An Insider Report takes less than 5 minutes to complete. I've seen plenty of completed reports.
Irene
|
Linda_K
|
posted on July 10, 2002 09:04:51 AM new
I totally agree corporate crime needs to be punished...severely. Every penny made from those who are found guilty need to be returned to the workers who have been affected.
I would also like to point out that this 'new type of accounting system' didn't just start since President Bush was elected. Who's to know if this isn't part of the reason the economy 'appeared' to be doing so well during the clinton administration.
I also wonder why the SEC doesn't appear to have been doing their job.
President Bush reporting his sale of those stocks the day before he sold them, to me, shows he wasn't doing anything underhanded. If someone did not follow the rules/laws that require the paperwork to have been submitted in a timely fashion...then prosecute them. This has been investigated three times and no charges have been filed to date. So someone [many people] must feel nothing illegal had been done.
|
gravid
|
posted on July 10, 2002 10:15:41 AM new
Frankly I think somebody at his wealth level depends on his support people to put the correct documents on his desk to sign and if they don't do so he doesn't think about it. Yopu are still responsible so you better have the best working for you.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on July 10, 2002 10:18:41 AM new
agreed
|
junquemama
|
posted on July 10, 2002 11:39:49 AM new
antiquary,
Did you notice the head of the IRS has been out of the Country and just real busy? I have never known a head of the Tax department to travel so much,He is headed to Russia now.All the while, during the hearings it was said over and over the IRS was sent a different set of figures showing losse's by the Corp.crooks. co-inky-dink? 
|
stockticker
|
posted on July 10, 2002 11:39:59 AM new
The secretaries in the company I worked for often completed the personal Insider Report forms for their bosses (officers or directors of companies concerned) who then signed. The information required to be filled in is very simple e.g. number of shares sold, average price, and number of shares in the company still held after the sale.
I've completed Insider Reports myself on behalf of my company when it bought or sold shares in related companies.
Irene
|
antiquary
|
posted on July 10, 2002 11:40:46 AM new
Bush's accountant was probably trained by Arthur Anderson and pulled the wool over his eyes just as they did Enron, et al.
"The biggest disappointment was Mr. Bush's failure to insist on a forceful reform of the accounting industry. Auditors are the primary guardians of business integrity, and in the recent boom they lost sight of their mandate to serve the public, not company officers. The House passed a weak reform bill in the spring. But the president at best appeared to be equating it with the more meaningful proposal the Senate is currently considering. The Senate bill, proposed by Paul Sarbanes, would establish an independent oversight board for the industry, and place limits on the consulting work auditors can perform for companies. Mr. Bush would have best served the interests of the tens of millions of Americans who want to continue entrusting their retirement savings to the stock market if he had transcended partisanship on this one issue and directed his party's leadership in the House to adopt the Senate's version of accounting reform."
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/10/opinion/10WED1.html
|
antiquary
|
posted on July 10, 2002 11:57:53 AM new
Hey Junquemama,
No, I didn't see that. I wonder why he's visiting our buddies the Russians.
|
junquemama
|
posted on July 10, 2002 11:59:06 AM new
Want to hear about a mind blower?(for me)
Last year I went thru an audit by the IRS.It was for the year 1997.A month ago I recieved a long inquirey form from the Gallup Poll,Wanting to follow up on my audit and wanting to know how the agent treated me and just a whole bunch of questions.I tore it up.
Two weeks later,I recieved a card from Gallup asking why I had not sent back the questionar(sp?) I tore it up.Like I really had a damn choice!And who in the hell would fill out the questions and say they didnt like the agent?(I sent a CPA)to battle for me,And came out pretty good.
|
junquemama
|
posted on July 10, 2002 12:06:00 PM new
antiquary
Mr. O'Neal just got back from Africa.He was over there a week or two.He found a lot of poor people ! And came back and ask Congress for 200 million to help the hungry and poor.
|
antiquary
|
posted on July 10, 2002 12:08:33 PM new
Glad the audit came out well.
Gallup seems to be involved in everything.
Maybe Arthur Anderson is its accounting firm.
|
gravid
|
posted on July 10, 2002 12:24:38 PM new
Probably rounding up agreement for tax treaties so there will be nowhere to hide.
I wonder if you take a vacation in a tax haven if it sends the old signal flares up?
|
Helenjw
|
posted on July 10, 2002 12:25:19 PM new
Bush also sat on Harken's audit committee, which was working on a restructuring plan for Harken. As part of his service on the audit committee Bush would have certainly been aware of the earliest discussions and drafts of the report that the company was $150 million in debt and would lose $23 million that year.
He had no excuse. His current position of holding members accountable just doesn't square with his shady past.
Helen
[ edited by Helenjw on Jul 10, 2002 01:23 PM ]
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 10, 2002 01:24:04 PM new
Mr. O'Neal just got back from Africa.He was over there a week or two.He found a lot of poor people ! And came back and ask Congress for 200 million to help the hungry and poor.
No kidding ? Had to go all the way to Africa Huh maybe he should start in appalachia or arkansas or chicago detroit mississippi, somebody should kick the miserable failure in his ass.
The last time we sent food to Africa the scum killed our soldiers and drug their naked bodies thru the streets. Food we ought to kill the sob responsible. and somebodu ought to fire this idiot.
|
REAMOND
|
posted on July 10, 2002 01:44:18 PM new
Bush's business dealings are all suspect. His bargain on the baseball team was remarkable, not to mention the angel-like bail-out he received on another oil company he ran into the ground. His brother also raped a Saving and Loan.
Cheney's corporate "problems" may start surfacing soon.
Did anyone hear about the new Bush 201K plan ? It is your 401K after it loses half of its value.
As far as all these scandels happening when Clinton was Pres., - look at the legislative record. Clinton tried to get no less than 6 pieces of legislation passed through Congress that included reforms for conflict of interest between analysts,consultants and accountants. All the legislation was killed by the Republicans in Congress.
There are and will be more little people hurt in the coming months. I just hope they vote.
|
krs
|
posted on July 10, 2002 05:40:06 PM new
"Cheney's corporate "problems" may start surfacing soon".
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&ncid=716&e=1&u=/ap/20020710/ap_on_bi_ge/cheney_lawsuit
|
junquemama
|
posted on July 10, 2002 06:41:07 PM new
If any of us used those same generally accepted accounting principles,We would be in prison a very long time.
This information was not suppose to leak out,It was the boulder holding back the dam of truth,The King has no clothes!!!
See? There is a God!
|
Helenjw
|
posted on July 10, 2002 08:52:13 PM new
junquemama
I may become a believer afterall! LOL!
Dick Cheney Full Law Suit; US Districh Court
Defendants..
HALLIBURTON COMPANY, D/B/A
HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES;
RICHARD B. CHENEY;
DAVID J. LESAR;
RAY L. HUNT;
ROBERT L. CRANDALL;
CHARLES J. DIBONA;
LAWRENCE S. EAGLEBURGER;
WILLIAM R. HOWELL;
JAMES LANDIS MARTIN;
JAY A. PRECOURT;
CECIL J. SILAS;
DOUGLAS L. FOSHEE;
JERRY H. BLURTON;
CEDRIC BURGHER;
ROBERT CHARLES MUCHMORE, JR.;
ANDERSEN;
ANDERSEN WORLDWIDE;
ARTHUR ANDERSEN, LLP;
TERRENCE EDWARD HATCHETT;
[ edited by Helenjw on Jul 10, 2002 09:10 PM ]
|
REAMOND
|
posted on July 10, 2002 09:03:43 PM new
[i]The King has no clothes[i]
The only problem is that the "King" in this situation is not Bush, but our economy.
No matter how many people go to prison, or how much property is seized, it will not restore the retirement funds or the jobs that have been lost, nor will it restore confidence. The retirement funds are not just those of employees that had 401Ks at these companies, but there are huge retirement funds invested in these stocks for teachers, state employees and many others that will be effected. Anybody still want your Social Security privatized ?
|
rawbunzel
|
posted on July 10, 2002 09:24:09 PM new
I've never wanted social security privatized but I would think that those that used to push for it would be seeing the folly there.
|
junquemama
|
posted on July 10, 2002 09:44:56 PM new
Helen said:I may become a believer afterall! LOL!
The world will now end as we know it.
|
junquemama
|
posted on July 10, 2002 09:55:57 PM new
REAMOND,The King is Bush.This is a good thing,The downward spiral of our economy will slow up..Had the big boys not been caught with their pants down,We would not have much hope for the future.Now they will all be under a microscope and a little nervous.The King will have to do something in a grandstanding offer for the peons.Give me cake!
|
auroranorth
|
posted on July 10, 2002 10:39:56 PM new
Yes They will be watched more closely, there will be one more FBI agent added. and the republicans will only accept bribes from companies smart enough not to get caught
sorry I just got this in make that convicted not caught.
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 11, 2002 01:07:26 AM new
"I would also like to point out that this 'new type of accounting system' didn't just start since President Bush was elected. Who's to know if this isn't part of the reason the economy 'appeared' to be doing so well during the clinton administration."
Your assumption is correct in that in an ever-expanding-and-amazing economy, it's relatively easy to cook the boks. After all, as a corp you want to keep your investors an add more, investors demand a return, so you guarantee one. In a great economy like we had under Clinton, if you "over" quoted what your earnings were to satisfy the investors, then you'd make it happen in the next quarter. WEasy. But where you're wrong is that it WAS a real economic boom - it didn't just appear that way on paper: more people were employed, more goods and services were sold, peole had more money - lots of money, in fact. It is that this sort of bookeeping is hard to cover in a bad economy intentionally driven into a shambles.
|
Borillar
|
posted on July 11, 2002 01:10:07 AM new
"He needs to show that he understands that good men sometimes do bad things when they are entrusted with power, and that it is the government's job to keep them accountable."
Antiquary, there are those who would argue with this article on that point. Many Americans who are pro-corporate state feel that the government has no right to tell them what to do and shouldn't be doing so. That the thought that the government issues charters for corporations means that they have every right to police corporations and to regulate them.
|
