Posted: 2002-07-23 07:50pm
First of all, you apparently don't even know what a strawman is. I mearly pointed out parts of your text where I disagreed, and then stated why. I suggest you do the same, sounding smart isn't workingSo here's a effortless deconstruction of Falcon's strawmen
Laws don't stop actions, they only make those actions illegal.First off I never supported Bush's plans of corporate reform, I stated they weren't enough otherwise inadequate. Along with enforcement we need to enact new laws and acts that will deal with the issues which have escaped media and public scrutiny.
Are the lawyers engaging or helping in an illegal activity? If so, fine, why were they shielded in the first place? Who put laws into place that shields wrongdoing by lawyers?These include, to:
Repeal the laws that shield lawyers, accountants and bankers from being sued for collusion in securities fraud and other corporate crimes.
That hardly helps when they are given incorrect information. Thats the problem, no one can know when something illegal is going on because the wrongdoers lie about it. How would your watchdog commission stop lies and fabrications?Enacting legislation to establish Financial Consumer Associations, state-chartered, nonprofit organizations with fulltime staffs that can help consumers band together to serve as watchdogs on financial issues, such as securities fraud.
Yes, because the government has a stellar record of managing money and fraud. Did you know that the government looses billions of dollars every year from the budget. Money they cannot account for in any way shape matter or form. It just disappears. Maybe we should just punish accounting firms that lie and cheat, then fear of prosecution and jail would keep the bad apples in line.Create a Federal Bureau of Audits, an independent agency responsible for overseeing and regulating the accounting industry. In addition, auditors should be forbidden from providing any non-audit services such as consulting to the same clients.
How would that stop fraud? They already play favorites and swap favors. Taking this action wouldn't prevent them from continuing to do so.Mandate strict separation between investment banking, insurance, and investment advice.
Whats that supposed to mean? Anyone who has been a businessman before can no longer serve in government? Thats not only stupid, its unconstitutional.Close the revolving door between business and government
I already responded to this before. How are stock options a loss? (read up if you want my full quote on this issue)Eliminate the double standard for stock options, whereby companies can get a tax write-off for stock options without having to list it as an expense on their financial statements.
If I'm not mistaken we already have a disclosure period. What needs to happen is writing law so that individual stock holders won't be locked into their shares, al la Enron.Require day-of disclosure for all executive stock sales.
Unions suck anyways, the last thing we need is more unions. Don't you realize that higher wages = more inflation = higher living standards? Companies don't absorb higher wages, they pass them on to the consumer (the person getting a higher wage)Repeal the Taft-Hartley Act that unfairly obstructs tens of millions of American workers in companies like Wal-Mart from organizing trade unions to bargain for living wages.
SO why arn't these things being done? Don't say Bush, most of the accounting frauds happened before he took office. It is government incompetance in general, and adding more laws will not change that.As with enforcing we need to:
Actively enforce the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, which contains several securities fraud provisions, including prohibitions on insider trading and nondisclosure.
Give corporate criminals real jail time.
Revoke professional licenses for lawyers and accountants who aid in fraud.
Expand SEC disclosure standards to include environmental and social issues.
Double the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) present budget of about $467 million for 2003.
How much have taxes went up since 1979?Can you can the biggest growth of poverty since 1979 marginal. As with who is at fault of this. It goes directly back to the CEOs. They have the power to cut jobs and decide wages. Take a look at this statistic.
Job cutters make companies profitable again. It is not in the interest of a company to hire personal that do not pay for themselves. Only the government does that. Whatever a business wants to pay a CEO is fine with me, its the companies money. If you don't like it, don't invest in said company. Very simpleIs this justification?
The top job-cutters received an increase in salary and bonus of nearly 20% in 2000, compared to average raises in that year for U.S. wage workers of about 3% and for salaried employees of 4%. Overall CEO pay also rose in 2000 despite the 10% drop in the S&P 500.
Was it illegal?Between 1996 and 1998, 41 large, profitable corporations used special tax breaks to reduce their corporate tax bill to less than zero, receiving outright federal tax rebate checks, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. (In contrast, the current rebates are paid only to people who paid income taxes.) As a group, the CEOs of these firms averaged pay hikes of 69% in the year of the rebate, far above the typical CEO raise of 38%. In six cases – Black & Decker, Praxair, Coca-Cola, Colgate-Palmolive, Enron, and McKesson – the CEO’s raise entirely consumed his company’s tax rebate for that year.
You see, people are paid what ever price the market will bare. Apparently these CEOs can command quite a price in the free market, and I applaud them for it.The increased wage inequity in 2000 continued a decade-long trend. If the minimum wage had grown at the same rate as CEO pay since 1990, 571%, it would now be $25.50 an hour, rather than $5.15 an hour
I wasn't talking about Enron CEOs silly boy. I was talking about the companies not currently under FCC investigation that had been involved in some kind of scandle. Scandle doesn't always = wrongdoing.What kind of question is this?!? Are you saying that the CEOs of Enron, Authur Anderson, ImClone, and WorldCom are not quilty. If you bothered to actually read the said scandals, they all deal with the crimes of CEOs gaining money by means of accounting fraud, insider trading and other illegal activities.
And I'm saying, what problem do you have with the owners of companies enriching themselves? As long as its done legally.And this is why they have self enriched themselves. As for justification see chart above.
We need to change that law, not introduce a whole new layer of government red tape.Exactly, they need to change the laws. To bad the CEO sold his sotcks before they took the plunge.