Thursday, April 30, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
"Some of the biggest corporate blowups of the past 20 years, like Enron, occurred chiefly because managers could exploit accounting rules that gave them great liberty in pricing assets", Peter Eavis at the WSJ, 4 April 2009.
Thurgood Marshall (TM) said something about SFAS 157. But TM died in 1993. So? His words live on. When I find the quotation, I will post it. Stay tuned. But TM wasn't a CPA. So? He left us some wisdom. We should apply it.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Saturday, April 25, 2009
"A former chairman of Tajikistan's Central bank diverted more than $850 million to a company run by himself and his family, according to an independent audit posted on the bank's Web site on Monday", WSJ, 14 April 2009.
GSG and LB make me sick. GSG's shareholders should run LB out and tar and feather him. He admits he did not do his job properly. Stock awards be held for at least three years? Hmm. LB doesn't read IA, does he? See my 13 January 2009 post: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2009/01/incentives-count-for-bankers-too-3.html. Compensation experts? Where were these "experts" ten years ago? Act "like an owner"? What were you doing all along LB?
"'There is no purely military solution to it,' [piracy] Gates said in an address to the Marine Corps War College in Quantico, Va. 'There's really no way in my view to control it unless you get something on land that begins to change the equation for these kids.' ... Among the advocates for more serious initiatives in Somalia has been Vice Adm. William E. Gortney, commander of US naval forces in the Middle East, who on Suday reiterated his ships could only do so much and 'the ultimate solution for piracy is on land'," Peter Spiegel at the WSJ, 14 April 2009.
Where do I begin with how incompetent, or worse Gates is? That we fought terrorists for over seven years shows our strategy and tactics incompetence. Gates should be fired. Now! What does "holistic approach" mean? Programs "rely on unproven technology", gee. Gates sounds like, drumroll please, a stupid accountant! The Manhattan Project relied on "unproven technology" too! Gates is a bigger danger to the Republic than al-Queda is, was or ever could be. Gates should find himself a sinecure somewhere with a foreign embassy. I understand the Saudis have lots of money. Gates find yourself a sinecure there. I've posted on the F-22 before, 12 March 2009: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2009/03/modern-weapons-and-cpas.html.
Friday, April 24, 2009
I agree with the WSJ. DO the math yourself. Or do you believe, along with that ignoramus Dianne Feinstein, we can blow the world hundreds of times over, my 15 January 2009 post, http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2009/01/we-aint-got-no-enemies.html.
We apparently learn nothing from history. At least POTUS Obama hasn't.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
"On Apr. 9, Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's atomic energy agency, announced that the Islamic Republic had installed 7,000 centrifuges in its Nataz uranium enrichment facility. The announcement came one day after the US State Department announced it would engage Iran directly in multilateral nuclear talks. ... Thus our president fulfills a pattern in which new adminstrations place the failure of diplomacy on predecessors rather than on adversaries. The Islamic Republic is not a passive actor, however. Quite the opposite: While President Obama plays checkers, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameni plays chess. The enrichment milestone is a testament both to Tehran's proactive strategy, and to Washington's refusal to recognize it. ... It was a ruse. Iranian officials were as insincere was European diplomats were greedy, gullible or both. Iranian officials now acknowledge that Tehran invested the benefits reaped into its nuclear program. ... When Mr. Obama declared on April 5 that 'All countries can access peaceful nuclear energy,' the state-run daily newspaper Resalat responded with a front page headline,' The United States capitulates to the nuclear goals of Iran'," Michael Rubin at the WSJ, 13 April 2009.
I agree with Bolton. I have no confidence in our intelligence establishment at all. It says what it's told.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Regulators can? Really? Besides, there are no TBTF banks, see my 12 December 2007 post: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2007/12/too-big-to-fail.html.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
PB's Weimar solution looks like the dollar's final solution.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
"The trustee overseeing the bankruptcy of subprime lender [NCF] filed suit against its auditor, KPMG LLP, claiming that 'reckless and grossly negligent audits' helped accelerate the firm's collapse two years ago. The lawsuits filed Wednesday said that specialists at KPMG tried to point out errors in [NCF's] financial statements but were silenced by the KPMG partner in charge of the audits 'to protect KPMG's business relationship with, and fees from, [NCF]. ... If the [NCF] trustee is sucessful, 'it may embolden others to look more closely at the possibility of bringing [accounting] firms to some level of culpability for the things that happened' that led to the credit crisis, Francine McKenna, president of McKenna Partners LLC, a corporate-governance consultancy, said in an interview. ... 'While we have not seen the complaint yet, any claim that the acquiesced to client demands is unsupportable,' KPMG spokesman Dan Ginsburg said in an emailed statement. ... The accounting issues center on provisions in the mortgages the bank sold to investors that required it to take back or make payments on the mortgages if they quickly went bad. When subprime mortgages began to sour in early 2007, [NCF] was on the hook for $8 billion in loans and collapsed soon thereafter", Donna Kardos at the WSJ, 2 April 2009.
Caving in to large clients is the Big 87654's stock in trade. How do you think they got that big? By being aggressive auditors? Well, PCAOB, where are you? Did you already review KPMG's NCF work? If not, why not? Will you provide "expert" testimony for KPMG or the plaintiffs in this matter? Or are you nowhere to be seen?