It seems that (the title) is the thinking of our illustrious congressmen (and maybe women too). Floyd Norris at The New York Times (here) describes efforts to undo much of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley legislation that has provided improved protection for investors by requiring corporations to institute internal controls to prevent fraud.
Well, let's get rid of that. It is stifling innovation.
Hat tip to Barry Ritholtz at The Big Picture (here).
Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha
community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors,
in contrast to contributors' articles.
Sarbanes-Oxley has been a disaster. While I can't prove it, I know there are reputable private companies that wouldn't consider going public because of the expense of administering the ridiculous reporting requirements. Why do I think it is a disaster? Because it has done nothing to prevent fraud, which is pervasive, as you document almost daily.
I agree. Also look at all the companies taken private so they can AVOID S-O.
Then we have the corporations that just move out of the country altogether.
On Nov 06 08:47 PM optionsgirl wrote:
> Sarbanes-Oxley has been a disaster. While I can't prove it, I know > there are reputable private companies that wouldn't consider going > public because of the expense of administering the ridiculous reporting > requirements. > Why do I think it is a disaster? > Because it has done nothing to prevent fraud, which is pervasive, > as you document almost daily.
I think I've posted before, opining that S/O should be repealed. However I'm sure that my rationale is vastly different than the illustrious senator's.
I want the banks that hold my money to be like utilities. Let the GS's of the world and the Merrill's of the world just gamble with hedge money. I would suggest that more regulation of banks and less regulation of other business is what is needed. dontpaycreditcards.com...
Gary A: Greetings. Couldn't agree more. In previous posts I have frequently advocated reinstating Glass/Steagal act. Did you get a chance to read Grantham's quarterly letter and the accompanying tick delayed piece? It's a real eye opener which I highly recommend.
I completely agree on the Sarbox disaster, and that it is a joke. While it is trotted out as soooo expensive, most "compliance" is a matter of having a few clerks download some data, put it in pretty powerpoint, and sell it to some suits who just want to put a checkmark in the "done" column. Just another piece of useless regulation eliminating enforcement of anti-fraud Law and defining "compliance" as successfully producing administrative spreadsheets.
On Nov 06 08:47 PM optionsgirl wrote:
> Sarbanes-Oxley has been a disaster. While I can't prove it, I know > there are reputable private companies that wouldn't consider going > public because of the expense of administering the ridiculous reporting > requirements. > Why do I think it is a disaster? > Because it has done nothing to prevent fraud, which is pervasive, > as you document almost daily.
> Gary A: Greetings. Couldn't agree more. In previous posts I have > frequently advocated reinstating Glass/Steagal act. Did you get a > chance to read Grantham's quarterly letter and the accompanying tick > delayed piece? It's a real eye opener which I highly recommend.
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.
Regulation Must Be a Problem - Get Rid of It 7 comments
Well, let's get rid of that. It is stifling innovation.
Hat tip to Barry Ritholtz at The Big Picture (here).
Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.
This post has 7 comments:
Why do I think it is a disaster?
Because it has done nothing to prevent fraud, which is pervasive, as you document almost daily.
Then we have the corporations that just move out of the country altogether.
On Nov 06 08:47 PM optionsgirl wrote:
> Sarbanes-Oxley has been a disaster. While I can't prove it, I know
> there are reputable private companies that wouldn't consider going
> public because of the expense of administering the ridiculous reporting
> requirements.
> Why do I think it is a disaster?
> Because it has done nothing to prevent fraud, which is pervasive,
> as you document almost daily.
On Nov 06 08:47 PM optionsgirl wrote:
> Sarbanes-Oxley has been a disaster. While I can't prove it, I know
> there are reputable private companies that wouldn't consider going
> public because of the expense of administering the ridiculous reporting
> requirements.
> Why do I think it is a disaster?
> Because it has done nothing to prevent fraud, which is pervasive,
> as you document almost daily.
On Nov 07 01:36 AM robert.b.ferguson wrote:
> Gary A: Greetings. Couldn't agree more. In previous posts I have
> frequently advocated reinstating Glass/Steagal act. Did you get a
> chance to read Grantham's quarterly letter and the accompanying tick
> delayed piece? It's a real eye opener which I highly recommend.
Latest Followers
Posts by Ticker
Latest Comments
Most Commented
Posts by Themes