Enron Uses FUZZY Math to Steal 401K Earnings

[Lhotka]

Enron Uses FUZZY Math to compute Earnings

While Enron has connections to both Democrats and Republicans, it was the Bush Administration who SELECTED this company to help forge an national energy policy.

 

[Power Wagon]

Companies, especially defunct ones, don't make our national policies. Our politicians do.



Let's look at the last administration... It took the world's largest deposit of "clean" coal... and in fact, pretty much the last known new source of "clean" coal, and locked it into a national monument nobody wanted or cares about. All this to benefit the mining operations of an asian company by giving them a world-wide monopoly on clean coal, one of whose principals was one James Riady, a big-time contributor to the Clinton's election efforts. All this by executive order. No hearings, no oversight, no "accountability" whatsoever. Clinton got contributions to his election, we got screwed. And I bet you're still cheering.



Gee... at least if we're going to have dialog between government and businesspeople, let's do it to benefit OUR country instead of some other country.



One last revision... . The Clinton administration also got input from Enron. Enron lobbied and pressured for every regulation, treaty or policy that would drive up the cost of energy and the White House obeyed.

 

[Lhotka]

Originally posted by Power Wagon

Companies, especially defunct ones, don't make our national policies. Our politicians do.

It's to bad that Clinton made such a huge impact on your life that you can't let him go.



The issue is ENRON and the fact that the Bush Administration has selected them as a major partner to assist in developing a national energy strategy. That's scary.

 

[Power Wagon]

Originally posted by Lhotka





It's to bad that Clinton made such a huge impact on your life that you can't let him go.



The issue is ENRON and the fact that the Bush Administration has selected them as a major partner to assist in developing a national energy strategy. That's scary.

When are you going to name all the rest and demonize them too?

The fact is, it appears you hate all energy companies... gee, no, you hate all companies - especially ones publicly held.



Gee... In spite of the Enron financial debacle, I'd have to say that thier business gave them a massive wealth of information on energy usage, production, cost, and distribution. Tapping into it would be pretty good thing to do.



But, since Enron is gone, this is pretty much a non-issue, isn't it?

 

[Lhotka]

There you go jumping to your daily conclusions without any thought or the foresight to backup your allegations.



The point here (I have to spell it out to you because you seem to be avoiding the real subject) is that our government was relying on someone as incompetent and corrupt as Enron to help fashion a national energy policy. They (CEO & Upper Management, not Working Class Labor) ran their own company into the ground, but have the ability to help direct a nation towards energy independence? They have their own interest at stake, not that of the American people. They dumped on loyal employees, but have the honesty and integrity to put the Nations best interests first?



I suppose you'd see no harm in hiring Osama Bin Laden, who probably has knowledge on how to counter terrorism, to head Homeland security.

 

[RonaldLarson]

Last I heard..

Enron's calls to high officials in the Bush administration for who knows what were stone walled for lack of interest. Before it's fall, due to illegal accounting practices and insider trading, Enron was a major player in energy and possessed management skills which called attention to them. It certainly looked like they should play a part in an energy policy, SOMETHING THIS COUNTRY HAS NEVER HAD.

Deceiptful, greedy and fearfull management at Enron was called to the attention of slick willies administration over a year and a half ago. The whistleblower committed suicide yesterday. Slick willie did nothing but collect more Enron money.

Joe Lieberman, loser in the last V. P. election, collected $275,000 in campaign contributions from Enron, and heads the investigation into their business practises!!!

Name one Bush administration official who had any influence in the outcome of the fall of Enron. Do you not think that if the Administration could, that they would have done something to prevent the destruction of a major employer in a critical industry? They could do nothing, did nothing and are not the bad guys. The hoods who destroyed Enron are the bad guys.

This is not a political situation, it is a business ethics question. The only thing congress needs to do is modify the rules concerning 401K funds management. Congress is not constitutionally mandated to run businesses. The employees and stockholders have that responsibility.

Ron

 

[Sled Puller]

Clinton will affect our lives for a LONG time to come. He should have been brought up on treason charges.

Anybody watching what the Chinese are doing lately with the nuke secrets he gave them?





How is that former VP of Enron doing? Oh, he is dead you say?

Gene

 

[Briar Hopper]

The real tragedy is not Clinton, but all the people who have turned a blind eye to the massive corruption and many criminal acts perpetuated upon us by the Clinton-Reno Adminstration. The inexcusable legal past of Hillary Godham Clinton , with her association and legal defense of the Black Panthers.

Hey you blind Democrat loyalists! Read David Limbaugh's book "Absolute Power". It might be available in Braille. God forbid you actually read something that might open your eyes, though! It's all true. Documented. What's that you say? Don't want to read it? You'd rather wallow in ignorance, making political commentary on a subject you're ill-versed about?

The "issue" shouldn't be about whatever the Bush Adminstration did where Enron is concerned, but rather what the previous adminstration did! You dare find a splinter in your brother's eye, when there is a plank in your own?

 

[Lhotka]

Look at all the people who turned a blind eye when they elected Bush and Cheney. Three DWI arrests between the two of them. Bush, I believe Bush is the first person elected to the presidency that is a convicted criminal. Driving While Intoxicated is inherently dangerous and a behavior that poses a risk of killing another human being. A personal choice. That's not exactly on the same scale as an extramarital affair or lying to someone.



Where are your facts that Clinton "sold" secrets to the Chinese? Let us say for the sake of this discussion that he did. Apparently that's O. K. Our current Administration makes no attempt to prosecute him. Why is that? Answer: Clinton's uncanny ability and resilience as a politician.



Like it or not, he is one of the most successful politicians of modern time.



Ignoring the issue Enron because of possible political implications only enables other companies to engage in the same types of behavior.

 

[Power Wagon]

Originally posted by Lhotka

Look at all the people who turned a blind eye when they elected Bush and Cheney. Three DWI arrests between the two of them. Bush, I believe Bush is the first person elected to the presidency that is a convicted criminal. Driving While Intoxicated is inherently dangerous and a behavior that poses a risk of killing another human being. A personal choice. That's not exactly on the same scale as an extramarital affair or lying to someone.



Where are your facts that Clinton "sold" secrets to the Chinese? Let us say for the sake of this discussion that he did. Apparently that's O. K. Our current Administration makes no attempt to prosecute him. Why is that? Answer: Clinton's uncanny ability and resilience as a politician.



Like it or not, he is one of the most successful politicians of modern time.



Ignoring the issue Enron because of possible political implications only enables other companies to engage in the same types of behavior.

Have you ever driven while ill? Say, have the flu?



Have you ever driven while tired? So tired your eyes were red and you felt groggy?



Bush did drive with a Blood Alcohol over the legal limit. But at that time it was NOT a crime. Both Clinton and Gore are pretty much concluded to have smoked pot. That WAS a crime, even then. You are being extremely disingenuous here... Bush never tried to get out of his citation, never tried to get around the law. He paid his penalty at the time, suffered the consequences.



Both driving with the flu and while extremely tired are both demonstrated to be at least an equal impairment to driving as being legally drunk. Had Bush done so later on in his years, when it was a criminal offense... he would not be president. You can't, if you have a criminal record.



As far as the rest of your commentary... Since when was Cheney convicted of drunk driving? Hasn't. I was once stopped on suspicion of drunk driving, had my car searched, and given a drunk test... But I've never consumed an alcoholic drink in my life. The cop simply thought what he saw was something it wasn't. Again, you're grasping at pointless straws.



Ohhh, boy. Clinton again. . Let's see... Clinton artfully dodges the law, finds ways to let all sorts of things slip to the Chinese so his cash cow for campaigning doesn't dry up. That IS "selling" national secrets. No way around it. If the Bush administration decided to prosecute, you'd be screaming your head off that they were on a partisan witch hunt, trying to smear Clinton after he's gone and can do nothing. But, since they decided there was little to nothing to be gained in expending thier energy on it (not even against the people who trashed the White House and executive offices, destroying possibly millions of dollars in the process) and just get on with the business of governing, you're making the absolutely insane analysis that it's because of Clinton's abilities??? Either way, you will condemn the Bush administration or praise Clinton. Both are lies.



"Ignoring Enron"??? YOu aren't making sense. Nobody is "ignoring Enron". The Clinton administration facilitated thier shoddy and misleading accounting practices by exempting them from laws designed to protect investors. The Bush administration did absolutely NOTHING in that regard, and then refused to throw money down that rathole. They aren't ignoring Enron, as you say, but then, there is little to this story, aside from the collusion of the Clinton era SEC and the Clinton White House and Enron's top brass that involves government oversight.



Enron had relied on ever-increasing energy costs, gambled on implementation of the Kyoto garbage, and played real fast and loose, expecting a receptive and very compliant White House to keep them on top of things if it didn't work out. The new administration rebuffed thier demands for various things, and wasn't the faintest bit interested in a bailout.



There's plenty of lawsuits going on, and in all probability, there will be a lot of fallout, but in the end there will be not the slightest trace of guilt from any of the present Administration. They have done nothing wrong in this matter. Nothing.

 

[Champane Flight]

Fact is?

The fact is that phone calls were made before the collapse of Enron to the Whitehouse. And now the present administration as much as put out an ultimatum that if anything comes up implicating anyone in the whitehouse they will "Pull the plug" on this investigation... ... . Sounds fishy to me... ... How many here think it is? Talk about a BLIND eye... ... ...

 

[Power Wagon]

Re: Fact is?

Originally posted by Champane Flight

The fact is that phone calls were made before the collapse of Enron to the Whitehouse. And now the present administration as much as put out an ultimatum that if anything comes up implicating anyone in the whitehouse they will "Pull the plug" on this investigation... ... . Sounds fishy to me... ... How many here think it is? Talk about a BLIND eye... ... ...

I don't. I think you're desperate to find some way to slime Bush. There's no way you can say that the last 3 Democrat presidents were better than the present occupant, so it's time to bust him down with what amounts to nothing.



Let's see, Enron called the White House. You know this? How? And what did they get? Apparently nothing. You're trying to say the Bush administration is guilty of bad things because someone called them. Get some substance first. Get something intellectually defensible first...

 

[Shrimpy]

Champane, where did you get that juicy little tidbit of news???? Pull the plug... ... ... . How????? Enron called EXPECTING to get help, but oh my no one at the BUSH White house would listen????

Yea, talk about blind eye... ... ... ... . If at first the facts don't fit the desired outcome... ... ... simply paraphrase till they do!!!!!!



I admit that Washington is nervous over this one..... both sides of the isle. Klinton took Enron money just like Bush and others... so what? We can identify exactly where Enron benefitted from klinton's help and where $100,000. 00 hit the account of the Demoncrat national kommitte (It was the power plant in India that klinton pushed threw for Enron). The VERY next day after India awarded Enron the contract 100g"s hit the dnc.





Nice try Blind Eyes, go back and re-load!!!!!!!!!

 

[Lhotka]

Originally posted by Power Wagon





Have you ever driven while ill? Say, have the flu?



Have you ever driven while tired? So tired your eyes were red and you felt groggy?



Bush did drive with a Blood Alcohol over the legal limit. But at that time it was NOT a crime. Both Clinton and Gore are pretty much concluded to have smoked pot. That WAS a crime, even then. You are being extremely disingenuous here... Bush never tried to get out of his citation, never tried to get around the law. He paid his penalty at the time, suffered the consequences.



Both driving with the flu and while extremely tired are both demonstrated to be at least an equal impairment to driving as being legally drunk. Had Bush done so later on in his years, when it was a criminal offense... he would not be president. You can't, if you have a criminal record.



As far as the rest of your commentary... Since when was Cheney convicted of drunk driving? Hasn't. I was once stopped on suspicion of drunk driving, had my car searched, and given a drunk test... But I've never consumed an alcoholic drink in my life. The cop simply thought what he saw was something it wasn't. Again, you're grasping at pointless straws.



Ohhh, boy. Clinton again. . Let's see... Clinton artfully dodges the law, finds ways to let all sorts of things slip to the Chinese so his cash cow for campaigning doesn't dry up. That IS "selling" national secrets. No way around it. If the Bush administration decided to prosecute, you'd be screaming your head off that they were on a partisan witch hunt, trying to smear Clinton after he's gone and can do nothing. But, since they decided there was little to nothing to be gained in expending thier energy on it (not even against the people who trashed the White House and executive offices, destroying possibly millions of dollars in the process) and just get on with the business of governing, you're making the absolutely insane analysis that it's because of Clinton's abilities??? Either way, you will condemn the Bush administration or praise Clinton. Both are lies.



"Ignoring Enron"??? YOu aren't making sense. Nobody is "ignoring Enron". The Clinton administration facilitated thier shoddy and misleading accounting practices by exempting them from laws designed to protect investors. The Bush administration did absolutely NOTHING in that regard, and then refused to throw money down that rathole. They aren't ignoring Enron, as you say, but then, there is little to this story, aside from the collusion of the Clinton era SEC and the Clinton White House and Enron's top brass that involves government oversight.



Enron had relied on ever-increasing energy costs, gambled on implementation of the Kyoto garbage, and played real fast and loose, expecting a receptive and very compliant White House to keep them on top of things if it didn't work out. The new administration rebuffed thier demands for various things, and wasn't the faintest bit interested in a bailout.



There's plenty of lawsuits going on, and in all probability, there will be a lot of fallout, but in the end there will be not the slightest trace of guilt from any of the present Administration. They have done nothing wrong in this matter. Nothing.

You suggest Bush should be credited for not "trying to get out of his citation or trying to get around the law". Isn't that what Clinton and Gore did when admitted to using marijuana? That's a bit more open then Bush was when questioned about his cocaine use. Oh... . and Cheney had the sense and money to fight the DWI charges. Doesn't mean he didn't commit the act, he just wasn't convicted of it. If you want to use the standard of never convicted... . well that makes Clinton an angel. What has he been convicted of? Let us apply the same standard here as to not be disingenuous.



Enron. I would expect you to blame the Enron fallout on Clinton. That's an example of how powerless the Bush administration is. Clinton to blame for Enron, the recession, the terrorist acts, moral degradation, global warming, crime, ect... ... . He can' be stopped. See how useless it was to elect Bush? Example: Bush has been trying to jump start the economy for a year now without success. Gambling on the fact that the economy might repair itself and coincide with some tax rebate policy isn't exactly sound economic stimulus.



A year into his presidency and he has no economic plan. You're seeing where his energy plan is leading us.



See ya... .

 

[SS]

Lhotka,



What is the weather like on YOUR planet? There is no denying that part of the reason we have corporate executives literally stealing from their employees is because of Klinton's behavior. If the President of the United States can get away with such outrageous things such as trying to question the meaning of the word "is" and declaring that BJ is only sexual contact for one of the participants, then anyone can lie their way out of anything. If he wants to lie to his wife, I could care less, but after he's been busted (many times over) it's time to tell the truth in a court of law. If he were the CEO of a major corporation that he would have lost his job immediately. I'm not sure that the same is true today, after what he was able to get away with during his time in office. I hope that these guys at Enron get to spend a very long time behind bars, while their fortunes are split among the victims. But, I do believe that they were emboldened by Klinton's actions - no punishment for his misdeeds. You don't have to agree - you have the right to be wrong.



I'll give you that he was a very successful politician. Very successful at covering his own rear end and making everyone else look like the bad guys in every situation. That does not make him a great (or even a good) leader. Like it or not, he lowered the bar for ethical behavior for anyone in a position of power.

 

[Lhotka]

Shrimpy where did you get the juicy tidbit of information that Enron called the White House EXPECTING to get help and that no one would listen????



Not true. The White House apparently listened very closely. Close enough to determine it was too politically risky to assist Enron. They knew enough about Enron's $$ problems to distance themselves. Bush claims he didn't correspondence from Enron. Maybe true, but everyone else in his administration knew about the financial problems.



I'd like to know if the White House knew about Enron's financial problems AND the fact that they were misleading their employees? If so. . they had a moral obligation to intervene. At the very least influence Enron to level with their shareholders and employees.

 

[Shrimpy]

If you are so blind to think that CEO's of the Fortune 500's don't make inquiry's to the President or his staff you are truly demented. They have been doing it since this country was founded. Since when is it the goverments responsibility to warn the general public. Folks in the Commerce and treasury dept. 's hear and see stuff daily about our economy and busines dealings. But still NO HELP was given!!!!!!! Political or not none was given.



Since you are so intent on linking Bush to this let's look back at the large Hedge Fund that good ole BJ billy bailed out. I don't rmrmber the name of the fund, ole bj insisted that we bail them out to the tune of BILLIONS. Why not let them fail??? They had far less folks working for them (less than 500) and the money lost would have been from the dreaded rich that you and others can't stand. But ohhhh nnnnooooo klinton had to bail them out. And if you connect the dots and OPEN your eyes, this particular Hedge Funds parent company was Citi Group who now has bj's good friend Bob Rubin as a board member. But wait... ..... Bob rubin was the treasury sect. under bj billy at the time of this bail out... ... ... and now is a highly paid board member for Citi Group. Smoking gun... . you tell me?????



Remember just like in grade school... ... ... . connect the dots and you get a pretty picture.



Both parties do it. But don't try to build a case when there is none... ... .....



Re-load and try again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Lhotka]

I agree with you. Clinton STILL rules... ... . and can't be stopped.

 

[Shrimpy]

He doesen't rule anything... ... ..... not even his own House . It is really a crude circle that we have going. A great tit for tat, that the general public (including some here on the TDR) let the media fill their heads with. I am more than willing to let klintons un-Presedency die on the vine. But by the liberal media constantly compareing bj billy and Bush we all fall for their trick. That trick is to keep the general public b!tching about things in the past and not looking at the hear and now and to the future.



Believe me if it is confirmed that GWB is guilty of anything then lets string him up, but so far there is nada, zip, nothing that can be proven. .



Later... ... ... ... .

 

[Power Wagon]

Originally posted by Lhotka





You suggest Bush should be credited for not "trying to get out of his citation or trying to get around the law". Isn't that what Clinton and Gore did when admitted to using marijuana? That's a bit more open then Bush was when questioned about his cocaine use. Oh... . and Cheney had the sense and money to fight the DWI charges. Doesn't mean he didn't commit the act, he just wasn't convicted of it. If you want to use the standard of never convicted... . well that makes Clinton an angel. What has he been convicted of? Let us apply the same standard here as to not be disingenuous.

</b><i>

Bush didn't use cocaine. Please try to refrain from outright lies. It demeans you.



Gee. If the cop had decided to haul me in, I would have fought too. Guess that makes me a drunk driver who's never consumed alcohol in his life. Or maybe your argument is pure baloney.



<b></i>



Enron. I would expect you to blame the Enron fallout on Clinton. That's an example of how powerless the Bush administration is. Clinton to blame for Enron, the recession, the terrorist acts, moral degradation, global warming, crime, ect... ... . He can' be stopped. See how useless it was to elect Bush? Example: Bush has been trying to jump start the economy for a year now without success. Gambling on the fact that the economy might repair itself and coincide with some tax rebate policy isn't exactly sound economic stimulus.



</b><i>



Hmmm... I was going to reply, but I can't seem to come up with an answer. What can you reply to gibberish? Nothing.



<b></i>





A year into his presidency and he has no economic plan. You're seeing where his energy plan is leading us.



See ya... .

Hmmm... "no economic plan".



Please detail the economic policy of the last administration.



And please refrain from calling "They were for growth, good jobs at fair wages, and prosperity" a "plan". That's not a "plan" that's rhetoric. A "plan" consists of a broad range of policies which is designed to encourage employers to employ, businesses to expand, and risk-takers to take risks. Name ONE policy of the Clinton administration which did any of these... I promise you can't name one.



Actually, I am somewhat insulted that you would try this argument on me. The Soviets developed a "planned" economy. The Chinese and Castro have too. We don't participate in such folderol, thank God.



And of course, if you're the president and want economic growth to take off, if you want the people to prosper... Then try what the last two most successful economic policies were... The first being Ronald Reagans which was based upon and was almost identical to the previous one before him. . John F Kennedy's. Both of which can be summed up in two words: "Cut taxes".



In both situations, relatively long-term economic growth ensued, which was not reversed until later left-leaning administrations undid thier policies. Reagan's lasted until the late 90's, and JFK's lasted until the early 70's.



What is desperately needed, is for domestic business to be competitive world-wide. . . and right now, the only means we have of doing so is to implement sound tax and fiscal policy... That being: Taxes that do not impair our own consumers AND do not raise the cost of doing business. Spending that is based upon what that sound tax policy generates... Not upon the whims of congresscritters attempting to buy votes of gullible morons.