Charles, How about passing laws which allow scrutiny of an enterprise's operation much more easily that is currently allowed? That could so increase the deterrent effect that less law-breaking resulted. So by passing such laws some of "them" will be stopped. Historically over the twentieth century, isn't this what has happened?
Chris Mason ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, 01 May, 2006 3:56 PM Subject: Re: Sarbanes-Oxley > Badly OT but yes, Enron (apparently) violated then-existing laws. How > passing additional laws will help is beyond many experts. Some people will > always violate the law. Passing additional laws won't stop them. > > Charles > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Skip Robinson > Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 8:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Sarbanes-Oxley > > > In a recent public radio news discussion about the ongoing Enron criminal > trials, the question was posed: if Enron were in business today, how would > the company measure up against the SOX standard? This whole agony and ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
