Comments on: The Pig Ken Lay Is Dead http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:34:15 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: BA in LA http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107884 BA in LA Mon, 10 Jul 2006 17:57:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107884 <p>ahwatukeejohn:</p> <p>If your mother has her whole retirement fund invested in one high flying company, she is a walking, talking, victim and should have a conservator.</p> ahwatukeejohn:

If your mother has her whole retirement fund invested in one high flying company, she is a walking, talking, victim and should have a conservator.

]]> By: ahwatukeejohn http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107883 ahwatukeejohn Sat, 08 Jul 2006 13:55:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107883 <p>Okay, okay. There was a mildly sarcastic tint to my remarks. Remember in the "Longest Yard" when Bert Reynolds was wondering why the inmates hated him so much? He was told "guys in here are rapists, killers, a couple of these guys even killed their own mothers. But you cheated on foot ball. Damn son, that's unAmerican."</p> Okay, okay. There was a mildly sarcastic tint to my remarks. Remember in the “Longest Yard” when Bert Reynolds was wondering why the inmates hated him so much? He was told “guys in here are rapists, killers, a couple of these guys even killed their own mothers. But you cheated on foot ball. Damn son, that’s unAmerican.”

]]> By: ForEnforcement http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107882 ForEnforcement Fri, 07 Jul 2006 23:18:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107882 <p>Zarqawi may have killed some servicemen and inoccent hostages.</p> <p>What he did not do is steal your mother's retirement. </p> <p>I think somebodies priorities have gone astray. Would you rather have somebody steal your retirement money or kill your mother? That actually seems like an easy choice to me.</p> <p>I'm sure my mother would remain alive. So it just depends on whose mother it is being killed. Somebody seems to imply since it was somebody elses mother, they would rather have the money.</p> Zarqawi may have killed some servicemen and inoccent hostages.

What he did not do is steal your mother’s retirement.

I think somebodies priorities have gone astray. Would you rather have somebody steal your retirement money or kill your mother? That actually seems like an easy choice to me.

I’m sure my mother would remain alive. So it just depends on whose mother it is being killed. Somebody seems to imply since it was somebody elses mother, they would rather have the money.

]]> By: tammynut http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107881 tammynut Fri, 07 Jul 2006 13:37:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107881 <p><a href="http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/2002/guest/qtr1/0216.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/2002/guest/qtr1/0216.htm</a></p> <p>Am I allowed to post a link here? Thought some of you might like this. Ken Lay committed the bulk of his crimes when it was Clinton's job to stop him.</p> http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/2002/guest/qtr1/0216.htm

Am I allowed to post a link here? Thought some of you might like this. Ken Lay committed the bulk of his crimes when it was Clinton’s job to stop him.

]]> By: robert108 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107880 robert108 Thu, 06 Jul 2006 19:44:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107880 <p>John: I just think that the death of Zarqawi was infinitely more significant to us than anything having to do with Ken Lay. The entire concept of Enron was wrong from the beginning, as I have explained above, and it was always doomed to failure. The losses were due to the flawed concept, not to any actions anyone performed. That doesn't excuse any wrongdoing, but the real culprit, IMO, goes unindicted to this day. Those who thought they were going to prosper from such an enterprise were fools, IMO. They are not victims, they are greedheads who didn't get what they thought they were going to get: a windfall due to govt manipulation of the energy market.</p> John: I just think that the death of Zarqawi was infinitely more significant to us than anything having to do with Ken Lay. The entire concept of Enron was wrong from the beginning, as I have explained above, and it was always doomed to failure. The losses were due to the flawed concept, not to any actions anyone performed. That doesn’t excuse any wrongdoing, but the real culprit, IMO, goes unindicted to this day. Those who thought they were going to prosper from such an enterprise were fools, IMO. They are not victims, they are greedheads who didn’t get what they thought they were going to get: a windfall due to govt manipulation of the energy market.

]]> By: ahwatukeejohn http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107879 ahwatukeejohn Thu, 06 Jul 2006 19:27:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107879 <p>Robert:<br /> If you or anyone else out there misconncrews (I never rec'd the gift of spelling) my remarks to beleive that I have any sympothy for Mr. Z you miss my point.<br /> I was only pointing out my theory as to why the ire toward Mr. Lay.<br /> If you think supporting business means having to excuse extragrand theft from the public, you demean business. I have respect for the many honest business people out there.<br /> No poor man has ever writen me a paycheck.<br /> lol.<br /> John</p> Robert:
If you or anyone else out there misconncrews (I never rec’d the gift of spelling) my remarks to beleive that I have any sympothy for Mr. Z you miss my point.
I was only pointing out my theory as to why the ire toward Mr. Lay.
If you think supporting business means having to excuse extragrand theft from the public, you demean business. I have respect for the many honest business people out there.
No poor man has ever writen me a paycheck.
lol.
John

]]> By: robert108 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107878 robert108 Thu, 06 Jul 2006 18:39:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107878 <p>Ah: You make my point. Thanks. No one stole my mother's retirement, btw, but thanks for the attempt to personalize your anti-business venom. "...some servicemen and innocent hostages..." Quite an understatement, don't you think?</p> Ah: You make my point. Thanks. No one stole my mother’s retirement, btw, but thanks for the attempt to personalize your anti-business venom. “…some servicemen and innocent hostages…” Quite an understatement, don’t you think?

]]> By: ahwatukeejohn http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107877 ahwatukeejohn Thu, 06 Jul 2006 13:19:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107877 <p>Robert:<br /> Zarqawi may have killed some servicemen and inoccent hostages. </p> <p>What he did not do is steal your mother's retirement. </p> Robert:
Zarqawi may have killed some servicemen and inoccent hostages.

What he did not do is steal your mother’s retirement.

]]> By: robert108 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107876 robert108 Thu, 06 Jul 2006 00:55:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107876 <p>Maybe it's just me, but I see more venom being expressed toward Ken Lay at his death than was directed toward Zarqawi at his death.</p> Maybe it’s just me, but I see more venom being expressed toward Ken Lay at his death than was directed toward Zarqawi at his death.

]]> By: ltlme http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107875 ltlme Wed, 05 Jul 2006 20:47:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107875 <p>His death just saved taxpayers quite a bit money. True, some of our dollars went to the trial, but they won't go a jumpsuit or a prison cell. </p> His death just saved taxpayers quite a bit money. True, some of our dollars went to the trial, but they won’t go a jumpsuit or a prison cell.

]]> By: ahwatukeejohn http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107874 ahwatukeejohn Wed, 05 Jul 2006 19:54:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107874 <p>I am really taken a back at your reference to Ken Lay being a pig. I feel that that is an unnecessary slander to an intelligent and (contrary to popular opinion) clean breed of domestic livestock.</p> I am really taken a back at your reference to Ken Lay being a pig. I feel that that is an unnecessary slander to an intelligent and (contrary to popular opinion) clean breed of domestic livestock.

]]> By: robert108 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107873 robert108 Wed, 05 Jul 2006 19:47:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107873 <p>The real mistake here is to judge Enron as some kind of bad example of the free enterprise system. Energy in this country is a govt-subsidized industry. The price of a kilowatt of electricity is not decided by the market, but by govt regulation. It was a mistake from the very beginning to try to trade in it as if it were a market-based commodity. The people who put their money into Enron were fools, attracted by the promise of a big payoff from trading in a protected commodity. Any wise investor steered clear of Enron for this very reason. As WC Fields used to say: "You can't cheat an honest man." The real criminal is the one who encouraged this bogus investment scheme as a part of his "economic boom".</p> The real mistake here is to judge Enron as some kind of bad example of the free enterprise system. Energy in this country is a govt-subsidized industry. The price of a kilowatt of electricity is not decided by the market, but by govt regulation. It was a mistake from the very beginning to try to trade in it as if it were a market-based commodity. The people who put their money into Enron were fools, attracted by the promise of a big payoff from trading in a protected commodity. Any wise investor steered clear of Enron for this very reason. As WC Fields used to say: “You can’t cheat an honest man.” The real criminal is the one who encouraged this bogus investment scheme as a part of his “economic boom”.

]]> By: BA in LA http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107872 BA in LA Wed, 05 Jul 2006 18:24:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107872 <p>I am a person who doesn’t believe it is wrong to speak evil of the dead. If a person is a “pig” or evil when alive, he is none the less a pig or evil when dead. I have to take exception, however, to the rather harsh assessment of the Lay/Skilling/Fastow/Enron fiasco. I worked in various corporations over 45 years before I retired. While not a powerful executive myself, I worked elbow to elbow with some of them. In all corporations there is a constant effort to put “lipstick on the pig”. The CEO and lesser officers in a company are required to do skillful dance to enhance performance but keep from going over the edge into illegality. Constantly at risk are such things as bond/credit rating, stock price, professional esteem, and salary. Many times I have seen the truth stretched in one quarter and vindication occur in the next quarter as the corporation pulls itself up by the bootstraps (in my positions I was usually a bootstrap puller).<br /> When auditors came to the company, the common pattern was to give them any information they ask for and not lie, but don’t answer any questions they don’t ask. All of this seems amoral. It is amoral: caveat emptor (also let the investor beware). The charge given to an enterprise in a free market is to make a profit. The legality and morality is left to the authorities, lawyers, and clergy. Breaking the law, however, is counterproductive in the long run and will almost guarantee a net loss or at the very least a reduction in profits at some point. Each corporation must support the law in self-interest. It retards the tendency to act rashly or shortsightedly. It gives every one equal treatment and a level playing field. A lawbreaker may be a competitor, a corporate raider, or patent usurper.<br /> Commerce is governed more by natural law than by civil law. For example, enterprises are limited by A=A, A always=A, and if A is a dollar it cannot be in two places at one time. A drought in India or the January snow pack in Nebraska or a hurricane in the Caribbean, affect economics more than all civil laws or legislation.<br /> I see Lay and Skilling as two who were caught in a downward spiral looking for a way to pull up (ask a pilot). From what I have read, they weren’t trying to do anything illegal but were trying to rescue the company from some bad decisions. A side note is that there may have been some chicanery and illegal profits in the “partnerships” formed by Fastow. Skilling and Lay never profited from these. If I were to investigate, I would look at the finances of the board members or people who did financial business with the corporation. Remember that money is never made nor lost. It only moves from one place to another.<br /> If an investor “loses” money, it really just moved from failed investor to a successful investor. Risk of failure is the reason that investments can be more lucrative (and less certain) than a FDIC insured savings account.<br /> I really appreciate your internet radio program and your point of view. It would be bizarre if we agreed on everything.</p> <p><br /> BA in LA</p> I am a person who doesn’t believe it is wrong to speak evil of the dead. If a person is a “pig” or evil when alive, he is none the less a pig or evil when dead. I have to take exception, however, to the rather harsh assessment of the Lay/Skilling/Fastow/Enron fiasco. I worked in various corporations over 45 years before I retired. While not a powerful executive myself, I worked elbow to elbow with some of them. In all corporations there is a constant effort to put “lipstick on the pig”. The CEO and lesser officers in a company are required to do skillful dance to enhance performance but keep from going over the edge into illegality. Constantly at risk are such things as bond/credit rating, stock price, professional esteem, and salary. Many times I have seen the truth stretched in one quarter and vindication occur in the next quarter as the corporation pulls itself up by the bootstraps (in my positions I was usually a bootstrap puller).
When auditors came to the company, the common pattern was to give them any information they ask for and not lie, but don’t answer any questions they don’t ask. All of this seems amoral. It is amoral: caveat emptor (also let the investor beware). The charge given to an enterprise in a free market is to make a profit. The legality and morality is left to the authorities, lawyers, and clergy. Breaking the law, however, is counterproductive in the long run and will almost guarantee a net loss or at the very least a reduction in profits at some point. Each corporation must support the law in self-interest. It retards the tendency to act rashly or shortsightedly. It gives every one equal treatment and a level playing field. A lawbreaker may be a competitor, a corporate raider, or patent usurper.
Commerce is governed more by natural law than by civil law. For example, enterprises are limited by A=A, A always=A, and if A is a dollar it cannot be in two places at one time. A drought in India or the January snow pack in Nebraska or a hurricane in the Caribbean, affect economics more than all civil laws or legislation.
I see Lay and Skilling as two who were caught in a downward spiral looking for a way to pull up (ask a pilot). From what I have read, they weren’t trying to do anything illegal but were trying to rescue the company from some bad decisions. A side note is that there may have been some chicanery and illegal profits in the “partnerships” formed by Fastow. Skilling and Lay never profited from these. If I were to investigate, I would look at the finances of the board members or people who did financial business with the corporation. Remember that money is never made nor lost. It only moves from one place to another.
If an investor “loses” money, it really just moved from failed investor to a successful investor. Risk of failure is the reason that investments can be more lucrative (and less certain) than a FDIC insured savings account.
I really appreciate your internet radio program and your point of view. It would be bizarre if we agreed on everything.

BA in LA

]]> By: Bachbone http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the_pig_ken_lay_is_dead.html#comment-107871 Bachbone Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:28:00 +0000 http://tammybruce.com/2006/07/the-pig-ken-lay-is-dead.php#comment-107871 <p>He died in Aspen. I thought the Enron honchos had to sell their multimillion dollar mansions and place the proceeds into a fund to repay some of the former employees' pension monies. Apparently, that report was wrong.</p> He died in Aspen. I thought the Enron honchos had to sell their multimillion dollar mansions and place the proceeds into a fund to repay some of the former employees’ pension monies. Apparently, that report was wrong.

]]>