Piano World Home Page Forums Restricted and Archives The Coffee Room Martha's in good company

Did anyone see Paul Klugman's article in the NYTimes today? Very interesting indeed. Here's the jist, for full text go to NYTimes.com:

It seems that our President, G. Bush, in the late '80s sold 2/3rds of his stake in Harber Energy for $848,000 (which is 4 times the amount getting Martha Stewart in trouble) a few weeks before the bad news that Harber Energy was being forced by the SEC to re-state it's 1989 earnings due to a phony transaction. Internal SEC memorandums concluded that he (G. Bush) had broken the law, but no charges were filed.

!

Paul Krugman has made a number of, shall we say, "interesting" assertions in the past. Suffice it to say that his knowledge of economics nor his objectivity have been, exactly, unchallenged. We shall see what shape a response to this will take and just how accurately he is presenting the facts.

IMO, the allegations of Martha Stewart's insider trading are being blown way out of proportion and are taking the focus away from what is really important; Worldcom, Enron, Tyco, Xerox, etc...

Thousands of employees have lost their jobs, their retirement savings have been wiped out and thousands of investors have been duped. Meanwhile, the board of directors made damn sure they lined their already bursting pockets.

What Martha (and President Bush) *may* have done, is illegal, but I ask, who are the victims?

Derick

Let's see. In 1989 he sold the stock for $4 a share. In 1991, the stock hit $8. Sounds like profiting from inside information to me.

The democrats raised the issue in the 92 presidential election and in the 94 Texas gubenatorial election. It's been investigated by the major Texas newspapers, the Washington Post, the New York Times, The American Spectator, and others, and none has found any evidence of wrongdoing. Most of the information, including an SEC memo on it, was published on the web in 2000.

Krugman is late and inaccurate, as usual. This was just another Democrat "big lie" attack trying to gain legs from the recent corporate scandals.

The general consensus amongst the TV talking heads is that if this had been anybody else except a very public figure such as Martha Stewart, the SEC would not have even looked at the case. We are only talking about $400,00, here.

And while I do think Martha should be prosecuted if engaging in illegal acts - keep in mind that insider trading is very hard to prove - every Justice department official working on this case is one less available to work on Global Crossing, Enron or WorldCom.

Add those up and you are talking about real money.

Gee Jolly, I am a little short this month.

Could I borrow $400K 'til payday?

$400,000 is peanuts when compared to that stolen by the executives of Worldcom, Tyco, Xerox, Enron, etc... Not to mention that thousands of American jobs lost to these crooks. And, should I mention the cost to you, the taxpayer. Again, who are the victims of insider trading?

How many on this forum are STILL so naive as to believe that the shareholders elect the board of directors who, in turn, determine the appropriate salaries for the CEO's?

Or have some FINALLY come to see that my earlier rantings and so called 'attacks' on capitalism were not attacks at all, but anger over the crooked nauture of corporate America.

Where have all the defenders of corporate America gone? Funny how they've conveniently kept a low profile as each scandal is unearthed.

Let Martha get back to her salad. Should she need any help deep frying a couple of corporate executives, I'd be happy to help her out.

Derick

Derick, I don't disagree with you at all regarding CEO's that are crooked. But if Martha is guilty she is showing the same blatant disregard for the rest of us as your favorite CEO's. She just makes a better salad.

The vicims of insider trading are everyone who invests in the markets. Many of whom do so indirectly through retirement and pension plans. If the markets are shown to allow favoritism to those rich, powerful, or connected it will have a powerful negative impact on future investments. The markets are the basis for a lot of the growth and economic prosperity this country has achieved in its lifetime.

I'm not naive enough to think stuff doesn't happen, but where and when it is found out it must not be allowed to be swept under the rug. If Martha is guilty, throw her posterior in the old graybar hotel. Maybe she can get a gig either in the kitchen or as a decorator.

John,

If agree with you that if Martha is guilty, she deserves to be punished to the full extent of the law.

However, my problem with all the focus on Martha, by the media and the ordinary folk, is that her crime PALES in comparison to the other atrocities commited by the executives and CEO's of many major US corporations.

Enron, Xerox, WorldCom and Tyco are just a few of the companies that have made the news for cooking the books. But let's take another American icon, IBM. IBM is selling their plant in Endicott, NY. The only major employer in that area. IBM *claims* that 2000 of the remaining 4000 employees will still have jobs as subcontractors. What IBM fails to state is that in 1999, IBM Endicott employed a total of 8000 employees. In 2000 it layed off 4000 and moved their jobs to China. Very patriotic.

Now why did IBM do this? Money. And who was the benificiary? The executives. Take a look at the "insider trading" stats published on all the high-ranking IBM executives. Ironically enough, the CEO managed to sell some of his stock one day in May 2001, raking in, sit down for this, $140,000,000 AFTER TAX. This is not the first time his, or other executives timing, was so 'perfect'.

Among the thousands of stockholders, several large retirement funds are tied up in IBM stock. The value of their IBM portfolio has been diminished by almost 50% this year alone due to their questionable, albiet legal, accounting practices.

Martha *may* have done a bad thing (we don't know anything for certain yet), but we do know, with 100% certainty, that US corporations have been lining their greedy pockets, lying to shareholders, and destroying the US work force while leaving Europe intact and helping the economy of China.

There's a big difference between walking into a bank with a machine-gun and demanding all the money in the vault and stealing a towel from a hotel. Martha stole a towel.

Keep in mind that US corporate executives steal more than $80,000,000,000/year. If only we were so lucky that they 'stole' a mere $400,000/year.

Martha should be canonized.

Derick

I have it straight from Martha,... " It's a good thing"

_Brad