Question:

Yes, you misread.  He asked about the DEBTOR’s accounting.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Unless I misread your post, to forgive a debtor, you would CREDIT the debtor’s account and DEBIT an expense account. — Ken Russell . I’ve googled this subject but didn’t come up with a relevant hit. My question is this:  how do I book (for book purposes) forgiveness of debt on the debtor’s side.  I know the tax treatment. Is it as simple as debiting the liability and crediting an (other) income account in the general ledger? Thanks, mc

Response:

I’ve googled this subject but didn’t come up with a relevant hit.  My question is this:  how do I book (for book purposes) forgiveness of debt on the debtor’s side.  I know the tax treatment. Is it as simple as debiting the liability and crediting an (other) income account in the general ledger? Thanks, mc

Response:

I’ve googled this subject but didn’t come up with a relevant hit.  My question is this:  how do I book (for book purposes) forgiveness of debt on the debtor’s side.  I know the tax treatment. Is it as simple as debiting the liability and crediting an (other) income account in the general ledger? Thanks, mc

it’s as simple as that

Response:

Unless I misread your post, to forgive a debtor, you would CREDIT the debtor’s account and DEBIT an expense account. — Ken Russell .

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve googled this subject but didn’t come up with a relevant hit.  My question is this:  how do I book (for book purposes) forgiveness of debt on the debtor’s side.  I know the tax treatment. Is it as simple as debiting the liability and crediting an (other) income account in the general ledger? Thanks, mc

Response:

Question:

Has anyone on this group had experience with both, and if so, could they describe some of the differences between auditing for a non-profit organization and auditing for a for-profit organization? I know that the ultimate goals of a non-profit (i.e. to provide service) obviously differ from those of a for-profit (astonishingly enough, to produce a profit), but how does this play out in conducting an audit?

John, As the saying goes, an audit is an audit is an audit, meaning many of the audit procedures will be essentially the same whether its a for-profit or nonprofit audit.   With a nonprofit audit however, the organization will have many restrictions on how it can spend its resources.  Much of the entity’s revenue may come from federal and state grants or private donations for a specific purpose.  These revenues must be kept up with and stored in three separate classifications of "net assets" (permanently restricted, temporarily restricted, and unrestricted).  Tracking these three types of net assets and ensuring that they are used properly is probably the biggest difference from a for-profit audit.  In addition, if the organization receives over $500,000 in federal grants (up this year from $300,000) then a "Single Audit" must be performed as well on the federal programs. Hope this helps.  If you have trouble sleeping at night, you may want to order a copy of the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide for Not-for-Profit Organizations, or read FASB 116 and 117 to learn more about nonprofits. Preston Singleton, CPA Austin, Texas  

Response:

While auditing is auditing, with a nonprofit organization GAAP differs as some FAS’s that apply to for profit entities do not apply to nonprofits. The 2 main FAS’s for nonprofits are FAS 116 and 117.  Obviously you can’t perform a proper audit unless you understand the rules that apply to that organization.  I have been in public accounting for over 16 years and have audited both organizations.  From experience the area that causes problems is not knowing where GAAP differs.  As an example investments are generally carried at fair value for nonprofit organizations.  Get the AICPA guide to audits of nonprofits for help  or PPC’s Audits of Nonprofits, as the differences are too numerous to point out in e-mails. Hope this helps some, Stephen Lewis, CPA

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Has anyone on this group had experience with both, and if so, could they describe some of the differences between auditing for a non-profit organization and auditing for a for-profit organization? I know that the ultimate goals of a non-profit (i.e. to provide service) obviously differ from those of a for-profit (astonishingly enough, to produce a profit), but how does this play out in conducting an audit?

Response:

Has anyone on this group had experience with both, and if so, could they describe some of the differences between auditing for a non-profit organization and auditing for a for-profit organization? I know that the ultimate goals of a non-profit (i.e. to provide service) obviously differ from those of a for-profit (astonishingly enough, to produce a profit), but how does this play out in conducting an audit?

Response:

Has anyone on this group had experience with both, and if so, could they describe some of the differences between auditing for a non-profit organization and auditing for a for-profit organization? I know that the ultimate goals of a non-profit (i.e. to provide service) obviously differ from those of a for-profit (astonishingly enough, to produce a profit), but how does this play out in conducting an audit?

I believe the overall goal for both situations would be the same since the purpose of a financial audit is to make sure the company being audited has been in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles. Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation

Response:

Question:

I know I will be flamed like crazy for this but it’s worth a try anyways. My name is Angie and I’m currently taking an Introductory Accounting class in College. I have a Quicken project due. To all of you accountants, it’s a piece of cake I am sure. But to me, with my full-time job and 18 credit schedule, it’s just too much for I think. So, if anybody in this newsgroup is willing to give me a hand, it would greatly be appreciated. Thanks for your time.

with accounting also. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens,  Georgia

Response:

I know I will be flamed like crazy for this but it’s worth a try anyways. My name is Angie and I’m currently taking an Introductory Accounting class in College. I have a Quicken project due. To all of you accountants, it’s a piece of cake I am sure. But to me, with my full-time job and 18 credit schedule, it’s just too much for I think. So, if anybody in this newsgroup is willing to give me a hand, it would greatly be appreciated. Thanks for your time. Ang

I am actually willing to pay $$$ for someone to do this for me. Ang

Response:

Log on to www.tutoraid.com Peter French MAcc MEd CMA

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I know I will be flamed like crazy for this but it’s worth a try anyways. My name is Angie and I’m currently taking an Introductory Accounting class in College. I have a Quicken project due. To all of you accountants, it’s a piece of cake I am sure. But to me, with my full-time job and 18 credit schedule, it’s just too much for I think. So, if anybody in this newsgroup is willing to give me a hand, it would greatly be appreciated. Thanks for your time. Ang

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Log on to www.tutoraid.com Peter French MAcc MEd CMA I know I will be flamed like crazy for this but it’s worth a try anyways. My name is Angie and I’m currently taking an Introductory Accounting class in College. I have a Quicken project due. To all of you accountants, it’s a piece of cake I am sure. But to me, with my full-time job and 18 credit schedule, it’s just too much for I think. So, if anybody in this newsgroup is willing to give me a hand, it would greatly be appreciated. Thanks for your time. Ang

Hello Ang, If you are thinking of paying somebody to help you to complete your accounting assignment, then mightelse you straight away buy the accounting certificate straight away. What for continue put yourself in such a diffcult situation. What you study now only is in Introductory Stage. Please don’t call yourself as accountant after you graduate. Shame for all accounting graduate and the professional out there.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Perhaps she is looking for help because she just doesn’t have the time to put into her "career" field.  Without putting in the time or otherwise figuring the issues out for herself, the student won’t be effective in the field and certainly not efficient. Frankly, when hiring,I am more interested in analytical skills of the candidate I am interviewing rather than whether the candidate knows how to handle a specific transaction. Repetitive work and transactions, I consider to be more bookkeeping oriented while the analytical skills cause the individual to be able to work in diverse, dynamic environments and figure out what needs to be done. She needs to do the work, extra if necessary, to figure out the issues so she will eventually have pride in her work and be valued by her colleagues.  IMO, that path leads to job satisfaction, the job is where most people spend most of their life.

Well, that was awfully condescending.  I don’t recall her asking for career/motivational help.  She asked for help with an Introductory Accounting Class.  She never mentioned she was an accounting major.  So get off of your soap box.

Response:

I know I will be flamed like crazy for this but it’s worth a try anyways. My name is Angie and I’m currently taking an Introductory Accounting class in College. I have a Quicken project due. To all of you accountants, it’s a piece of cake I am sure. But to me, with my full-time job and 18 credit schedule, it’s just too much for I think. So, if anybody in this newsgroup is willing to give me a hand, it would greatly be appreciated. Thanks for your time. Ang

Response:

Question:

The translation of an apropos German saying to your last paragraph would be: "No answer is also an answer."

Or, it could just be that the government doesn’t work on weekends and is notoriously (nefariously?) slow at responding to just about anything, except in an election year — Todd Stephens

Response:

The translation of an apropos German saying to your last paragraph would be: "No answer is also an answer." Or, it could just be that the government doesn’t work on weekends and is notoriously (nefariously?) slow at responding to just about anything, except in an election year

I thought about that, so I sent the same question to my Congressman.  It is an election year and this is not a safe district. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

I would consider that Bush has a responsibility to use the bully pulpit to talk up the market.  I don’t think he is good enough as a speaker or strong enough as a human being to do the right thing and pull it off. I agree. He comes across as a moron to me, personally. I am not sure he can figure out what his name is before an aide tells him in the morning, either.

Moron, not hardly pilgrim. My two cents.  Bush comes over as a product of the Country Club wing of the Republican Party.  They all act like he and his dad do.  They are famous for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.  They are about as effective as the old British Liberal party of the late 1800s and early 1900s, look nice at first glance, but hollow.  He is much better than the alternative, but he is not good enough for this country. Unfortunately, what worries the dickens out of me, there isn’t a better alternative. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Even still, pressure to "save the market" must be immense.  This is certainly a subject to watch. What kills me about all of this is that "the market", as reported by the press, is generally only 30 different publicly traded companies.  Some of the more responsible newsies go so far as to use the S&P 500 as "the market", but even that isn’t much better.  Sure, while things look grim for the DOW, there are thousands of other publicly traded companies (and private ones we can’t even know about) that are doing just fine.  It all seems so artificial when I think about it in that respect.

Just calculated the correlation coefficient between the Dow Industrial Average and the broad market statistic of your choice.  Whatever you calculate, that is what it is. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ron, your assessment would perhaps be more accurate if you factored: 1. creative accounting 2. pro forma reporting 3. managed earnings 4. plain "hard" accounting fraud into the denominator of P/E. Once these are included, the lower end of your estimates is probably closer to what we IMHO are likely to see in the not so distant future. I don’t believe the problems are anywhere near common enough to support your assertion. I would guess that over 95% of the listed U.S. companies are paying square and are not committing your four vices above.  However, I do not have that same level of faith in European companies and I have less faith in Asian companies statements, as far as anything our of Africa, well I don’t figure they are real. Unless of course the Fed’s Stock Protection Squad massively and repeatedly intervenes, which would only prolong the agony. I mailed your SPS comment off to the Federal Reserve and asked them if they were doing that.  They haven’t gotten back to me yet.  I think it is another urban legend.

My experience would suggest that the 95 % figure is on the high side, e. g. when one recalls that, until Enron, only 2 of the S&P accounted for employee stock options using the preferred method. You are probably correct on other continents, where there is nothing comparable SEC at all.  There have been a few prosecutions of dotcons in Germany and the state attorney of Northrhine-Westphalia opened a criminal investigation of Deutsche Telecon due to this group’s use of inflated real estate valuations in prospectuses.  But by and large: no plaintiff, no judge.  The Zurich cantonal police have not arrested even one of the principal suspects in the Swissair bankruptcy case to date. The translation of an apropos German saying to your last paragraph would be: "No answer is also an answer." A. Lucien Meyers, CIA, CMA — If you receive this by error, please delete it and inform the sender. PGP key fingerprint=F1C0 D9AE 1B18 1405 4DFA  B4CC 6DC7 FF78 C76E FB15 To Big Brother Echelon from "spook": counter-intelligence smuggle Iraq Rumsfeld radar Soviet Albanian Mossad

Response:

Ron, your assessment would perhaps be more accurate if you factored: 1. creative accounting 2. pro forma reporting 3. managed earnings 4. plain "hard" accounting fraud into the denominator of P/E. Once these are included, the lower end of your estimates is probably closer to what we IMHO are likely to see in the not so distant future.

I don’t believe the problems are anywhere near common enough to support your assertion. I would guess that over 95% of the listed U.S. companies are paying square and are not committing your four vices above.  However, I do not have that same level of faith in European companies and I have less faith in Asian companies statements, as far as anything our of Africa, well I don’t figure they are real. Unless of course the Fed’s Stock Protection Squad massively and repeatedly intervenes, which would only prolong the agony.

I mailed your SPS comment off to the Federal Reserve and asked them if they were doing that.  They haven’t gotten back to me yet.  I think it is another urban legend.   — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

Ron, your assessment would perhaps be more accurate if you factored: 1. creative accounting 2. pro forma reporting 3. managed earnings 4. plain "hard" accounting fraud into the denominator of P/E. Once these are included, the lower end of your estimates is probably closer to what we IMHO are likely to see in the not so distant future. Unless of course the Fed’s Stock Protection Squad massively and repeatedly intervenes, which would only prolong the agony. A. Lucien Meyers, CIA, CMA — If you receive this by error, please delete it and inform the sender. PGP Key fingerprint=F1C0 D9AE 1B18 1405 4DFA  B4CC 6DC7 FF78 C76E FB15 To Big Brother Echelon from "spook": obfuscation domestic disruption smuggle Afghanistan spy FSF South Africa

Response:

Even still, pressure to "save the market" must be immense.  This is certainly a subject to watch.

What kills me about all of this is that "the market", as reported by the press, is generally only 30 different publicly traded companies.  Some of the more responsible newsies go so far as to use the S&P 500 as "the market", but even that isn’t much better.  Sure, while things look grim for the DOW, there are thousands of other publicly traded companies (and private ones we can’t even know about) that are doing just fine.  It all seems so artificial when I think about it in that respect. — Todd Stephens

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … readers in bold letters that "THE FED DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INTERVENE IN THE S&P FUTURES MARKET" … That was my first thought. If the Fed Bank bought equities, that would be a taking under the Constitution. This was to get around the little problem Americans had with the Crown taking property on little more than a whim. One of the central reasons for the Constitution was to prevent takings without due process. That aside, the N.Y. Stock Exchange’s market volume stops seem to work rather well.  As I posted before, the PE of the DOW, and general market is rather high.  That high market PE requires one heck of a lot of optimism in the future earnings growth of the underlying company to support. Frankly, I trust Adam Smith’s invisible hand of the free market a great deal more than any government intervention. A couple of points: I would expect to see the administration attempt to "talk up" the market.  I would not be too surprised at attempts to "jawbone" those unwilling to go along by mere suggestion.

I would consider that Bush has a responsibility to use the bully pulpit to talk up the market.  I don’t think he is good enough as a speaker or strong enough as a human being to do the right thing and pull it off. I would also expect such measures to fail, possibly even backfire in such a way as to make things worse than they already are.

I will agree with that.  No one, as opposed to an event, is strong enough to move the equity market.  The too biggest drivers are corporate profits and public sentiment. Even still, pressure to "save the market" must be immense.  This is certainly a subject to watch.

As I have said before, it depends on peoples confidence and the business cycle.  At the present time the DOW industrials have a floor, based on a PE of 14 times trailing earnings, of some where in the 5,000 – 5,500 neighborhood.  How much confidence do you have in the future?  You put your money in if you are optimistic. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

CNBC Europe, London, gave a few more details on the suspected stock market intervention of the US Federal Reserve Stock Protection Squad (SPS) this Friday morning, 2002-07-26, at 8:00 hours central European summer time on their "Squawkbox" programme, although the picture is still extremely sketchy. According to CNBC reporting, the Fed received the legal framework authorising active stock market intervention during the Reagan administration and set up the SPS then. The purpose of the SPS is basically to watch US equities markets, recommend if and when intervention is appropriate, e. g. to prevent a complete market meltdown, and to carry out interventions. Again according to CNBC, the Fed publicly informed about SPS meetings in connexion with the LTCM crash a few years ago. CNBC Europe reported having received many emails asserting SPS intervention Wednesday, 07-24, and yesterday, 07-25. Yesterday’s SPS intervention seemed quite possible concerning JP Morgan Chase stock, which declined sharply at about 15:00 NY time upon an announcement of credit rating degradation, only to unexpectedly recover an hour later without any counterbalancing news. In many countries, e. g. Japan, active governmental intervention in the equities market is nothing new but, of course, classical liberals (European definition) consider it to be a stark violation and falsification of the fundamental principles of free market economies. In addition, the practice transfers risks from stockholders to the public at large (taxpayers ultimately pay). Socialists have always claimed that capitalism in practice "privatises profits and nationalises losses". It seems to yours truly that the current US federal administration, while claiming loudly to be a staunch supporter of "capitalism", has heavily embarked on a programme of pure Keynesian economics in the US (e. g. massive increase of public debt, massive future government spending programmes for "security", stock market intervention, etc.) and is at the same time preaching austerity to the Argentinians and others. Keynesian national economic druckenness has, sooner or later, always led to severe hangovers, deliriums, collapses or worse. A. Lucien Meyers, CIA, CMA — If you receive this by error, please delete it and inform the sender. PGP key fingerprint=F1C0 D9AE 1B18 1405 4DFA  B4CC 6DC7 FF78 C76E FB15 To Big Brother Echelon from "spook": Peshawar nuclear $400 million in gold bullion Kabul Honduras Iran Bush

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CNBC Europe, London, gave a few more details on the suspected stock market intervention of the US Federal Reserve Stock Protection Squad (SPS) this Friday morning, 2002-07-26, at 8:00 hours central European summer time on their "Squawkbox" programme, although the picture is still extremely sketchy. According to CNBC reporting, the Fed received the legal framework authorising active stock market intervention during the Reagan administration and set up the SPS then. The purpose of the SPS is basically to watch US equities markets, recommend if and when intervention is appropriate, e. g. to prevent a complete market meltdown, and to carry out interventions. Again according to CNBC, the Fed publicly informed about SPS meetings in connexion with the LTCM crash a few years ago. CNBC Europe reported having received many emails asserting SPS intervention Wednesday, 07-24, and yesterday, 07-25. Yesterday’s SPS intervention seemed quite possible concerning JP Morgan Chase stock, which declined sharply at about 15:00 NY time upon an announcement of credit rating degradation, only to unexpectedly recover an hour later without any counterbalancing news. In many countries, e. g. Japan, active governmental intervention in the equities market is nothing new but, of course, classical liberals (European definition) consider it to be a stark violation and falsification of the fundamental principles of free market economies. In addition, the practice transfers risks from stockholders to the public at large (taxpayers ultimately pay). Socialists have always claimed that capitalism in practice "privatises profits and nationalises losses". It seems to yours truly that the current US federal administration, while claiming loudly to be a staunch supporter of "capitalism", has heavily embarked on a programme of pure Keynesian economics in the US (e. g. massive increase of public debt, massive future government spending programmes for "security", stock market intervention, etc.) and is at the same time preaching austerity to the Argentinians and others. Keynesian national economic druckenness has, sooner or later, always led to severe hangovers, deliriums, collapses or worse. A. Lucien Meyers, CIA, CMA

I can’t find anything on this. That doesn’t mean it is happening – just that if is there is very little publicly know about it. It does have a certain ring of plausibility, however.  Let’s keep our ears open. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … readers in bold letters that "THE FED DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INTERVENE IN THE S&P FUTURES MARKET" … That was my first thought. If the Fed Bank bought equities, that would be a taking under the Constitution. This was to get around the little problem Americans had with the Crown taking property on little more than a whim. One of the central reasons for the Constitution was to prevent takings without due process. That aside, the N.Y. Stock Exchange’s market volume stops seem to work rather well.  As I posted before, the PE of the DOW, and general market is rather high.  That high market PE requires one heck of a lot of optimism in the future earnings growth of the underlying company to support. Frankly, I trust Adam Smith’s invisible hand of the free market a great deal more than any government intervention.

A couple of points: I would expect to see the administration attempt to "talk up" the market.  I would not be too surprised at attempts to "jawbone" those unwilling to go along by mere suggestion.   I would also expect such measures to fail, possibly even backfire in such a way as to make things worse than they already are. Even still, pressure to "save the market" must be immense.  This is certainly a subject to watch. — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

… readers in bold letters that "THE FED DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INTERVENE IN THE S&P FUTURES MARKET"

… That was my first thought. If the Fed Bank bought equities, that would be a taking under the Constitution. This was to get around the little problem Americans had with the Crown taking property on little more than a whim. One of the central reasons for the Constitution was to prevent takings without due process. That aside, the N.Y. Stock Exchange’s market volume stops seem to work rather well.  As I posted before, the PE of the DOW, and general market is rather high.  That high market PE requires one heck of a lot of optimism in the future earnings growth of the underlying company to support. Frankly, I trust Adam Smith’s invisible hand of the free market a great deal more than any government intervention. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

I can’t find anything on this.

http://members.rogers.com/fallstreet1/plungeprotection/plungeprotecti… Chris

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CNBC Europe, London, gave a few more details on the suspected stock market intervention of the US Federal Reserve Stock Protection Squad (SPS) this Friday morning, 2002-07-26, at 8:00 hours central European summer time on their "Squawkbox" programme, although the picture is still extremely sketchy. According to CNBC reporting, the Fed received the legal framework authorising active stock market intervention during the Reagan administration and set up the SPS then. The purpose of the SPS is basically to watch US equities markets, recommend if and when intervention is appropriate, e. g. to prevent a complete market meltdown, and to carry out interventions. Again according to CNBC, the Fed publicly informed about SPS meetings in connexion with the LTCM crash a few years ago. CNBC Europe reported having received many emails asserting SPS intervention Wednesday, 07-24, and yesterday, 07-25. Yesterday’s SPS intervention seemed quite possible concerning JP Morgan Chase stock, which declined sharply at about 15:00 NY time upon an announcement of credit rating degradation, only to unexpectedly recover an hour later without any counterbalancing news. In many countries, e. g. Japan, active governmental intervention in the equities market is nothing new but, of course, classical liberals (European definition) consider it to be a stark violation and falsification of the fundamental principles of free market economies. In addition, the practice transfers risks from stockholders to the public at large (taxpayers ultimately pay). Socialists have always claimed that capitalism in practice "privatises profits and nationalises losses". It seems to yours truly that the current US federal administration, while claiming loudly to be a staunch supporter of "capitalism", has heavily embarked on a programme of pure Keynesian economics in the US (e. g. massive increase of public debt, massive future government spending programmes for "security", stock market intervention, etc.) and is at the same time preaching austerity to the Argentinians and others. Keynesian national economic druckenness has, sooner or later, always led to severe hangovers, deliriums, collapses or worse.

Could be disinformation.  Maybe part of a short play or other reasons. Once you get a rumor like this started, it is impossible to prove something didn’t happen. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

I can’t find anything on this.

http://members.rogers.com/fallstreet1/plungeprotection/plungeprotecti… Chris

With a little help from Chris’s link, I was able to find two current free articles that included the phrase "plunge protection".  They are: http://www.thestreet.com/markets/aarontaskfree/10034004.html http://www.thestreet.com/markets/aarontaskfree/10034039.html both contain the following: Weird Al and the Gang Of course, none of the aforementioned reasons (nor ones I’ve missed) will be enough to convinced some readers the gains weren’t the result of market manipulation by the Fed or other government agencies. As I suspected, last night’s story did little to disabuse some readers from the notion the market has become a government-sponsored entity. If the Fed isn’t directly buying equity futures, it could "encourage" member banks or big broker/dealers to do it on their behalf, many suggested. Then there’s the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, better known as the "Plunge Protection Team." It’s unclear whether any government operatives were active in the financial markets Wednesday. But conspiracy theories aren’t really necessary to explain the action. Stocks have been battered and, as reported here ad nauseam, there’s been a never-ending string of folks trying to call a bottom; i.e., hordes of participants anxious to put money to work on a belief the selling was irrational and didn’t reflect the perceived strong fundamentals of economic recovery and low inflation/interest rates. Also, there is some information in The Wall Street Journal ——- begin copy / paste from The Wall Street Journal —– Government Secrets Tumultuous markets are always fertile breeding ground for rumors, but this one was too juicy to ignore. Following the spectacular late rebound in stocks Monday, a story started circulating that Uncle Sam was doing its bit to keep the market afloat. The rumor, distributed widely in e-mail messages and chat rooms, was specific: The White House Working Group on Financial Markets, created after the 1987 crash and dubbed by conspiracy theorists as "The Plunge Protection Team," had instructed the Federal Reserve to buy stock futures. It didn’t seem to matter that the White House went on the record denying the talk. Some Fed watchers did their part, pointing out the flaws in the speculation. Morgan Stanley economist David Greenlaw sent out a research note dedicated entirely to the theory, in which he reminded readers in bold letters that "THE FED DOES NOT HAVE THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO INTERVENE IN THE S&P FUTURES MARKET" and noted that the weekly publication of the central bank’s balance sheet data would make futures purchases impossible to hide. Meanwhile, IFR Thomson’s BondData service surveyed its readers, many of whom would have seen Fed orders come through their trading desks. IFR got more than 30 responses in a few minutes. The results: No one saw the business, no one spoke to anyone who had seen it and no one believed it. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1027031356718728080-search,00.html… (subscription only) The President has been extremely sensitive to how the market reacts to his words ever since he had to take political flak from the Democrats when Wall Street gave a less than rapturous reception to his speech condemning corporate malfeasance. He would have wanted the market to respond positively to what he had to say yesterday. The market might well have suspected that the Plunge Protection Team (PPT) would be active to ensure that outcome. The market belief is that a PPT, comprised of the most senior officials of the Federal Reserve, the US Treasury, the financial supervisors and the leading Wall Street houses, is operating to maintain smooth trading conditions in the market. A bounce in share prices was not surprising, therefore, given the market’s belief that the President would want to avoid embarrassment. There are two plausible hypotheses. Either the PPT was active buying stocks or the market’s belief in a PPT was enough to deter sellers temporarily. The negative point for the market was that the recovery was so fleeting. This demonstrated that market participants are now less inclined than they were even a few days ago to act on the supposition that any uptick in prices is the start of a new ‘bull’ phase. Paradoxically, this psychology is consistent with the approaching end of the ‘bear’ phase. The fact that market performance is now being compared, quite properly, with the 1973-74 episode, rather than with more recent periods of market weakness that were essentially ‘bull’ market corrections, is a further sign that realism is beginning to displace irrational hope in investors’ market assessments. http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,BT_CO_20020723_001318-search,00.html… (subscription only) ——- end copy / paste from The Wall Street Journal —– While I doubt (not strongly) that the FED is actually buying futures, I would not doubt that the administration is using all the coercive power at its disposal to "encourage" private individuals, companies, and institutions to buy.   — Jim Hudspeth, CFE, CPA   http://survivalworks.com

Response:

Question:

Also Mr hettinga should remember that based on what we are looking at, the USA accounting is maybe tin pot and banana republic    how else can Enron Worldcom and I’m sure there are many others be explained

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Companies keep three sets of books. A terabyte, multidimensional, drilldown data warehouse for themselves, plus a couple of cheap little reports with a few dozen useless, older numbers, for taxman and stockholders. Todd Boyle CPA http://www.gldialtone.com/FinancialDeregulation.htm Keeping two sets of books, one for yourself, and one for the tax man has all the hallmarks of business in a tinpot banana-republic. http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB1025557015105772280,00.html Companies Should Close Credibility Gap in Books SO NOW WE KNOW: In the last decade, leading American corporations have teamed up with unscrupulous (or incompetent) accountants to mislead shareholders about how much money they make. But that is only half the story. At the same time, many of those same companies have teamed up with the same accountants to mislead the Internal Revenue Service about how little money they make. The result is a huge and growing gap — call it the credibility gap — between book income and taxable income. If the efforts at accounting overhaul now under way are to be successful, they will need to close that yawning gap … from both ends. Consider the case of WorldCom Inc. Between 1996 and 2000, the company reported $16 billion in earnings to its shareholders. But to the tax man, it reported less than a billion dollars of taxable income. The truth undoubtedly lies somewhere in between. Enron Corp. has a similar story. To its shareholders, it reported profits of $1.8 billion between 1996 and 2000. But it told the IRS that it lost a billion dollars during the same period, according to calculations by Robert McIntyre of the labor-backed group, Citizens for Tax Justice. Kmart Corp., to take another name in the news, reported $1.6 billion in profits to its shareholders; but a loss of $51 million to the IRS. [...SNIP] Incidentally, Japan taxes corporations on GAAP income, with a few exceptions, there’s plenty of academic comment on that already, TOdd

Response:

Yes I think you are right. The published accounts should include a reconciliation between how the numbers are arrived at for tax and for reporting  . Where there is difference the Annual reports confirmed by the CEO and the Auditors should state what authority or laws are  being relied on, and where the difference exceeds say   $us 500 m, the accounts should include a certification from IRD that they have reviewed the  principles, and they accept they are valid.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Companies keep three sets of books. A terabyte, multidimensional, drilldown data warehouse for themselves, plus a couple of cheap little reports with a few dozen useless, older numbers, for taxman and stockholders. Todd Boyle CPA http://www.gldialtone.com/FinancialDeregulation.htm Keeping two sets of books, one for yourself, and one for the tax man has all the hallmarks of business in a tinpot banana-republic. http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB1025557015105772280,00.html Companies Should Close Credibility Gap in Books SO NOW WE KNOW: In the last decade, leading American corporations have teamed up with unscrupulous (or incompetent) accountants to mislead shareholders about how much money they make. But that is only half the story. At the same time, many of those same companies have teamed up with the same accountants to mislead the Internal Revenue Service about how little money they make. The result is a huge and growing gap — call it the credibility gap — between book income and taxable income. If the efforts at accounting overhaul now under way are to be successful, they will need to close that yawning gap … from both ends. Consider the case of WorldCom Inc. Between 1996 and 2000, the company reported $16 billion in earnings to its shareholders. But to the tax man, it reported less than a billion dollars of taxable income. The truth undoubtedly lies somewhere in between. Enron Corp. has a similar story. To its shareholders, it reported profits of $1.8 billion between 1996 and 2000. But it told the IRS that it lost a billion dollars during the same period, according to calculations by Robert McIntyre of the labor-backed group, Citizens for Tax Justice. Kmart Corp., to take another name in the news, reported $1.6 billion in profits to its shareholders; but a loss of $51 million to the IRS. [...SNIP] Incidentally, Japan taxes corporations on GAAP income, with a few exceptions, there’s plenty of academic comment on that already, TOdd

Response:

Companies keep three sets of books. A terabyte, multidimensional, drilldown data warehouse for themselves, plus a couple of cheap little reports with a few dozen useless, older numbers, for taxman and stockholders. Todd Boyle CPA http://www.gldialtone.com/FinancialDeregulation.htm – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Keeping two sets of books, one for yourself, and one for the tax man has all the hallmarks of business in a tinpot banana-republic. http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB1025557015105772280,00.html Companies Should Close Credibility Gap in Books SO NOW WE KNOW: In the last decade, leading American corporations have teamed up with unscrupulous (or incompetent) accountants to mislead shareholders about how much money they make. But that is only half the story. At the same time, many of those same companies have teamed up with the same accountants to mislead the Internal Revenue Service about how little money they make. The result is a huge and growing gap — call it the credibility gap — between book income and taxable income. If the efforts at accounting overhaul now under way are to be successful, they will need to close that yawning gap … from both ends. Consider the case of WorldCom Inc. Between 1996 and 2000, the company reported $16 billion in earnings to its shareholders. But to the tax man, it reported less than a billion dollars of taxable income. The truth undoubtedly lies somewhere in between. Enron Corp. has a similar story. To its shareholders, it reported profits of $1.8 billion between 1996 and 2000. But it told the IRS that it lost a billion dollars during the same period, according to calculations by Robert McIntyre of the labor-backed group, Citizens for Tax Justice. Kmart Corp., to take another name in the news, reported $1.6 billion in profits to its shareholders; but a loss of $51 million to the IRS.

[...SNIP] Incidentally, Japan taxes corporations on GAAP income, with a few exceptions, there’s plenty of academic comment on that already, TOdd

Response:

How about the various versions for the wife, the mistress and bank manager. The Italian style.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Companies keep three sets of books. A terabyte, multidimensional, drilldown data warehouse for themselves, plus a couple of cheap little reports with a few dozen useless, older numbers, for taxman and stockholders. Todd Boyle CPA http://www.gldialtone.com/FinancialDeregulation.htm Keeping two sets of books, one for yourself, and one for the tax man has all the hallmarks of business in a tinpot banana-republic. http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB1025557015105772280,00.html Companies Should Close Credibility Gap in Books SO NOW WE KNOW: In the last decade, leading American corporations have teamed up with unscrupulous (or incompetent) accountants to mislead shareholders about how much money they make. But that is only half the story. At the same time, many of those same companies have teamed up with the same accountants to mislead the Internal Revenue Service about how little money they make. The result is a huge and growing gap — call it the credibility gap — between book income and taxable income. If the efforts at accounting overhaul now under way are to be successful, they will need to close that yawning gap … from both ends. Consider the case of WorldCom Inc. Between 1996 and 2000, the company reported $16 billion in earnings to its shareholders. But to the tax man, it reported less than a billion dollars of taxable income. The truth undoubtedly lies somewhere in between. Enron Corp. has a similar story. To its shareholders, it reported profits of $1.8 billion between 1996 and 2000. But it told the IRS that it lost a billion dollars during the same period, according to calculations by Robert McIntyre of the labor-backed group, Citizens for Tax Justice. Kmart Corp., to take another name in the news, reported $1.6 billion in profits to its shareholders; but a loss of $51 million to the IRS. [...SNIP] Incidentally, Japan taxes corporations on GAAP income, with a few exceptions, there’s plenty of academic comment on that already, TOdd

Response:

Question:

This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq.

Response:

This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq.

Most of the world, not just the Arab world, is against our attacking Iraq. The writer Kent Southard notes: The late Egyptian President Gamul Nasser once said of American foreign policy, "You never make straightforwardly simple stupid moves, you make complicated stupid moves that makes us think there’s actually something to it." There’s probably no better characterization of American policy towards Iraq, especially that of its Republican administrations. Ronald Reagan began with favoring Iraq as it was fighting the Iranians who’d held our embassy hostage; at war’s end the first George Bush continued to arm Hussein, over the objections of the Pentagon. The relationship was apparently so cordial that Hussein asked for our permission before invading Kuwait; permission was given, but the Saudi’s hadn’t been consulted, and Bush changed his mind. The Gulf War was announced, invitations sent; everybody came, and in the high excitement of mid-chase, the order came down to halt: the Republican Guard and Hussein were to go free. Hussein was needed "to insure stability in the region," and towards that end Gen. Schwartzkopf let Hussein retain his helicopter gunships for the expressed purpose of putting down the Kurds and other Iraq opposition groups that had responded to George Bush’s call to rise up in rebellion. So the world was treated to the spectacle on CNN of American troops standing by and watching the insurgents slaughtered by the tens of thousands while George Bush disclaimed any responsibility. So now Bush the lesser has announced a new war on Iraq, but nobody’s responding to the invitations. Most everyone seems to agree that Hussein’s a problem, but then again they probably tried to warn us about that some years ago. Iraq seems an issue that could be fairly considered largely of our own creating, and our allies should be forgiven if they feel this George Bush is bringing to the solution of the problem about the same level of wisdom that led to its creation. The situation in Afghanistan remains fluid, to be generous, yet Bush wants to rush off to attack Iraq because he’s got the ‘big mo,’ the wind of victory at his back; at the very moment when Arab populations are already charged and primed against us. After decades of ‘complicated stupid moves,’ maybe we’re progressing to stupidity of the more straightforward variety. – - – At this point, I think Bush is doing little more than wagging the dog and making almost everyone in the world *very* nervous. He’s a loose cannon with too many cannonballs and no one to restrain him. I fear for this country. We’ll be damned lucky to survive this Bush presidency. — Harry Krause – - A worker voting Republican is like a chicken voting for Frank Perdue.

Response:

jeez, I sure wouldn’t want to be interested in boating, if I lived over there, eh? — "Where are we going? And what’s with this hand basket?" regards, Frank Johansen Aurora, Ontario

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq. Most of the world, not just the Arab world, is against our attacking Iraq. The writer Kent Southard notes: The late Egyptian President Gamul Nasser once said of American foreign policy, "You never make straightforwardly simple stupid moves, you make complicated stupid moves that makes us think there’s actually something to it." There’s probably no better characterization of American policy towards Iraq, especially that of its Republican administrations. Ronald Reagan began with favoring Iraq as it was fighting the Iranians who’d held our embassy hostage; at war’s end the first George Bush continued to arm Hussein, over the objections of the Pentagon. The relationship was apparently so cordial that Hussein asked for our permission before invading Kuwait; permission was given, but the Saudi’s hadn’t been consulted, and Bush changed his mind. The Gulf War was announced, invitations sent; everybody came, and in the high excitement of mid-chase, the order came down to halt: the Republican Guard and Hussein were to go free. Hussein was needed "to insure stability in the region," and towards that end Gen. Schwartzkopf let Hussein retain his helicopter gunships for the expressed purpose of putting down the Kurds and other Iraq opposition groups that had responded to George Bush’s call to rise up in rebellion. So the world was treated to the spectacle on CNN of American troops standing by and watching the insurgents slaughtered by the tens of thousands while George Bush disclaimed any responsibility. So now Bush the lesser has announced a new war on Iraq, but nobody’s responding to the invitations. Most everyone seems to agree that Hussein’s a problem, but then again they probably tried to warn us about that some years ago. Iraq seems an issue that could be fairly considered largely of our own creating, and our allies should be forgiven if they feel this George Bush is bringing to the solution of the problem about the same level of wisdom that led to its creation. The situation in Afghanistan remains fluid, to be generous, yet Bush wants to rush off to attack Iraq because he’s got the ‘big mo,’ the wind of victory at his back; at the very moment when Arab populations are already charged and primed against us. After decades of ‘complicated stupid moves,’ maybe we’re progressing to stupidity of the more straightforward variety. – - – At this point, I think Bush is doing little more than wagging the dog and making almost everyone in the world *very* nervous. He’s a loose cannon with too many cannonballs and no one to restrain him. I fear for this country.

Although many countries express concern with the idea of our invading Iraq, I doubt any of our true Allies would even open their lips once the shooting began.  If they did, who cares?  It’s time we stopped acquiescing to the World’s wishes, and do what’s in the best interest of this country. Remember, those other countries have just as much to lose. Think what would happen if a terrorist organization or country hit us hard enough to totally disrupt our economy at a time when the global economy is looking to the US to bail it out. I, too, fear for this country. We had 8 years of a Presidency that spent billions in aid that went towards nuclear reactors in North Korea, and brokered deals that gave a nuclear China access to our highest technology…all of this while our own military was gutted, and illegal immigration soared.  Meanwhile, we learn that the record economic growth, and record corporate profits and success were a mirage built by phony accounting.  No wonder we’re in this mess.  The Clinton Administration left the White House the way Saddam left Kuwait…scorched Earth policy. I thank God every day that we now have a President that puts America’s interests before his own personal interests…a President that cares very little about upsetting phony allies at the expense of our country.

Response:

Actually, it’s our hockey teams that are roaring. First the ladies and now the men’s hockey. It just doesn’t get any better!  What is it you yanks say??  HOO RAH! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sounds like "The mouse that Roared". Bill Bring it on! Hopefully, Canada is our next target after Iraq.

Response:

Sounds like "The mouse that Roared". Bill – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bring it on! Hopefully, Canada is our next target after Iraq. What does the US aim to gain by all this. In the gulf war I read somewhere that they spent 1 billion dollars / day. Why don’t they use this for there own problems before dealing with other countries. It almost seems like a make work project for the military and it’s suppliers. Saddam has watched George come and go, Bill come and go and he will probably watch George jr. do the same. Hasn’t history already proved that any empire that tries to control the world ultimately fails and folds such as the romans, british etc… I have nothing against the US but when I travel overseas I always wear my canadian flag on my pack so as not to be confused with them. I heard on a news show that over 3800 innocent civilians were killed in the afghan bombing this is more than the WTC and I am sure they had nothing to do with it. This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq.

Response:

What does the US aim to gain by all this. In the gulf war I read somewhere that they spent 1 billion dollars / day. Why don’t they use this for there own problems before dealing with other countries. It almost seems like a make work project for the military and it’s suppliers. Saddam has watched George come and go, Bill come and go and he will probably watch George jr. do the same. Hasn’t history already proved that any empire that tries to control the world ultimately fails and folds such as the romans, british etc… I have nothing against the US but when I travel overseas I always wear my canadian flag on my pack so as not to be confused with them. I heard on a news show that over 3800 innocent civilians were killed in the afghan bombing this is more than the WTC and I am sure they had nothing to do with it.

The US has nothing to gain at this point, but George Bush does. His "presidency" was heading into the toilet before 9-11 and without his wag the dog "war on terrorism" now, it would be heading there again. He has to keep his war on terrorism in the forefront, because without it, the voters will see he’s simply hiding behind the curtain. It’s only a matter of time until the next big attack. What Bush is doing now won’t stop it. — Harry Krause – - They don’t suffer; they can’t even speak English. – Republican lawyer George Baer on starving miners

Response:

Bring it on! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hopefully, Canada is our next target after Iraq. What does the US aim to gain by all this. In the gulf war I read somewhere that they spent 1 billion dollars / day. Why don’t they use this for there own problems before dealing with other countries. It almost seems like a make work project for the military and it’s suppliers. Saddam has watched George come and go, Bill come and go and he will probably watch George jr. do the same. Hasn’t history already proved that any empire that tries to control the world ultimately fails and folds such as the romans, british etc… I have nothing against the US but when I travel overseas I always wear my canadian flag on my pack so as not to be confused with them. I heard on a news show that over 3800 innocent civilians were killed in the afghan bombing this is more than the WTC and I am sure they had nothing to do with it. This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq.

Response:

What does the US aim to gain by all this. In the gulf war I read somewhere that they spent 1 billion dollars / day. Why don’t they use this for there own problems before dealing with other countries. It almost seems like a make work project for the military and it’s suppliers. Saddam has watched George come and go, Bill come and go and he will probably watch George jr. do the same. Hasn’t history already proved that any empire that tries to control the world ultimately fails and folds such as the romans, british etc… I have nothing against the US but when I travel overseas I always wear my canadian flag on my pack so as not to be confused with them. I heard on a news show that over 3800 innocent civilians were killed in the afghan bombing this is more than the WTC and I am sure they had nothing to do with it.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq.

Response:

Hopefully, Canada is our next target after Iraq.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What does the US aim to gain by all this. In the gulf war I read somewhere that they spent 1 billion dollars / day. Why don’t they use this for there own problems before dealing with other countries. It almost seems like a make work project for the military and it’s suppliers. Saddam has watched George come and go, Bill come and go and he will probably watch George jr. do the same. Hasn’t history already proved that any empire that tries to control the world ultimately fails and folds such as the romans, british etc… I have nothing against the US but when I travel overseas I always wear my canadian flag on my pack so as not to be confused with them. I heard on a news show that over 3800 innocent civilians were killed in the afghan bombing this is more than the WTC and I am sure they had nothing to do with it. This is the advice/warning coming from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Syria. I can see anti-American countries, such as Yemen and Syria, speaking out against a US attack on Iraq. But, Saudi Arabia’s words show that they, too, must be grouped in the *unfriendly-to-US-interests* category…as if the fact that 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis isn’t enough. My take?  Who cares, as long as Turkey and Kuwait back us.  Both countries are important strategically to an attack on Iraq.

Response:

Question:

The IRS has an agent opening in my area. I qualify as a GS-9. I am an insulin dependent diabetic though. 2 questions: 1. Is the IRS a good job? Learn a lot? Any options for learning more computer skills?

Yes.  IRS Agent is a professional series, I think it is series GS-512. It is competitive Federal Civil Service.  I understand they are very big on training, but I think it is a set program.  Many tax accountants and tax lawyers got there start with the IRS.  Computer is a different series.  As I recall, the Federal computer programming series was a non-professional series. The pay is good.  The benefits are decent.  The retirement plan is pretty decent. 2. Do they accept IDDM?

I don’t know, but I don’t think IDDM would be a problem.  Federal agencies tend to go the limit in making allowances form people with disabilities.  As I recall, Agent is not the same as Investigator, or the badged sworn officers. are they like the FBI where you have to maintain eligibility status to enter the army?

Not to my knowledge, but it was a long time ago that I looked into it. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *                                                             * *   Unemployed six years, and really beginning to enjoy it.   * *    From the Socialist People’s Republic of Kalifornia       * *                   Ayn Rand was right                        *

Response:

The IRS has an agent opening in my area. I qualify as a GS-9.

P.S.  Unless something has changed, these were competitive positions, staffed under merit hiring rules.  You had to apply using an SF-171, your application was scored, and you were put on a register.  The hiring office would interview the top three on the list and then select one for the position.  Then everyone moved up one on the list.   (I understand the Clinton Administration made some changes to the process but I am not familiar with what they were.  I imagine if they got there way it would have been to change to a gender / race based system. )

Response:

Question:

There are no particular standards specific to the hotel industry, however, FRS15 tangible fixed assets is relevant for the accounting of the actual hotels on the balance sheet and the depreciation charge, which has changed for years ending after 31 march 2000 Get an accounting standards book! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I work for a mojor Hotel chain in the accounting department, perhaos I can help.  What do you need to know? I am a student in Accounting and lately I was assigned to do some research for the hotel industry. Is anyone aware of accounting standards/rules that are peculiar to the hotel industry?  I could like to find some information on this but aren’t sure where I could start the research. Any input will be appreciated! Thanks, HelloMiMi Before you buy.

Response:

I am a student in Accounting and lately I was assigned to do some research for the hotel industry. Is anyone aware of accounting standards/rules that are peculiar to the hotel industry?  I could like to find some information on this but aren’t sure where I could start the research. Any input will be appreciated! Thanks, HelloMiMi Before you buy.

Response:

I work for a mojor Hotel chain in the accounting department, perhaos I can help.  What do you need to know? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am a student in Accounting and lately I was assigned to do some research for the hotel industry. Is anyone aware of accounting standards/rules that are peculiar to the hotel industry?  I could like to find some information on this but aren’t sure where I could start the research. Any input will be appreciated! Thanks, HelloMiMi Before you buy.

Response:

Question:

Kev, I think Mary is living in the past. But Peachtree Complete 6.0 does not need to be ran in batch mode. But I do remember seeing that in my manual for Peachtree for Windows 3.5 and 5.0. 6.0 says that it can be run in real time but it won’t allow more than one person on any particular transaction at a time. This safe guards what Mary was referring to. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Where did you get this information, that Peachtree should be run batch mode only if networked? I don’t remember running across this in the manual. Wouldn’t file and record locking take care of any possible contention problems, whether it’s run batch or real-time? The important fact that must be kept in mind for using PeachTree on a network, with multiple users is to make sure the program controls are set for batch processing rather than real time. If batch processing is not used, there can be data loss. Just read the manual, you should not have any trouble.  Besides, PeachTree does not charge extra for multiple user —  it is included in the original license. Mary T, MBA x-no-archive: yes Mr.  Alkooheji:  I can’t tell how many users you want on the system, but Peachtree is incapable of handling any number of simultaneous users.  We generally recommend a networkable product; Millenium v5.5.  Please contact me for further information and to arrange a demonstration. Respectfully, Wrong!  Peachtree for Windows has been networkable since version 2.0.  Multi-user support is not a problem. And no… I’m not trying to sell it. -Ken Payne Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com

Antony

Response:

You will find the following info on Peachtree’s support page #35849 http://www.peachtree.com/support/peachfacts/html/35849.cfm Posting Methods: Real-time posting is recommended for better performance and fewer conflicts if you are using Peachtree Complete for Windows or Peachtree Complete Plus Time and Billing. Batch posting is recommended if you are using Peachtree First Accounting and Peachtree Accounting for Windows 3.5. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The important fact that must be kept in mind for using PeachTree on a network, with multiple users is to make sure the program controls are set for batch processing rather than real time. If batch processing is not used, there can be data loss. Just read the manual, you should not have any trouble.  Besides, PeachTree does not charge extra for multiple user —  it is included in the original license. Mary T, MBA

Response:

Dear PeachTree Experts and Users I am thinking to adopt PeachTree in my Company ( Electrical Contractor ) with arround 150 staff, and over 2000 of item types I would be very glad if any of Peach Tree versions provide all these specifications : 1- Deal effectivley and in Integrated manner with these modules    GL, Inventory and Stock Control, Reciavable and Payable, PayRoll,    and very important Job Costing and Cost Control 2- Windows Based ( not Dos ) 3- Y2K Complient 4- Multi-User ( and prefer using only Windows Workgroup if possible ) 5- Advanced Querying and Reporting Capabilities 6- Getting Technical Support in case of Problem Faced 7- Reasonably Good User Manual I would appreciate very much any suggestion, please don’t forget to reply by email since I have not continous access to internet to read newsgroups Cheers    Ahmed Alkooheji

Response:

Where did you get this information, that Peachtree should be run batch mode only if networked? I don’t remember running across this in the manual. Wouldn’t file and record locking take care of any possible contention problems, whether it’s run batch or real-time? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The important fact that must be kept in mind for using PeachTree on a network, with multiple users is to make sure the program controls are set for batch processing rather than real time. If batch processing is not used, there can be data loss. Just read the manual, you should not have any trouble.  Besides, PeachTree does not charge extra for multiple user —  it is included in the original license. Mary T, MBA x-no-archive: yes Mr.  Alkooheji:  I can’t tell how many users you want on the system, but Peachtree is incapable of handling any number of simultaneous users.  We generally recommend a networkable product; Millenium v5.5.  Please contact me for further information and to arrange a demonstration. Respectfully, Wrong!  Peachtree for Windows has been networkable since version 2.0.  Multi-user support is not a problem. And no… I’m not trying to sell it. -Ken Payne Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com

Response:

Mr.  Alkooheji:   I can’t tell how many users you want on the system, but Peachtree is incapable of handling any number of simultaneous users.   We generally recommend a networkable product; Millenium v5.5.   Please contact me for further information and to arrange a demonstration. Respectfully, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear PeachTree Experts and Users I am thinking to adopt PeachTree in my Company ( Electrical Contractor ) with arround 150 staff, and over 2000 of item types I would be very glad if any of Peach Tree versions provide all these specifications : 1- Deal effectivley and in Integrated manner with these modules   GL, Inventory and Stock Control, Reciavable and Payable, PayRoll,   and very important Job Costing and Cost Control 2- Windows Based ( not Dos ) 3- Y2K Complient 4- Multi-User ( and prefer using only Windows Workgroup if possible ) 5- Advanced Querying and Reporting Capabilities 6- Getting Technical Support in case of Problem Faced 7- Reasonably Good User Manual I would appreciate very much any suggestion, please don’t forget to reply by email since I have not continous access to internet to read newsgroups Cheers   Ahmed Alkooheji

Response:

The important fact that must be kept in mind for using PeachTree on a network, with multiple users is to make sure the program controls are set for batch processing rather than real time. If batch processing is not used, there can be data loss. Just read the manual, you should not have any trouble.  Besides, PeachTree does not charge extra for multiple user —  it is included in the original license. Mary T, MBA

x-no-archive: yes Mr.  Alkooheji:  I can’t tell how many users you want on the system, but Peachtree is incapable of handling any number of simultaneous users.  We generally recommend a networkable product; Millenium v5.5.  Please contact me for further information and to arrange a

demonstration. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Respectfully, Wrong!  Peachtree for Windows has been networkable since version 2.0.  Multi-user support is not a problem. And no… I’m not trying to sell it. -Ken Payne Ford Truck Enthusiasts http://www.ford-trucks.com

Response:

Question:

with 13 quintillion Indian people looking for work…. why would anyone in Inda hire an American to pick crops?

Response:

If you’ve got *good* English qualifications try the big banks, legal and accounting firms who often have English speakers on staff to vet their outgoing mail for obvious bloopers

Response:

Joseph: The time-honored feed-your-face thing to do in Asia is teaching English — a real calling which can make a big difference in people’s lives, make you feel good and immerse you right in the culture since you have to to be a good teacher.  You’ll be teaching conversation — and making plenty yourself! Since it’s quite a field over there, teaching EFL in the Far East is the subject of several books, some on Japan, some on the region more generally and one allegedly coming out in June dealing with SE Asia specifically. Beyond this there’s a website: www.eslcafe.com, which spreads the latest gosip all around.  You should sign on right away. You’ll need training if you haven’t ever studied linguistics or a foreign language, and for that there are a number of (fairly expensive) four week courses in the UK, the US and elsewhere.  Beyond that you could easily do a Masters degree in TESOL or applied ling.  There are a lot of options. You should know, though, that it’s no cakewalk.  Rather than get into it here, I’ll simply send you toward that website: www.eslcafe.com so you can see for yourself.  That site even has some of my opinions on it; I’m the same "Ben Bangs" whose first initial stands for William. Good luck! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey. I will be doing some living and traveling in India and southeast Asia in a couple of months. I will be overseas for a long time, perhaps even a couple of years, and I would like to find means to support myself while there. Can anyone offer me suggestions on how to make a living as an American in India and southeast Asia? I’ve heard ambiguous mention of crop-picking jobs, but I’d like as much info as I can get about all potential occupations…all help is appreciated. Thanks! —

Response:

Teach English. Its fun and you meet lots of young people.  Ther are several books on the subject. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey. I will be doing some living and traveling in India and southeast Asia in a couple of months. I will be overseas for a long time, perhaps even a couple of years, and I would like to find means to support myself while there. Can anyone offer me suggestions on how to make a living as an American in India and southeast Asia? I’ve heard ambiguous mention of crop-picking jobs, but I’d like as much info as I can get about all potential occupations…all help is appreciated. Thanks! —

Response:

I agree about teaching.  I spent a year in SE Asia – teaching English in Bangkok to earn money for short trips to the surrounding area,  this also gave me the opportunity to live in Bangkok and experience it as a resident rather than just passing through.  You can earn a lot of money in Japan and Korea- but personally, Bangkok is much more appealing as a city.   There are also opportunities to work in the media – Bangkok has more English language dailies than any other city in the world – and one of the smallest ex-pat communities – new magazines are springing up all the time – you could start up re-writing and move on to writing articles – opportunities also in TV and radio…..DJ-ing etc

Response:

Hey. I will be doing some living and traveling in India and southeast Asia in a couple of months. I will be overseas for a long time, perhaps even a couple of years, and I would like to find means to support myself while there. Can anyone offer me suggestions on how to make a living as an American in India and southeast Asia? I’ve heard ambiguous mention of crop-picking jobs, but I’d like as much info as I can get about all potential occupations…all help is appreciated. Thanks! —

Response:

[soc.culture.indian removed from newsgroup line] I have heard that in Asia there is a large demand for English teachers.  If you have experience in teaching, or a certificate from an ESL program, it’s easy;  in some places, though, all you need is a college degree (in any field). Another thing you might consider, if you are at all talented as a writer or photographer, is to try selling articles to US-based magazines.

Response: