Is This the New Year?

Tonight is New Year's Eve, a famous moment for clinking glasses, looking back on the past year's triumphs (or regrets) and hoping that the new year is a clean beginning of fresh blessings to come. Along with said champagne and reminiscing thoughts usually also comes a resolution - that this will finally be the year we lose weight, are nicer to people, save more money, volunteer more, or __[fill in the blank]__. My office offers some relatively random but usually enjoyable training classes, and I took one earlier this month called "This Year I Will" (taught by M.J. Ryan who also has a book by the same title). The gist of the class was that we need to keep in mind a couple key items to actually succeed in those well-intentioned resolutions:

1. Be specific (this includes lots of annoying 'hows?' - like how will you save money? what are you willing to do to lose weight? how will you specifically measure accomplishing your goals? etc etc)

2. Positive feedback. Our instructor pointed out that after someone receives a job review in which the majority of items are things they need to improve on, their job performance typically drops by an average of 28%. Whereas people with largely positive reviews subsequently improve their job performance. Why? We are wired for positive feedback (or so says Ms. Ryan). Her point is, if we make a resolution to go the gym 5 times a week and we only go twice, we usually respond by telling ourselves how pathetic we are that we only went twice. Instead we should congratulate ourselves on successfully going twice, and consider next week a new start.

The moral of the story? Pick a resolution that is something you truly want to do. Then give yourself a break after the stumbles along the way. (After all, as Ryan explained, babies learning how to walk don't tell themselves "Stupid baby!" after falling, they just ignore the fall and keep going).

In a somewhat related tangent, my godparents introduced Chris and I to New York artist Ian Axel. One of his songs (sung with Chad Vaccarino) is "This is the New Year." Besides an appropriate title for this time of year, the lyrics are a good reminder of the true meaning of a new year - that in the end we have one another. So let's toast to a new year, a new beginning, ignoring skinned knees we may pick up along the way, and embracing who we are and who we find along the way.

Another year you made a promise
another chance to turn it all around
and do not save this for tomorrow
embrace the past and you can live for now
and I will give the world to you

Speak louder that the words before you
and give them meaning no one else has found
The role we play is so important
we are the voices of the underground
and I would give the world to you

Say everything you’ve always wanted,
be not afraid of who you really are,
cause in the end we have each other,
and that's at least one thing worth living for...

A 600 Turkey Day

Now that we are in the pre-Christmas winter months, people's thoughts turn to gifts, parties, and (hopefully) giving back to the community. My office is no exception, and since we get 2 days per year as paid time off to volunteer, five of us from accounting went for the day to help out at the Bowery Mission. Founded in 1879, the Bowery is one of the largest homeless aid organizations in the city.

A little known fact is that NYC is the only city in the country legally required to provide shelter for anyone who seeks it. Yes, anyone. The city is required to find a bed for each and every person who seeks it out, and on cold nights NYC has even rented out entire cruise ships to shelter people.

So what makes the Bowery so special, when the city would shelter the homeless? Besides the fact that Chris and I know the Bowery's president and his wife (whom we deeply respect), the Bowery has a unique approach to the city's marginalized by offering both short term and long term care. So yes, they do serve three meals a day, 365 days a year, providing clothing and shelter as well to meet immediate needs. But, crucially, they also have long-term programs where men and women stay between 6 months - 2 years and receive computer training, financial/spiritual/personal counseling, and have rotating jobs within the Bowery organization so that they have job experience on their resume when they leave. The womens' program, for instance, doesn't graduate a resident until she meets 5 criteria, including that they have a job, have a place to live (Bowery helps them save wages to afford a deposit while they live in the program), and are reconciled to their family.

All this as background to say that I deeply believe the Bowery has a powerful approach to helping those in need, and I was excited to help out in preparing Thanksgiving meals.

Still, I was totally astounded by the sheer scope of the work Bowery goes through to serve Thanksgiving. I had read they serve 3,800 people on Thanksgiving day, but it is another matter entirely to see volunteers working in shifts around the clock (literally!) to get 600 turkeys, 1,000 lbs of potatoes, 900 pies, and 800 pounds of stuffing prepared and cooked. My co-workers and I helped prepare turkeys, peel potatoes, make stuffing, organize the pantry and other odd jobs (below).








Let me add here that when I heard 1,000 lbs of potatoes and 800 lbs of stuffing, I imagined huge industrial boxes of potato flakes and Stouffer's stuffing getting mixed with hot water. Not so. The Bowery believes strongly in treating the homeless with with dignity, and as such everything was made from scratch. I believe the main thought going through my mind all day was "Holy moly!"... huge stacks of potatoes lined the pantry, and each was hand peeled, baked and mashed for mashed potatoes. Other groups of volunteers did nothing all week long but dice loaves of bread to be mixed with broth and spices for homemade stuffing. Wow.

After 8 hours picking turkey meat, hand mixing huge containers of stuffing, dicing bread, stacking pies, and unloading trucks of donated food, we were all exhausted to the bone - but it's great to be a part of such an exciting effort in the city!

How will you get involved to give back?

Our Debt to Dilbert

My company's employee intranet site posts a Dilbert comic every day alongside the lunch menu, and while most elicit a chuckle among myself and my fellow cubicle-dwellers, this one was downright eerie... mainly because it somehow reminded me of the national debt (my brain is a scary place, I know).

The deficit panel this week created a proposed list of spending cuts/tax increases in an attempt to cut our nation's debt (see WSJ article). Honestly, I am surprised to say that I actually think a lot of the suggestions make sense... for instance, lowering corporate tax rates, but eliminating a lot of loophole deductions. (Ditto for individuals, who would have some deductions eliminated, like mortgage interest, but whose base tax rate would go down). I think those moves could majorly simplify filing taxes, a process so complicated that even CPA's eyes cross (mine do, anyway). But the point here is that it comes back to Dilbert: many citizens wants the government to cut the deficit (myself included), but none want to deal with the practicalities of making it happen... sending the sort of mixed message I used to hear in my investment banking intern days:

Managing Director to me at 6pm on Friday: "We have a new project, but I don't want you here all weekend working on it. It should take about 25 man hours. I need it on my desk first thing Monday"

Uhh, ok.

Getting a politician to go anywhere near the Deficit Panel's suggestions will be essentially impossible, since political suicide is usually spelled: a) cutting spending to popular programs b) raise taxes on everyone (including the 'middle class') c) all of the above. So, as the New York Times asked today, 'how would you fix our budget'??

Mr. Deficit, I don't know how to get rid of you without a lot of painful measures. But I also know that our pain (and your grinch-iness) will only increase ten fold if we ignore you. So I would like to offer up some parting wisdom from our friend Mr. Seuss:

You're a foul one, Mister Grinch,
You're a nasty wasty skunk,
Your heart is full of unwashed socks, your soul is full of gunk, Mister Grinch,

The three words that describe you are as follows, and I quote, "Stink, Stank, Stunk!"

Anything but a Plain Jane

I have been re-reading Jane Eyre this week. This would come as no surprise to those who knew me in college; I wrote my senior thesis on Charlotte Bronte’s works. But I have for several years been immersed in the financial realm, so it was an unexpected treat to revisit Jane Eyre. (My family and husband usually roll their eyes when they see me rereading books for the fifth or sixth time, however I continue undaunted in the rather strange habit of re-reading books).

One passage in particular struck me this week; Jane is leaving Mr. Rochester, whom she loves but is about to leave (spoiler alert!) because she discovered at the altar that Rochester already has a wife – a mad woman locked in the house’s attic. (And you thought classics were boring!) It rends her heart to leave, and Rochester pushes her to stay, offering to whisk her away to villas in France and Italy where they can live as a married couple with no one knowing they aren’t technically married. Jane realizes she must leave Rochester, reflecting:

I will keep the law given by God; sanctioned by man. I will hold to the principles received by me when I was sane, and not mad—as I am now. Laws and principles are not for the times when there is no temptation . . . They have a worth—so I have always believed; and if I cannot believe it now, it is because I am insane—quite insane: with my veins running fire, and my heart beating faster than I can count its throbs.” -Jane, Chapter 27

It is Jane’s perspective that calls us to action. The call to remember in the darkness what we have seen in the light; to recall the whispering we heard from God when all that currently surrounds is silence.

How much better would our businesses and governments be if only we could all take this lesson? To reform because we believed in doing the right thing, rather than because we were blind to everything but the punishment of being caught. To put in place government principles we believe are beneficial, not push through bills for the sole purpose of trying to be re-elected. Business ethics classes usually teach students that they should be ethical because it will pay off monetarily in the long run – i.e., recalling you faulty product is cheaper than the lawsuits and bad press. But what about being ethical for the sake of it? Because we had glimpses of the right thing in moments of sanity?

The hallmark of the last two years of the financial crisis has been insanity; panic from investors, greed from bankers, mud-slinging from politicians. Caught up in the moment, it is hard to reach back in memory to moments of normalcy. But it is those who can see in panic the eventual return to calm that will rule the day.

Fall Colors and the Vermont Falconer

One of the things I miss the most about Virginia are the fall colors. It's just not quite the same living in NYC where 'fall colors' means seeing the two trees in your neighborhood turn brown. However, my fall tree withdrawal was helped immensely by the trip Chris and I took last weekend to Manchester Village, Vermont. Even better was that the trip was free for us (a company retreat for my department) and a fun chance to get to know colleagues better and enjoy a gorgeous state expense-free.

We stayed at the Equinox Resort which boasts gorgeous grounds (the white building on left) and spa/golf course/off road/hiking/archery/falconry activities. Yes, falconry! In fact, on Saturday while I spent the day in the woods doing team building activities with my department, the "SO"s (significant others) got a stipend to enjoy the facilities and Chris took an hour of falconry lessons! You get your own bird (wingspan ~6 ft) and you learn about falconry, 'launching' your bird into the wind, and calling him back to your arm (protected by a thick leather glove). Chris has now legally changed his name to {deep voice} "The Falconer." [just kidding]

Sadly while the SOs were pampered, our department's day in the woods was in 8 hours of pouring rain, wind, and 41 degree weather... but as we all limped back home, the sun peeked out and we noticed a beautiful rainbow through the trees! [Insert metaphor about needing trials/rainy days to see rainbows].

We had a few minutes on our own Sunday before the bus whisked us away, and Chris and I enjoyed a stroll through the quaint Manchester Village streets (below). Even the train ride home was along the fall-painted Hudson River... all in all, a beautiful scene of autumn, a bittersweet goodbye to summer amid gorgeous colors!








Autumn, by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Thou comest, Autumn, heralded by the rain,
With banners, by great gales incessant fanned,
Brighter than brightest silks of Samarcand,
And stately oxen harnessed to thy wain!
Thou standest, like imperial Charlemagne,
Upon thy bridge of gold; thy royal hand
Outstretched with benedictions o'er the land,
Blessing the farms through all thy vast domain!
Thy shield is the red harvest moon, suspended
So long beneath the heaven's o'er-hanging eaves;
Thy steps are by the farmer's prayers attended;
Like flames upon an altar shine the sheaves;
And, following thee, in thy ovation splendid,
Thine almoner, the wind, scatters the golden leaves!

Onions Have Layers

The first weekend in October I went back to Richmond/Williamsburg VA to visit family, friends, and a few of my professors from the William & Mary days. It was great to catch up with everyone, and created that bittersweet feeling of starting our lives in NYC while missing our 'roots' a few hundred miles away. (Though, to quote Sweet Home Alabama, "you can have roots and wings"). Anyway, one of the cool things we did over the weekend was attend the Cirque de Symphony at the VA Performing Arts Center. Essentially the performance linked two different performing arts, with the Virginia Orchestra playing a variety of classical pieces while several members of an international acrobatics troop perform cirque du soleil-type moves in the foreground.

It was both beatuiful and enthralling, with a few moments where I turned to Afton and said "I really don't think the human body is supposed to be able to bend that way!" Especially impressive where a couple of men at the end who performed stunts with one another - at one point, one of the guys was in a push up position on the stage, while the second guy was in a pushup position, but suspended only by having a hand on the first guy's neck! Eek! (Pictures below... and for more details/pictures for the event, see Hadar's blog)).

As I was leaving the theater I was struck by a couple of thoughts:
1. I felt an immediate need to start going to the gym more often (including yoga)
2. I began wondering about layers. The evening was almost magical; two different types of activities brought together that created a whole much bigger than the sum of its parts.

It left me wondering how I could better combine other seemingly unrelated layers into my own life. How can I be more philanthropic/community focused in my approach to work? How can I marry my english/creative side with a business world that is much more detail driven? How do I layer balance into a workaholic city?

There are no ready answers, but as Cirque de Symphony showed, unrelated layers can create unexpected beauties.

It's the Great Tax Punt, Charlie Brown

There's been a lot of buzz recently about taxes, and with good reason. With the Bush tax cuts about to expire, congress faces the difficult task of deciding for whom the tax cuts should be renewed. I am more than willing to admit that it's an incredibly difficult question to answer, but I am also disappointed that the government did what it almost always does (republican or democrat) and avoided the tough questions until after mid-term elections. Why does it matter when tax laws are decided if it doesn't impact taxes until 2011? Because it makes it almost impossible for people to plan financially, and much more likely that economic growth will remain sluggish until legislation is decided.

Americans (especially those owning small businesses) as well as corporations are in this weird no-man's-land... unable to plan spending/growth until they know what tax rates will be. My father-in-law owns his own business, and has had to lay off several people recently due to the threat of rising tax/health care costs. If tax legislation was finalized, he would at least have a better sense of his future expenses and could move forward with less fear of the unknown.

At this point I think many people tune out of the tax debate, thinking "I don't make more than $200,000 a year, or own a business so who cares?". Yes, you are under the current definition of "rich" by Obama (though the issues with defining "rich" may earn its own post). But your income is still going to be impacted, particularly through capital gains/dividend tax and through AMT.

Dividend taxes could range from 15% to 40% depending on what plan congress adopts. That makes a huge difference, even to a 'small time' investor like me. Because ANY stock you hold, no matter how much annual income you make, will be taxed for how much it's value goes up over time (capital gains) and what dividends it pays out (qualified dividend income). Thus, cap gains/dividend tax rates impact anyone with savings in stocks/mutual funds.

The AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) is also posed to strike those decidedly not "rich." AMT was created in the 1970s to ensure that the uber-wealthy paid tax and weren't hiding under a barrage of tax shelters/deductions. AMT essentially forbids you from taking most deductions on your tax return (so no mortgage tax deductions, personal deductions, kid deductions, reduced values of charitable deductions*). Props to the lawmakers - in my opinion, this actually made sense at the time. However, the problem is that AMT wasn't indexed to inflation. So making $30K/year in 1970 made you rich (average income was ~$7,600), but today $30K/year is not-so-rich. Congress periodically "patches" the AMT to raise the exemption level, but if they don't act soon for 2011, the individual exemption for AMT will bounce back down to $33,750 for single tax payers and $45,000 for married filing jointly, raising taxes for an estimated 50+ million people. Eeek.

The graph on left from The Tax Foundation shows how different the AMT effect could be based upon what plan congress adopts. To check out how the different plans could affect your personal taxes, check out the tax scenario calculator.

So congress: please, put in the quarterback and make a play! I know it's tough, and taxes are never popular (I'm a CPA and I still hate taxes), but it's YOUR JOB to DECIDE SOMETHING. At least then we'll have a sense of what's coming... and know if the light ahead is the light at the end of the tunnel, or the light of an oncoming train.


*Props to my mom for correcting a fact: initial posting said charitable deductions weren't allowed under AMT. As my mom points out, they are allowed... but they're a bit less valuable due to differing tax rates used by AMT vs regular tax returns.

It's Not Easy Being Green... Or is it?

I have seen The Muppet Movie. A lot. When my brother was little, my mom got suckered into the “it’s my first child and he’s cute and if he wants to watch The Muppet Movie every night before bed then why not?” theory. Apparently this worked out fine until David started wanting to watch a little farther in the movie… and a little farther… every evening. Rather smart for a small child wanting to avoid bed. Sadly my mom learned the lesson and such movie bedtime delay tactics were no longer allowed by the time I came along, but the Muppet Movie was still one of our daytime favorites.

So why the dialogue about singing frogs, bears in Studebakers, and a strangely outgoing pig? It seems to me that we still have a lot to learn from the 1979 Muppet classic. New York City is famous for being the city of More. More money, more prestige, more pollution. In some ways this can be a good thing, under the theory of Proverbs 27:17 – “As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.” But after a couple years of living in NYC, I also find it exhausting at times. There is always someone staying longer at work, someone making more money, someone proving they’ll outperform you if you let them. While in theory I know none of this matters, it’s still hard to ‘be in the world but not of the world,’ so to speak.

But, after a few long-ish days at work, I am reminded of the simple wisdom of the muppets: go for your dreams, use your imagination, and take spontaneous road trips! (Or to quote the muppet's Fraggle Rock wisdom-offering Trash Heap, "Wherever you go, there you are.")

You're burning with hope, you're building up steam…

You're close to your dream.
Life's like a movie, write your own ending
Keep believing, keep pretending

We've done just what we set out to do.
Thanks to the lovers, the dreamers, and you!

Pensions... will Batman save us?

There's an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal today about pension assumptions in accounting, and another one in the NY Times (links below). Both hit close to home, because I see pension accounting as rather equivalent to Gotham city, this place with both nice skyscrapers and lots of dark alleys to hid in and meet with sketchy mob bosses. Why over-dramatize pensions into a city in need of a Batman-like rescue? I think there are a lot of things about pension expenses that the average American doesn't know (but should).

I realize that this is the moment where the eyes of most of my friends in the 40-and-under range usually glaze over and they quietly mutter to themselves 'who the heck cares about pensions?' Well, I do. And you should. Pension costs affect expenses for both companies and governments, and this in turn affects their stock prices (or in the government's case, our taxes). Thus pensions affect all age brackets, even those decades from retirement.

Ok, fine. Maybe I've convinced you to keep reading and maybe I haven't. But what I think people should realize is:

The time value of money [said in a booming James Earl Jones voice]

A common concept in finance is the time value of money. This is the idea that money appreciates over time if you invest it. Let's say 8-year-old Timmy has a keen investment sense, and wants to buy a $100 bicycle in 3 years. Timmy could put $100 under his mattress and wait 3 years, but since Timmy is finance-savvy he'll invest the money in a CD/money market/stock/whatever and it will appreciate. If Timmy earns 10% each year on his money, he only needs to save $75 now to buy the $100 bike in 3 years. The critical piece is estimating what % return you will receive. If Timmy earns only 2% a year instead of 10%, he needs to save $95 now rather than 75%. The % makes a huge difference.

Pension accounting relies heavily on the time value of money theory, because companies are trying to estimate how much money they need to save now to pay for pensions later on. I think it's a good thing that companies are required to include pension expenses on their balance sheet (they didn't use to be). But what I find rather deceiving is that each company gets to PICK what return rate they want to use. There's no industry or government standard required. So if Ford wants to estimate a 10% yearly return, they are free to do so (they have to disclose the % rate they use but it's buried deep in the 10K footnotes that most people skim or don't read). Most companies/governments use 7.5-9.5% return assumptions in order to minimize the "how much do we need to save now" cost number. But who the heck is earning 8-10% returns? CDs from banks are about 1% now. Stock market returns for the last decade are flat at 0%. Even if you take an average over the last 60 years, the S&P 500 (a benchmark of the average stock market performance) has earned about 7%. And even a small change in estimated returns makes a big change in cost today (as poor Timmy discovered).

So what's the real point? Be aware that the billions of pension expenses discussed by companies/governments in the news are just estimates, and they are estimates that (at least in my opinion) often fall short of what the cost will really be down the road. Companies/goverments' pension plans are grossly underfunded now, and would be even more so if return %'s were more realistic.

So, if you're thinking about investing in stock/bond for a company that offers pensions, check out their pension accounting footnote first! You can find company 10K yearly earnings filings here:
http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html

And once you're there, the pension footnote is usually called "Retirement Benefits" or something similar. You're looking for the return % that is called "Expected Return on Assets"

Ford looks like this (the US Plan column is the main one... do you see the 8.25%?)

		Pension Benefits
		U.S. Plans								Non-U.S. Plans								U.S. OPEB
		2009				2008				2009				2008				2009				2008
Weighted Average Assumptions at December 31 (a)
Discount rate			5.86	%			6.50	%			5.68	%			5.95	%			5.74	%			4.95	%
Expected return on assets			8.25	%			8.25	%			7.17	%			7.11	%			—				4.67	%
Average rate of increase in compensation			3.80	%			3.80	%			3.15	%			3.13	%			3.80	%			3.80	%
Initial health care cost trend rate (b)			—				—				—				—				—				5	%
Assumptions Used to Determine Net Benefit Cost for the Year
Discount rate (c)			6.50	%			6.25	%			5.93	%			5.58	%			4.95	%			5.81	%
Expected return on assets			8.25	%			8.25	%			7.11	%			7.26	%			4.67	%			7.17	%
Average rate of increase in compensation			3.80	%			3.80	%			3.13	%			3.21	%			3.8

You can also tell how underfunded a company is in another chart in the same footnote (again, this one's from Ford).

Look about 2/3 down the chart to "Funded status at December 31" --- for 2009 it's (6,181). Since the report is in millions, this means Ford is $6 BILLION underfunded... ie, even if they did earn 8.25% every year, they'd need to be saving $6B more now than they have to be able to pay pension expenses down the road! Yikes!

Pension Benefits
		U.S. Plans								Non-U.S. Plans								Worldwide OPEB
		2009				2008				2009				2008				2009				2008
Change in Benefit Obligation (a)
Benefit obligation at January 1		$	43,053			$	44,412			$	20,382			$	25,558			$	19,065			$	28,096
Service cost			343				378				251				301				408				326
Interest cost			2,693				2,682				1,193				1,321				899				1,456
Amendments			—				4				(54	)			117				(175	)			(928	)
Separation programs			12				334				121				42				2				13
Curtailments			—				—				(19	)			—				—				(1	)
Settlements			—				—				(1	)			(58	)			(13,637	)			—
Plan participant contributions			27				25				80				101				40				42
Benefits paid			(3,908	)			(3,960	)			(1,456	)			(1,380	)			(1,673	)			(1,628	)
Medicare D subsidy			—				—				—				—				67				68
Foreign exchange translation			—				—				1,927				(4,779	)			253				(478	)
Divestiture			—				—				—				(6	)			—				—
Actuarial (gain)/loss and other			2,418				(822	)			921				(835	)			804				(7,901	)
Benefit obligation at December 31		$	44,638			$	43,053			$	23,345			$	20,382			$	6,053			$	19,065
Change in Plan Assets (a)
Fair value of plan assets at January 1		$	37,381			$	45,696			$	14,707			$	21,396			$	2,786			$	3,875
Actual return on plan assets			4,855				(4,480	)			1,692				(2,036	)			792				(1,011	)
Company contributions			136				138				968				1,209				—				—
Plan participant contributions			27				25				80				101				—				—
Benefits paid			(3,908	)			(3,960	)			(1,456	)			(1,380	)			(62	)			(77	)
Settlements			—				—				(1	)			(58	)			(3,517	)			—
Foreign exchange translation			—				—				1,581				(4,510	)			—				—
Divestiture			—				—				—				(3	)			—				—
Other			(34	)			(38	)			(7	)			(12	)			1				(1	)
Fair value of plan assets at December 31		$	38,457			$	37,381			$	17,564			$	14,707			$	—			$	2,786
Funded status at December 31		$	(6,181	)		$	(5,672	)		$	(5,781	)		$	(5,675	)		$	(6,053	)		$	(16,279	)
Amounts Recognized on the Balance Sheet (a)
Prepaid assets		$	13			$	15			$	101			$	53			$	—			$	—
Accrued liabilities			(6,194	)			(5,687	)			(5,882	)			(5,728	)			(6,053	)			(16,279	)
Total		$	(6,181	)		$	(5,672	)		$	(5,781	)		$	(5,675	)		$	(6,053	)		$	(16,279	)
Amounts Recognized in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss (b)
Unamortized prior service costs/(credits)		$	1,895			$	2,268			$	433			$	557			$	(2,799	)		$	(3,510	)
Unamortized net (gains)/losses and other			5,705				4,858				6,100				5,163				1,772				611
Total		$	7,600			$	7,126			$	6,533			$	5,720			$	(1,027	)		$	(2,899	)
Pension Plans in which Accumulated Benefit Obligation Exceeds Plan Assets at December 31 (a)
Accumulated benefit obligation		$	25,686			$	24,975			$	16,707			$	11,649
Fair value of plan assets			20,248				20,044				12,034				7,171
Accumulated Benefit Obligation at December 31 (a)		$	43,756			$	42,279			$	21,975			$	19,197

Ok, that's it for the accounting standards soapbox. But maybe one soul in a million will check out a footnote one day and make this rant worth it :o)


The news articles mentioned above:
WSJ
NY Times