Just like the accounting fraud that happened at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after passing Sarbennes-Oxley? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052300184.html Thank goodness for regulations.
First, most of that happened before Sarbox passed. Second, Fannie and Freddie were mostly exempt from Sarbox when it did pass. Nice try, though! barfo
Sarbanes Oxley passed in 2002. Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac accounting scandals were 2006. If you aren't satisfied that regulations failed in those cases, how about Lehman Brothers? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/business/13lehman.html?_r=1 The govt. did a good job of keeping Bernie Madoff from ripping people off. Wait, no they didn't.
Your link says 1998-2004. If you expect government to prevent all crime, you are being just a tad unrealistic. Jeez, we have laws against murder, and people get murdered all the time. Obviously, the laws against murder are a failure and should be repealed. barfo
Which part of 1998-2004 was after Sarbanes-Oxley? It also says the accounting problems occurred at Freddie Mac in 2003. The FEDERAL government doesn't prosecute but a very few murder cases. For good reason. However, we already have laws against fraud, so if fraud is going to be committed anyhow, why not just use THOSE to prosecute the CEOs and accountants or other individuals that perpetrate them?
Well, Sarbox was passed in mid-2002 and most of the provisions took effect mid-2004 or later. The idea is to try to reduce the amount of fraud, by making it harder to do, and to make it easier to detect. barfo
How effective was Sarbanes Oxley in making it easier to detect any fraud that went on? I do not see that the amount of fraud was reduced in the least.