Bingo. You’re a big winner! On to the bonus round!

In the full context of things, the line between government and business is going to blur so badly, you won’t be able to tell one from the other. There’s an old line saying, “If you owe the bank a thousand dollars, you have a problem. If you owe the bank a million dollars, the bank has a problem.” Well, we could add, “If you owe the bank 100 billion dollars, the government has a problem.”

The old classic, right? Italy is just one big black hole of corruption, fraud, mafia, etc.

You may find it surprising, but the economy in Italy thrives mostly on small and medium companies which have been doing rather well in most sectors, and are not generally prone to corruption or fraud like the big monsters such as Parmalat or Fiat or you name it, which have always had their political and financial networks that covered their asses.

There’s a lot of problems in many areas of the economy, especially, as in the US, with the competition of non-democratic states exploiting their workforce in disregard of all basic rights and rules (all references to China and the like purely intentional) - but there’s still jobs to be got, and new companies being opened, and thriving sectors, because despite the politics, despite the big finance, there are still loads of people working their ass off and sticking by the rules. People who work. That’s what runs a country. Not those going from one ministers’ dinner to another, poor things.

In Italy, everything works “despite of” something else.

You might just want to get a fuller picture or actually know a bit more about Italy before you draw your slightly clich?d conclusions.

& I note with no surprise whatsoever that the writers of the Free Trade article are Reaganite politicians, not economists. You’re certainly right about slavery, not to mention industrial machinery, and also the traditional flow of ideas from developed to developing countries that the current bunch of US-inspired IP directives (which Europe’s leaders are just as guilty of backing, to be fair) are trying to cut off. In short, the argument is as fallacious as a fallacious thing.

Thanks for the kind comments on my blog, btw

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/06/opinion/06SCHU.html?ex=1074426804&ei=1&en=c43e5a850235bf4f

Wasn’t there a thing called slavery, or am I missing something? Obviously it isn’t only stalinists who rewrite history.

“and if you’ve got global operations then only a global accounting practice can audit them”.

All the more reason surely why a hell of a burden of responsibility falls on these companies. And equally, if they are so big, then they should be big enough to turn down dubious clients.

OK I know, I’m an idealist at heart. But, as I said, cynicism just leads to complacency.

Interesting detail how yet another of the big Marquee accounting names is stuck right in the middle, they must all now really have earned themselves a reputation for ‘quality’

Parmalat’s auditor, Grant Thornton, isn’t one of the traditional Big 5 (now 4, for reasons of Enrony) accounting firms - although it is currently the fifth largest.

And the reason why big corporate scandals always feature big accounting firms is because big global companies are effectively obliged to be audited by big accounting firms: having your books audited is a legal requirement, and if you’ve got global operations then only a global accounting practice can audit them.