Part of the current financial problem is the SEC's acceptance of GAAP in its present form, the generally accepted accounting standards. 1. GAAP was invented by accountants for the protection of the accounting industry and preferred by the Wall Street firms which it services, IMO. 2. GAAP does not require full disclosure and thorough downside risk assesment. 3. GAAP does not require aggregate, much less an itemized lisitng of counterparties classed by counterparty credit ratings who hold securitized and unsecuritized obligations. 4. GAAP permits less than full specific itemization of current derivatives positions. 5. There appears to be less than adequate assessment of managment's estimates for derivative risk reserve set asides. 4. GAAP does not require timely mark to market estimates. 5. GAAP allows risk to be transferred off balance sheet. 6. Enron at the time of its collapse was in compliance with GAAP. Using GAAP financial statements, even the credit rating agencies have a less than stellar track record assesing current riskand valuation. Using GAPP financial statements it's difficult for analysts, much less the average investor to get a realistic handle on estimating value. For example, the current inability of anyone to place an accurate value on the financials. My view is that even though GAPP can technically be complied with, it can also be used by managment as a shield to hide behind if they choose to. When a company is bought out on Wall Street, an immense ammount of due dilligence must be preformed in order to accurately assess real value. So how can one ever expect to make judicial and informed investing decisions when relying on GAAP in it's present form? Comments?