RE: Sarbanes-Oxley / my opinion

>Is this supposed to identify animals that have crossed the Mexican
>border?

No, this is every farm animal in the US, including horses, cattle,
pigs, chickens, ducks, turkeys, llamas, catfish, and etc... have got
to have a radio frequency ID (RFID) tag and/or microchip and the
owner has to report within 24 hours any birth, death, or movement of
the animals from the property which also has a premsis (a GPS postion
and 911 address) Id number.  

The same questions can be asked of it, that are being asked about SOX.

It does not prevent anything from happening... It is re-action not
pro-action. Adds more cost and paper work...  Add gives more control
to the governing agency...

I know it is off topic but I just wanted to voice my observations.

If anyone wishes to check it out... check the USDA web site
www.usda.gov/nais  and www.nonais.org or www.stopanimalid.org  

Eurrat


---- Original Message ----
From: M1C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Sarbanes-Oxley / my opinion
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 19:09:02 -0500

>
>Is this supposed to identify animals that have crossed the Mexican
>border?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>endofthetrail@xxxxxxxxxxx
>Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 1:30 PM
>To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: Sarbanes-Oxley / my opinion
>
>
>>I suppose my three immediate questions would be:
>>1. What is SOX intended to prevent?
>>2. How effective is it at actually enforcing what it's intended to
>>prevent?
>>3. What are the new methods of circumventing it?
>
>This is SOOO funny, not Ha Ha funny, but because it is so similar to
>the NAIS (National Animal Id System) stuff that the "government" is
>trying to push onto the farmers in the name of security.
>
>They want to put radio freq tags on every animal in the nation.  It
>does not prevent anything, it is a reaction tool, and adds cost.  The
>same questions apply.
>
>Eurrat
>
>---- Original Message ----
>From: M1C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: Sarbanes-Oxley / my opinion
>Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:08:16 -0500
>
>>
>>I suppose my three immediate questions would be:
>>1. What is SOX intended to prevent?
>>2. How effective is it at actually enforcing what it's intended to
>>prevent?
>>3. What are the new methods of circumventing it?
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Milt Habeck
>>Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 11:30 AM
>>To: Midrange technical discussion group
>>Subject: Sarbanes-Oxley / my opinion
>>
>>
>>Dear Mark,
>>
>>Your  'SOX and BRMS'  post last week has encouraged me 
>>to share my personal point of view about SOX.  
>>
>>In my opinion, Sarbanes-Oxley compliance doesn't require an 
>>enterprise to do anything that good business practice did not 
>>already require a couple of decades ago. SOX just requires that 
>>external auditors do a more thorough job looking for 
>>distinctions between world class business practice and how a 
>>company actually operates ... and ... it requires that the auditors 
>>report those distinctions for review by investors.
>>
>>It's not clear how well the "report-it-to-the-investors" part of 
>>the legislation is working. If anyone knows of an annual report
>>that has included a SOX-type complaint in an audit letter, 
>>please tell me more about it. If annual reports of that genre
>>can't be found, then we're left with two hypotheses:
>>
>>  1. Thousands of publicly traded companies are doing a great 
>>      job running their business with sound internal control
>>      regimens in all functional areas (including IS). 
>>
>>  2. The fear of annoying a client and not being invited to
>>      perform next year's audit has proved to be more compelling 
>>      than the fear of failing to observe the letter of
>>Sarbanes-Oxley. 
>>
>>      [Quite candidly, it's hard to believe hypothesis #1 given the 
>>       testimonies I've personally heard from managers across a 
>>       broad cross section of manufacturing industries.]
>>
>>Long before SOX was invented, pharmaceutical companies
>>had much more demanding business practice requirements imposed
>>by the FDA. If your enterprise could get system-certified under
>>FDA's 21 CFR part 11 rules, SOX would be a cake-walk. 
>>
>>There are several other IT compliance requirements that pre-date
>>SOX and here's a link to information about the better known ones:
>>http://www.unbeatenpathintl.com/ITstandards/source/1.html 
>>
>>You mention BRMS (Business Rule Management System) 
>>software and that genre of tool can help an enterprise develop 
>>and maintain operational policies. But, it's not going to help much 
>>if the purchaser doesn't already grasp what world-class business 
>>practices are supposed to look like. 
>>
>>   Without that intellectual property, the final deliverable won't
>>   help improve the quality of operations any more than many of 
>>   the ISO 900x policy books I've seen. (I'm referring to the 
>>   "just-write-down-what-we-are-already-doing-so-we-can-pass-
>>   the-ISO-audit-ASAP" type efforts.)
>>
>>
>>Warm regards,
>>
>>Milt Habeck
>>Founder/President
>>Unbeaten Path International
>>
>>www.upisox.com  
>>(888) 874-8008
>>
>>"Unbeaten Path is in the business of 
>>  helping enterprises move towards 
>>        world class performance"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>+++++++   +++++++   +++++++   +++++++   +++++++   +++++++
>>From: "Mark Allen" <scprideandms@xxxxxxxxx>
>>To:midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:45:59 
>>Subject: SOX and BRMS saves of Application data and Objects
>>
>>Looking for some ideas from somebody who's been thru this or at
>least
>>part
>>of it.  I know a little about BRMS and not even sure "what" the SOX
>>Compliance people MIGHT be looking for.  I know this is vague but
>its
>>all I
>>got for now. just looking for some general ideas.
>>
>>Thanks, also feel free to respond off list. 
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
>>mailing
>>list
>>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
>>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
>>mailing list
>>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
>>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
>mailing
>list
>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>
>
>-- 
>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
>mailing list
>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>