Enron #3

1. What does Gladwell mean when he says that, 'Puzzles are "transmitter-dependent"; they turn on what we are told. Mysteries are "receiver dependent"; they turn on the skills of the listener.'?
He means that puzzles, which depend on the information and how much of it is given, are dependent on the source of the information, the "transmitter", whereas since mysteries, since we already have the information and just usually cannot interpret or understand it correctly, are more dependent on the skills of the receiver to solve the mystery.

2. Why didn't Enron have to pay taxes on their S.P.E.'s? What would be Enron's defense? Can you name the Illogical Fallacy present?
Enron didn't have to pay taxes because "the I.R.S. doesn't accept mark-to-market accounting; you pay tax on income when you actually receive that income" and since Enron wasn't actually having any real income coming in, the I.R.S. didn't think it was making any money and thus didn't tax it. Enron would probably just say that they "knew" they WOULD make that money for real, and when they did they could pay taxes, but right now they shouldn't have to pay the I.R.S. because they haven't actually attained the money yet.
This fallacy is called Special Pleading/Double Standard, when someone/a party thinks everyone else should have to follow the regulations except for themselves, because they have an excuse.

3. Did Enron try to hide the fact that they weren't paying taxes?
Enron did not try to hide that fact, or really much of anything, they just didn't flash it out in the open, and nobody bothered to ask the questions and actually read Enron's documents and financial statements that would clearly show what they were doing.

4. Why does Gladwell claim that, 'Woodward and Bernstein would never have broken the Enron story.' Why don't you think anyone asked about Enron's financial statements? Is there a fallacy at work here?
Because they were just young kids with no experience, who had the type of energy and persistence necessary for solving a puzzle, when you need to uncover missing information, but this was a mystery that required "experience and insight" to understand the complex financial statements.
Probably the reason nobody asked about Enron's dealings is that there wasn't a lot of evidence yet to show they were sinking themselves, and not a lot of people -if anybody- knew that the money Enron claimed to be making wasn't actually real. To me this seems like the Ad Ignoratium fallacy, where because there was no proof known (UNDERSTOOD) by outsiders, they didn't think to accuse Enron of the real problem.

5. Gladwell claims that, 'Mysteries require that we revisit our list of culprits and be willing to spread the blame a little more broadly. Because if you can't find the truth in a —even a mystery shrouded in propaganda—it's not just the fault of the propagandist. It's your fault as well.' Do you agree with the implications of this statement?
I agree to some extent because With puzzles, it can be that the company or whoever the offending party is is hiding information from us that we cannot find out because we are not inside that party (for example, if Enron had NOT reported their financial deals on paper, no one else could report it for them because only Enron has that information), but in the case of a mystery, when we have the information available to us, it is our job to ask questions and actually LOOK at the information and if necessary learn how to read/interpret it. If we don't do this, as no one did at first for Enron, we are partially to blame for the situation at hand. However, I think in areas or situations where people may not be as educated or have as many opportunities open to them to investigate such a thing as Enron's financial documents (for example, living under a strict government where it is illegal to interfere with corrupt companies or whatever), it is not the people's fault if they are not aware or can do nothing to solve the mystery or stop the corruption.

6. What was the advice of the Cornell students to anyone who held Enron stock?
Their advice was "Sell." They believed Enron's stock values were too high because they weren't actually making all their claimed earnings, so the students thought, logically, it would not be wise to hold stock in such a company that really isn't worth all it says it is and will probably go down the tubes soon...