Quote:
Originally Posted by The Yen Man
Money, members, same difference. The fact is, the CAs want to keep their status as top dogs, but bring the other two into their fold so they have a lot more members and thus more clout.
|
So we give ourselves more clout by bringing a ton more members that essentially dilute the prestige of our designation? Get real.
You think execs/boards will think the same of CPAs when every kid and his dog has one? Just because the CMAs/CGAs (CGAs moreso) have lax entry/designation criteria and can churn out members doesn't make them any more knowledgeable. They're the Russian army of the accounting world; just using sheer numbers to attack; but with only 1 of 5 soldiers actually getting a rifle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE SCUD
Still, I prefer to let the crap float to the top, I am pretty sure 99% of CGAs and 98% of CMAs have no interest in any macro economic power, they and their institute probably don't even know the address to the IASB  |
CGA's don't need the added stress of dealing with IASB or IFRS pronouncements; they already have enough to worry about trying to get their PA vouchers to balance or the smiley face to pop-up in Quicktax. (I kid).
Sadly Canada doesn't really have all that much pull when it comes to IASB anyways (think of all the pain getting those O&G amendments made before adoption) and we're only getting smaller on a global scale (with emerging economies overtaking us).