The trouble with double-entry...

[Robert Uhl]

TC <tc at emailetc.co.uk> writes:
>
> > > Now here's where I screw with 700 years of accounting tradition.
> >
> > That's where you should take a step back and reconsider.  It's the
> > height of hubris for me to think that I know better than centuries
> > of men (I happen to think so quite often, but that's because I'm a
> > pompous git...).  If folks have been doing it for so long, it's
> > highly probable that there's a good reason for it, although of
> > course there may not be.
> 
> Interesting philosophy.  And so where do you think we'd be today then,
> if certain Italian merchants, 500 years ago, had followed your advice,
> not said "yah booh sucks!" to *their* elders, and hadn't come up with
> Double Entry book-keeping?

I did note that there might _not_ be a good reason to stick with
something.  But the odds aren't on one's side.  Neophilia is a worse
vice than neophobia IMNSHO.

-- 
Robert Uhl <http://public.xdi.org/=ruhl>
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the
poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal
bread.                                          --Anatole France