Chief Justice says: "Greed Works Most of the Time"
-
what goes through my mind? greed is pervasive in singapore!Originally posted by maurizio13:What goes through your mind when you hear a Chief Justice say "Greed Works Most of the Time" in a Legal Forum??? -
Chief Justice says: "Greed Works Most of the Time"
He oredi give u a hint, Singapore will become corrupted sooner and later. Just prepare some money to bribe them when the time come. u will be free to go. Just kidding. Hahaha -
Money makes the world go round. People are working and investing for $$$. Or else why do we need to study? The increasing importance of $$$ causes greed.
-
so greed does work ya? as i've mentioned oft enough, greed doesn't care about consequence...imagine the greedy lawyer wanting to charge $150k for something that insignificant....and the cj is now finding it 'troubling'....lol
-
In A victory for the common man, a primary school teacher has won a long drawn battle over $120,000 in legal costs which arose over a $60 dispute.
Apparently he changed his mind or contradicted himself.
.
The Court of Appeal ruled yesterday that Jonathan Lock (picture), 35, will not have to pay the exorbitant sum, most of it to his former lawyer Andrew Hanam.
.
Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, one of three judges who heard the appeal, also directed the Law Society to determine if an inquiry is needed to look into Mr Hanam's conduct in handling Mr Lock's case.
.
In the Court's grounds of decision, CJ Chan said: "This is an incredible case. We've not seen one like it in all our years in the law. It has brought no credit to counsel involved and the legal system as a whole."
. -
He was probably trying to imply that 'Greed works most of the time, But not this time.."Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Apparently he changed his mind or contradicted himself.
-
Far from it. Greed is what drives innovation and entrepreneurship....but every lawyer knows that it must be done within the boundaries of the law. Those who want to have a comfortable, safe job and knock off at 6pm everyday has no business becoming rich.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Apparently he changed his mind or contradicted himself.
Go read 'Poor dad, rich dad'. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Far from it. Greed is what drives innovation and entrepreneurship....but every lawyer knows that it must be done within the boundaries of the law. Those who want to have a comfortable, safe job and knock off at 6pm everyday has no business becoming rich.
Go read 'Poor dad, rich dad'. 
How do you account for the fact that the two riches men in the world at the moment are also arguable the biggest philanthropists the world has ever seen.Money is so hard to give away - Lessons from Bill Gates and Warren Buffet
Obviously the fact that they become the world's richest, by their acts of charity, they did not become rich because of greed but from a much higher motivation. Greed destroys people and money that comes from greed can never satisfy as well as money that comes from doing a decent day's work or building a successful enterprise.
Heard @ a dinner address tonight :
Bill Gates amassed such a fortune which at one time was valued at almost US$100billion.
When one such as Bill comes to such a level, you can only imagine that money starts to lose itÂ’s meaning.
So what did Bill decide to do as the worldÂ’s richest man?
Give it all away, and got his mum, dad, and rest of his entire family to help him do it.
And boy did he find out that itÂ’s so hard to give money away properly! As in giving it to the right cause and making sure that it will be used rightly with minimal wastage. ItÂ’s definitely easier for Bill to make money instead of giving it away!
Otherwise LKY would be the happiest person in the world. Is he, obviously not, he just despicably decided to take even more public money when there are so many suffering in this society!
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, giving away their own money, and LKY? Taking MORE public money. -
One of the cyber counter agents at the other site has posted the news of the Curry Puff hawker in Yishun as if all hawkers are earning big monies and ministers are underpaid and should be allowed to take more from the tax coffer.
This is only to be expected as what we have is a system where our ministers and top civil servants like Chief Justice seem to have no compunction in taking tax payers' monies by wrongful means like making biased comparison with the successful hawkers or stock brokers or estate agents.
People must expect them to continue to publicise news like the curry puff hawkers who make tons of monies indirectly implying that ministers are not earning enough and people should allow them to plunder into reserves and surpluses to take their own salaries of any amounts in order to match these hawkers.
The Chief Justice in giving his legal officers the latest salary increases and bonuses is doing the same. He would rather keep quiet about the many legal officers who are laid back and not deserving their higher pays and concentrate in talking about those who are getting higher salaries in the private sector.
We can expect our morality to go the same way of our public servants and ministers with this kind of self-taking of own salaries going on ad nausem.
When citizens are not even earning enough to pay for the necessities and utilities or transportation, we are seeing ministers and top civil servants taking away their monies with all the excuses and half-truths that private sector people are doing well.
Can they really like the curry puff hawkers create employments for the people who are underpaid or unemployed?
Can they stop importing cheap foreign labors to come in and take away their jobs or take away their retirement monies and pretend to be giving them back only after they are dead or near dead.
It is sad that all our leaders and top public servants are now getting from bad to worse behaving in this manner. Yet the Chief Justice being our legal and moral custodian cannot see it is wrong for them to take tax payers' monies using falsehood in this blatant manner. It is a case of wrong being portrayed as right through use of power and position.
The hawkers at least earn their monies honestly with their efforts, and entrepreneurship unlike those who use power to take their own salary increases and bonuses and annuities from the public tax payers' surpluses squeezed from the people with artful and unsubstantiated comparison which is a much bigger crime deserved to be punished by firing squad.
That is why once the leaders become greedy and envious of what curry puff makers are earning they will eventually lose their morality and can no longer govern with respect and support of the people.
How can the president being people's moral guardian sing poetry about the placid negara when this sort of misuse of power is happening ? -
....
TS is such a sensitive ...
Our honourable CJ is merely speaking the truth; would you rather he lie and propose not a practical solution?
Mind you, the legal community loves and supports our CJ. He is a man of brilliance and on par with his predecessor.
Don't read too deeply into what he says - that's what judges do; they lay the facts bare for all to see, and then come to a decision based on past precedents, community standards and policy.
Here, our honour has laid for us:
Bare fact = Firms overseas offer a much better remuneration package for junior lawyers (whereas here, real $$$ only starts coming in once you make partner - especially in the larger firms such as A&G, D&N, Rodyk).
Decision (not exactly, but as a generic term) = Firms should offer more so that we stop losing our legal talents to other countries, like HK.
Ratio = Ah I'm too lazy to type everything out - go read and figure.
Funny how globalisation works yea - we have heaps of Chinese come into Singapore as labourers, yet we lose our finest to them. Not just lawyers too, doctors, architects, artists, bankers etc. - this issue arises all the time: why is it our talents are always leaving? -
Greed is everywhere, not just in SG. What the CJ said expressed a universal truth about human nature that we all want to deny!Originally posted by lotus999:what goes through my mind? greed is pervasive in singapore!
In every situation and circumstance I come across, there is hardly one that is not driven by greed. Greed is a greater manifestation of self, and hence selfishness. Greed is the desire to want more, and more for oneself. -
I can't see the linkage here! Greed is in every human nature. Have you not even seen a young child or even baby refusing to share?Originally posted by 4getmenot:He was probably trying to imply that 'Greed works most of the time, But not this time.."
Let's be upfront: this is one human weakness that pervates all communities not just SG, or judiciary, or whatever linkages you want to make out of. That is nothing more than just projection - that is avoiding/denying your own shortcoming and instead pointing at another. -
They are LAWYERS for fark's sake ....
what can you expect ? ......
you think they went to law school to help the poor and innocent get justice ? ... or the $80000 they can charge for a hundred dollar lawsuit ? ....
that's why Law is the only parasitic profession in the society ... in any society ... -
While greed is in every human, it does not mean the negative. Greed simply means wanting more and more for oneself. Without this trait, society will be very laid back, no one wants to achieve or doing anything.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Far from it. Greed is what drives innovation and entrepreneurship....but every lawyer knows that it must be done within the boundaries of the law. Those who want to have a comfortable, safe job and knock off at 6pm everyday has no business becoming rich.
Go read 'Poor dad, rich dad'. -
Greed (eating as much as possible) leads to obesity.
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
Ah, but everyone fails to see the disciplinary proceeding coming that lawyer's way. He's going to have to account to the CJ himself.
They are [b]LAWYERS for fark's sake ....
what can you expect ? ......
you think they went to law school to help the poor and innocent get justice ? ... or the $80000 they can charge for a hundred dollar lawsuit ? ....
that's why Law is the only parasitic profession in the society ... in any society ...
[/b]
I've been witness to more than one of these, and what happens behind those closed doors the public seldom knows - it is harsh and the punishment is often disproportionate; all in the name of upholding the repute of our legal community's integrity. -
hahaha, I disagree. You seemed to have a grudge more than greed!Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Obviously the fact that they become the world's richest, by their acts of charity, they did not become rich because of greed but from a much higher motivation. Greed destroys people and money that comes from greed can never satisfy as well as money that comes from doing a decent day's work or building a successful enterprise.
Otherwise LKY would be the happiest person in the world. Is he, obviously not, he just despicably decided to take even more public money when there are so many suffering in this society!
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, giving away their own money, and LKY? Taking MORE public money.
Both Bill and Warren are greedy but not necessarily in negative ways. If they were not, then it is quite impossible for them to accumulate riches, and then donate. These are wiser people than the rest but it does not mean they were not greedy. Greed is the driving force for their successes to beat or run-down competitors, to achieve good returns on investments, and so forth.
Again, I find you linkages hard to fathom. -
it's just an old boy's club ... the purpose is to restrict and regulate entry so that existing members can continue driving mercs and raking in millions a year .... nothing else ....Originally posted by rmyfrm:Ah, but everyone fails to see the disciplinary proceeding coming that lawyer's way. He's going to have to account to the CJ himself.
I've been witness to more than one of these, and what happens behind those closed doors the public seldom knows - it is harsh and the punishment is often disproportionate; all in the name of upholding the repute of our legal community's integrity.
other professions do it too ... the engineers, the doctors ...
but of course ... the other professions actually produces something of value ... engineers build and make things, doctors heal ......
law is an artificial construct that enables society to function ... but lawyers have turned this construct into a hindrance and an obstacle for the common masses .... -
True, obesity is the accumulation of FAT, the desire to want more and more of FAT for oneself!Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Greed (eating as much as possible) leads to obesity. -
I disagree. I believe law is crucial as a facilitator of society. Otherwise, anarchy would rule the land (a somewhat ironic statement) and chaos ensue. Let us not forget that legislative development is but one aspect; like how doctors maintain the health of their patients, lawyers exist to maintain and regulate (through purposive contest) the rights of individuals co-existing together in a community.Originally posted by Fatum:it's just an old boy's club ... the purpose is to restrict and regulate entry so that existing members can continue driving mercs and raking in millions a year .... nothing else ....
other professions do it too ... the engineers, the doctors ...
but of course ... the other professions actually produces something of value ... engineers build and make things, doctors heal ......
law is an artificial construct that enables society to function ... but lawyers have turned this construct into a hindrance and an obstacle for the common masses ....
I fail to see how law has become a hindrance/obstacle.
Rather, may I counter-argue that lawyers do not initiate proceedings on their own but always act upon the instructions of clients (which of course, depends on the advice given by the lawyers themselves - not exactly circular). If anything, it is others that are a problem for the rest. -
if you're a lawyer bro, I apologize to you .... as you see by now, yes, I am no big fan of lawyers ...Originally posted by rmyfrm:I disagree. I believe law is crucial as a facilitator of society. Otherwise, anarchy would rule the land (a somewhat ironic statement) and chaos ensue. Let us not forget that legislative development is but one aspect; like how doctors maintain the health of their patients, lawyers exist to maintain and regulate (through purposive contest) the rights of individuals co-existing together in a community.
I fail to see how law has become a hindrance/obstacle.
Rather, may I counter-argue that lawyers do not initiate proceedings on their own but always act upon the instructions of clients (which of course, depends on the advice given by the lawyers themselves - not exactly circular). If anything, it is others that are a problem for the rest.
if you read my post again, you'd see that I did state that law is important for society to function .... it is the practitioners of this profession that I don't like .... and it's not just those who charge $80000 for hundred dollar lawsuits and ambulance chasers either ...
of course, lawyers act only on the behalf of their clients ... but if the clients knows about the law, would they need lawyers then ? ...
so ... it's a matter of taking your lawyer's word for it, no ? ... and who's to know when they have been short changed ? ... what if the chap was not charged $80000 .... but $40000 .... but overcharged all the same ? ... what if he just meekly paid up, in the way most Singaporeans swallow shit from their goverment, and no alarm bells went off ? ...
if an engineer was negligent, buildings falls apart, tunnels collapses, cars break down, other engineers would descend upon him and tear him apart ... if a doctor conks out a patient, autopsies would make sure he never gets to kill another person again .... can the law profession offer such gurantees ? ... you may think so ... I would not ... -
No need to apologise; constructive debate and purposive dissent makes for improvement resulting in common good. In any case, no one likes lawyers; it's ok, I have come to terms with that. Only stupid young kids think it's a glamorous profession, with all their ideals about saving the world ... ooh are they in for a world of hurt if they get admitted into law school. Speaking of which, kids these days, really full of shit; especially those that dress like hippies and sport Macbooks, Ipods and speak 1/2 assed French.Originally posted by Fatum:if you're a lawyer bro, I apologize to you .... as you see by now, yes, I am no big fan of lawyers ...
if you read my post again, you'd see that I did state that law is important for society to function .... it is the practitioners of this profession that I don't like .... and it's not just those who charge $80000 for hundred dollar lawsuits and ambulance chasers either ...
of course, lawyers act only on the behalf of their clients ... but if the clients knows about the law, would they need lawyers then ? ...
so ... it's a matter of taking your lawyer's word for it, no ? ... and who's to know when they have been short changed ? ... what if the chap was not charged $80000 .... but $40000 .... but overcharged all the same ? ... what if he just meekly paid up, in the way most Singaporeans swallow shit from their goverment, and no alarm bells went off ? ...
if an engineer was negligent, buildings falls apart, tunnels collapses, cars break down, other engineers would descend upon him and tear him apart ... if a doctor conks out a patient, autopsies would make sure he never gets to kill another person again .... can the law profession offer such gurantees ? ... you may think so ... I would not ...
You'll be surprised at how strictly the Law Society handles professional negligence - an example: lawyer was specifically told by client not to make payment before a certain date; the lawyer made payment the day before that date; the lawyer was debarred and banned from practice for 2 years.
There are practical reasons why attention is not drawn to disciplinary offences/proceedings; faith must always be had in the integrity of the legal system, and it's practitioners - without this, the very foundations of justice and consequently, society, could collapse.
People remember professional negligence by doctors/engineers more frequently because the implications of their actions are larger in that the direct consequence can result in life/death. Hence, the adoration by the media. On the other hand, professional negligence by lawyers very often, at most, result in economic loss - which while initially shocking, fades with time. Even the biggest legal crook (in my opinion), Glenn Knight, has been forgiven with the passage of time.
Further, generally, lawyers are more conscious of their mistakes (or foresight as to their inability) - in law school, professional negligence is instilled and reinforced as it can literally destroy a career (and life).
All I seek is to defend the profession and my community; let it not be condemned in entirety because of the failings of a few. No doubt I hide behind a moniker but isn't that the attraction that draws us all to forums in the first place?
-
thanks you for your post ...Originally posted by rmyfrm:No need to apologise; constructive debate and purposive dissent makes for improvement resulting in common good. In any case, no one likes lawyers; it's ok, I have come to terms with that. Only stupid young kids think it's a glamorous profession, with all their ideals about saving the world ... ooh are they in for a world of hurt if they get admitted into law school. Speaking of which, kids these days, really full of shit; especially those that dress like hippies and sport Macbooks, Ipods and speak 1/2 assed French.
You'll be surprised at how strictly the Law Society handles professional negligence - an example: lawyer was specifically told by client not to make payment before a certain date; the lawyer made payment the day before that date; the lawyer was debarred and banned from practice for 2 years.
There are practical reasons why attention is not drawn to disciplinary offences/proceedings; faith must always be had in the integrity of the legal system, and it's practitioners - without this, the very foundations of justice and consequently, society, could collapse.
People remember professional negligence by doctors/engineers more frequently because the implications of their actions are larger in that the direct consequence can result in life/death. Hence, the adoration by the media. On the other hand, professional negligence by lawyers very often, at most, result in economic loss - which while initially shocking, fades with time. Even the biggest legal crook (in my opinion), Glenn Knight, has been forgiven with the passage of time.
Further, generally, lawyers are more conscious of their mistakes (or foresight as to their inability) - in law school, professional negligence is instilled and reinforced as it can literally destroy a career (and life).
All I seek is to defend the profession and my community; let it not be condemned in entirety because of the failings of a few. No doubt I hide behind a moniker but isn't that the attraction that draws us all to forums in the first place?
however ... the mental image of the unscrupulous, rapacious lawyer is not something that can be easily erased from my mind easily ... nothing personal of course, my lawyer friends have come to terms with me greeting them bloodsuckers all the time ...
the comments by our CJ, in whatever context, doesn't help matters, the previous CJ's penchant for upping the sentences of appealers doesn't help, $80000 lawsuits, even though they may be the exception, rather than the rule, doesn't help ... lawyers who abscond with their client's money, leaving wives and partners in the lurch, doesn't help .... and let's not even talk about the relationship between local politics and the law here, those bits belongs to the jokes and humour forum perhaps, if they were not so disheartening ....
you see, unlike other professions, law demands not just the skills of it's practitioners, but it places a lot of burden on the moral fibre and integrity as well ... a doctor can be a prick, but you can trust him to heal you ... an engineer can be an asshole, but if his equations are correct, it doesn't matter ... but it's different for lawyers ... and that's why I find comments of the sort being discussed here deeply disturbing ....
some may call me an idealist (which I am ... ) ... some may call it but a reflection of the society we live in now ..... but should people be comfortable with that ? ... I'm not ... I think we should all be sad that we don't even bother paying lip service to the high principles of certain professions anymore, and admit that material goals are the main motivator ...
perhaps something has gone very wrong with our society ....