Do we really need more lawyers, and accountants ?
-
In the 1992 there was a 'cap' place on the numbers of legal beagles wannabes.Originally posted by Jontst78:Actually I acredit the mindsets to the education system in the 70s and 80s, even to the early 90s.
At that time, during the industrialization, along with the booming shipyard industry (apart from the recession in the 80s). Engineers were in high demand. Hence, if you notice, the education system at that time (even evident today) had a very strong grounding in Maths and Science. Even in the Uni at that time, Arts and social sciences were seen as dumping grounds during the 80s. Art students in secondary schools at the time, were stereotyped to be less academically inclined. Conformity was the aim at that time, which resulted in less creativity. The workforce today, is made of students of that era. Just my take.
External law degrees were deemed not good enough for a legal career here.
This led to a situation that only NUS was producing law graduates. From this pool, some abandoned their calling for a less hetic lifestyle. Which led to a shortage of lawyers. Which inturn led to the opening up to foreign lawyers to practice here, and now "opening the doors wider".
The 'cap' was actually touted to raise the standard of law graduates, but I suspect it was in retalliation to the rising number of such graduates harrassing the government in the elections at that time. -
EQ is missing from the whole equation of our system of government. So there is always the lack of understanding of simple issue in terms of serving the needs and aspirations of the people.
Lawyers are trained to fight the opponents with counter-arguments and hypocrisy to dismiss people's problems including the real problems, They do not care for truths. They only care to win their own case.
The whole society is messed up by the lawyers even as lawyers are required to perform certain limited functions for trade and commerce to go on smoothly. Their role of society can be described as ambivalent with good and evil all rolled up in one bundle.
Our leaders are mostly lawyers at the top echelon so they cannot really see themselves people causing big problems in governing the country. They mess up the people because by nature of their training they are supposed to fight people without regard for justice depending on which side they happen to be engaged for.
We as a people are getting messed up and divided into fighting one another. It is difficult to build a nation because of too many lawyers being engaged in top places of society. There is a lot of problems and there is a real big problem with building nationhood and consensus with people disputing and suing one another because of lawyers governing the country.
Lesser lawyers should therefore be employed for the government as they have a tendency to imagine problems and provide the wrong policies or solutions which at the end are hurting the people.
We need more scientists and engineers and technologists and knowledge applications to serve the people to create jobs and solve our many problems like rising costs of living and upgrading our social and community landscape. -
Your statement is wrong.Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:The prospect will be good, if you stay in one company long enough.
Your prospect is good if other companies want to compete with another for your skills and experience.
Gone was the saying a rolling stone gathers no moss ....now the new saying is that a rolling stone gathers alot of moss .
Companies are now more loyal to their profit margin than their employees. -
Only when there is a lot of training in diverse areas can there be real tests of skills and competence. The Japanese Mangement System exposes the employees to whole areas of training. If our local companies cannot provide such training then the only way for an employee to upgrade is to move and gather more moss.Originally posted by fymk:Your statement is wrong.
Your prospect is good if other companies want to compete with another for your skills and experience.
Gone was the saying a rolling stone gathers no moss ....now the new saying is that a rolling stone gathers alot of moss .
Companies are now more loyal to their profit margin than their employees. -
I don't think that is the problem .Originally posted by robertteh:EQ is missing from the whole equation of our system of government. So there is always the lack of understanding of simple issue in terms of serving the needs and aspirations of the people.
Lawyers are trained to fight the opponents with counter-arguments and hypocrisy to dismiss people's problems including the real problems, They do not care for truths. They only care to win their own case.
The whole society is messed up by the lawyers even as lawyers are required to perform certain limited functions for trade and commerce to go on smoothly. Their role of society can be described as ambivalent with good and evil all rolled up in one bundle.
Our leaders are mostly lawyers at the top echelon so they cannot really see themselves people causing big problems in governing the country. They mess up the people because by nature of their training they are supposed to fight people without regard for justice depending on which side they happen to be engaged for.
We as a people are getting messed up and divided into fighting one another. It is difficult to build a nation because of too many lawyers being engaged in top places of society. There is a lot of problems and there is a real big problem with building nationhood and consensus with people disputing and suing one another because of lawyers governing the country.
Lesser lawyers should therefore be employed for the government as they have a tendency to imagine problems and provide the wrong policies or solutions which at the end are hurting the people.
We need more scientists and engineers and technologists and knowledge applications to serve the people to create jobs and solve our many problems like rising costs of living and upgrading our social and community landscape.
From chatting with most Singaporean students in Australia, most of these students are ingrained with the thought that if they choose a particular route , they have to stick to that route. So everything else is an additional burden and not within their job scope.
Hence if they cannot get anything within their job scope , they are "not good enough" for another industry and don't want to "waste time" to even try . That was the naive mentality I felt from those who came straight from Singapore to study overseas or work.
Most of the Australians take anything from their working and schooling experience to boost up their CV while I had to listen to some of my dear Singaporean friends stating that they don't want to put anything "unrelated" to their " job scope" even though their skills were transferable.
They boxed themselves into their discipline to the point that I really cringed. It is the Singaporean culture of conformity - can't blame it on government totally but can't say it is not partly their fault either. -
The Japanese culture demands that they work from bottom up and Japan has a very conformist culture ( almost robotic) , even more so than Singapore . It is not something that I can envisage for Singaporeans.Originally posted by robertteh:Only when there is a lot of training in diverse areas can there be real tests of skills and competence. The Japanese Mangement System exposes the employees to whole areas of training. If our local companies cannot provide such training then the only way for an employee to upgrade is to move and gather more moss. -
I can see your point that Singaporeans have been conditioned into a box and they cannot think out of the box.Originally posted by fymk:I don't think that is the problem .
From chatting with most Singaporean students in Australia, most of these students are ingrained with the thought that if they choose a particular route , they have to stick to that route. So everything else is an additional burden and not within their job scope.
Hence if they cannot get anything within their job scope , they are "not good enough" for another industry. That was the naive mentality I felt from those who came straight from Singapore to study overseas or work.
Most of the Australians take anything from their working and schooling experience to boost up their CV while I had to listen to some of my dear Singaporean friends stating that they don't want to put anything "unrelated" to their " job scope" even though their skills were transferable.
They boxed themselves into their discipline to the point that I really cringed. It is the Singaporean culture of conformity - can't blame it on government totally but can't say it is not partly their fault either.
There is a big box they are placed in also - lawyers are needed to solve problems or govern the country. If we come out of the lawyers' box there is another bigger box where the whole country can be planned to live and work together and strive to support one another in community and social togetherness but the lawyer box has been too big for most people to get out now. -
Frankly as much as I do not like the ruling party policies, I cannot assign the fault as a 100% to the government in regards to being boxed in.Originally posted by robertteh:I can see your point that Singaporeans have been conditioned into a box and they cannot think out of the box.
There is a big box they are placed in also - lawyers are needed to solve problems or govern the country. If we come out of the lawyers' box there is another bigger box where the whole country can be planned to live and work together and strive to support one another in community and social togetherness but the lawyer box has been too big for most people to get out now.
Singaporeans need to take ownership of what they think, not to trust so much "good news" and what they should do to get to where they want long term as well as short term. Is it really worth it to get an upgrade to bring up the 99 year lease property or is it better to cut one losses and opt for a government that truly cares?
No government will serve everyone's interest ,so either you find a way to get through to the system (aka vote them out) or get out of the system. -
There is a proactive box and the reactive box as well. By choosing the proactive mode the government can govern with greater imagination with higher level of success.Originally posted by fymk:Frankly as much as I do not like the ruling party policies, I cannot assign the fault as a 100% to the government in regards to being boxed in.
Singaporeans need to take ownership of what they think, not to trust so much "good news" and what they should do to get to where they want long term as well as short term. Is it really worth it to get an upgrade to bring up the 99 year lease property or is it better to cut one losses and opt for a government that truly cares?
No government will serve everyone's interest ,so either you find a way to get through to the system (aka vote them out) or get out of the system.
By choosing the reactive mode they will continue to govern like in the past - keep talking of their past glories. Actually by adopting the proactive mode they could recognize society's problems and come up with objectives and introduce pro-people and progressive solutions with diverse strategies to solve problems.
By the reactive approach they will continue to deny or come up with excuses like people must change their mindset and not talk about their own roles duties and responsibilities despite claiming to be the first-world leaders. -
ah but the ballot box also keeps them in power.Originally posted by robertteh:There is a proactive box and the reactive box as well. By choosing the proactive mode the government can govern with greater imagination with higher level of success.
By choosing the reactive mode they will continue to govern like in the past - keep talking of their past glories. Actually by adopting the proactive mode they could recognize society's problems and come up with objectives and introduce pro-people and progressive solutions with diverse strategies to solve problems.
By the reactive approach they will continue to deny or come up with excuses like people must change their mindset and not talk about their own roles duties and responsibilities despite claiming to be the first-world leaders. -
Yes the GRC box and defamation law (trumped up by having too many lawyers in government) seem to keep them in power for forever.Originally posted by fymk:ah but the ballot box also keeps them in power. -
Lawyers are trained to fight the opponents with counter-arguments and hypocrisy to dismiss people's problems including the real problems, They do not care for truths. They only care to win their own case.
Isn't the way to ascertain truth is through debating and convincing
if u feel tat is not the truth, then how to ascertain truth ? Isn't the whole legal system of the whole world wrong then ? -
What you say is right except that when it comes to deciding on mistakes caused by the leaders' policies they will not want or welcome such two-way debates and say let's move on.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Isn't the way to ascertain truth is through debating and convincing if u feel tat is not the truth, then how to ascertain truth ? Isn't the whole legal system of the whole world wrong then ? -
You must know how lawyers argue - they go on technicalities and loopholes. So you need to avoid the technicalities and loophole to speak to the masses and harness the power of the ballot box.Originally posted by robertteh:Yes the GRC box and defamation law (trumped up by having too many lawyers in government) seem to keep them in power for forever.
Otherwise it is pointless.
Why there are so many lawyers? Because lawyering requires alot of convincing orations . To be a politician , you must be able to orate well to the public. Elections are won by speeches and promises , not by actions alone. -
A lot of politicians in the world r lawyers. Lets just face it... furthermore there is nothing wrong with lawyers being politicians. An important portfolio of politician is to be able to speak well and argue well. Another relevant profession is fiancial prof since they know how to run economy.
Knowing more about how the body work or how a motor run does not help much -
But that does not mean that you cannot make a contribution.Originally posted by stupidissmart:A lot of politicians in the world r lawyers. Lets just face it... furthermore there is nothing wrong with lawyers being politicians. An important portfolio of politician is to be able to speak well and argue well. Another relevant profession is fiancial prof since they know how to run economy.
Knowing more about how the body work or how a motor run does not help much
Lawyers are good for oration but alot of them need to consult experts in specific fields to argue their case.
-
There is nothing wrong with lawyers becoming politicians except when they start getting into their heads that they make good politicians or creme de la creme of politicians.Originally posted by stupidissmart:A lot of politicians in the world r lawyers. Lets just face it... furthermore there is nothing wrong with lawyers being politicians. An important portfolio of politician is to be able to speak well and argue well. Another relevant profession is fiancial prof since they know how to run economy.
Knowing more about how the body work or how a motor run does not help much
There is nothing wrong actually for citizens to support the government except when they started to become arrogant claiming to be always right, denying mistakes like NKF or failure to be accountable for Shin Corp losses or the best or world's best worth to be paid millions of salaries.