<DIV>I'm a litigator -- the guy they call in when the transactional lawyers fail. But there are a lot more of the transactional lawyers who mainly finalize agreements and just do things people want done, like sell some real estate or arrange a merger. There are a lot fewer lawyers on my end of things, litigators, and even then most of the disputes don't involve failures of ethics but different understandings of agreements or questions about who is responsible when when and if someone was careless. Now it is true that in my practice I deal with a lot of allegations of fraud, mostly unmeritorious, or anyway unprovable, and I defend real crooks, white color as well as actual murderers, but I think that real crooks are about as (un)common among businessmen as among regular people. Unethical behavior is more common, but it's also more common among people who aren't businesspeople than criminal or downright crooked behavior. Carl Remick <carlremick@hotmail.com> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">>From: andie nachgeborenen <ANDIE_NACHGEBORENEN@YAHOO.COM> > >Actually, this is cheap cynicism that shows a mistaken grap of the nature >of markets and business activities. Business runs mainly on trust and >requires an fairly robust ethical standard. If it's all a cheat and and >sham, then any market system would collapse in very short order. Spoken like a true corporate lawyer. Chuck is right: There are no business ethics; business is what you can get away with. The fact that distrust is so universal in business dealings explains why there is such extensive demand for lawyers like yourself. Epidemic mutual suspicion among business people is your bread and butter, counselor. Carl >From: Chuck Grimes > >--------- > >No problem. > >The answer is there are no business ethics. > >There is no limit to, that is to say, there is no >greatest lower bound >on the indefinite interval of malfeasance, fraud, and >corruption by >and for the conduct of business except those imposed >in the completely >tangential formalism of the cost-benefit calculation >of litigating >them. > >What the fuck else is there to understand? > >Doktor Chuck > >^^^^^^^ > >CB: There is the One Commandment: "Thou shall make >money". > >******************************************************* > >And the way you do that is by hiring wage-slaves and >paying them less than the value of the commodities >(goods and services) they collective end up producing. > >"Thou shalt not steal." ???? > >Best, >Mike B) _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!? <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/10/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail/static/efficiency.html">New and Improved Yahoo! Mail</a> - Send 10MB messages!