Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 9733)

80% live in HDB doesnt mean all below 8k household income. 8k limit is only for initial application for the HDB flat. there are many still living in there but way above the 8k combined. 10-15k salary for individual is actually getting common but still not norm. many just keep quiet about it, haha

Originally Posted by Rorty (Post 9682)

It boggles my mind how out of touch some posts in this thread are. A law professor does not earn "peanuts", unless you are using the TT Durai scale. For example, an assistant professor (lowest professorial rank) would probably be earning 8-12k a month (I'm a law student estimating based on clues dropped by my own law professors). That's many times the median monthly income in Singapore, which was 2.7k in June 2010.

The definition of "rich" offered by an earlier poster which stipulates a salary of 500k/month simply beggars belief. It reminds me of people who say that a salary of 10k/month is only "average" or "middle-class" - when such an income would place you within the top 5% of the population! "Middle-class", by definition, would be those earning the median income of ~3k. If you are in the top 5%, you are rich, period. Benchmark yourself against objective statistics, not against your peers (who tend to be in the same economic class as you) or some unrealistic materialistic ideal.

Anyway, to any JC student reading this thread to decide whether to take up law, my advice is not to decide based on pay. Instead, go pick up a random law textbook and browse through it. Download some judicial decisions to read (you can find recent ones here). This is what you will be doing for the next four years. If you don't have the requisite interest and aptitude, you will be miserable in law school, and will most likely end up doing something completely unrelated to law when you graduate (assuming you don't drop out before then).

Originally Posted by Finance Guy (Post 9800)

It is interesting that your law professors see the need to "drop clues" as to their pay. I am not a law graduate, but my uni lecturers never does that in front of us. I hear from friends that most lawyers make partners in their 30s and draw 300-500k pa. So I guess its true that academia pays much less in law than other professions for them to boost their own self-esteem?

Originally Posted by Rorty (Post 9803)

It wasn't the case that my professors actively hinted that they were making X amount of money. Rather, I asked a couple of them in private about how working as an academic was like, and pay naturally was one of the subjects that came up obliquely.

Academia definitely pays less than private practice, but it is still a decent pay that allows you to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle (car, condo, annual vacations, etc). Not everything is about money. As an academic, you get far better work life balance, you get to pursue your intellectual interests, and you get to mould the lawyers, judges and politicians of tomorrow. You fly around the world presenting papers at conferences, you have leisurely lunches with colleagues and students discussing issues of the day, and newspapers call you up asking you for your esteemed opinions.

It is actually a very cushy job, and one that is available only to the top students of a cohort (who could easily have joined any big firm if they wanted to). Honestly, a law professor would probably have far better self-esteem than the average lawyer.

Originally Posted by Unregistered (Post 9931)

Here's some real world data for you guys. This is my fourth year as a lawyer, I am working at a foreign law firm, and my monthly pay is 12k.


BUT


My boss owns my soul. 14, 16 hour work days, weekends burnt, only have time to eat and sleep. And sometimes not even that.

Originally Posted by Finance Guy (Post 9800)

It is interesting that your law professors see the need to "drop clues" as to their pay. I am not a law graduate, but my uni lecturers never does that in front of us. I hear from friends that most lawyers make partners in their 30s and draw 300-500k pa. So I guess its true that academia pays much less in law than other professions for them to boost their own self-esteem?

Originally Posted by Accountant (Post 10263)

I have recently finished my national service and i'm currently contemplating on furthering my studies in the UK. I've received offers from recognized universities to read law there. My A level grades were above average but not good enough to enter the law faculties or courses related to the top professions.

I am also about to finish my ACCA qualification which i studied part time, I really like accounting but the general consensus in Singapore is that a degree is of paramount importance to secure a bright future. I am also keen on joining the civil service, this puts me in an even more difficult position as my divisional grading is determined by the qualifications I have.

The question is do erstwhile accountants perform well in the legal profession? Would law firms specializing in M&A, equity and trusts and Tax see a person possessing accounting knowledge in a brighter light? What other areas do accountants-turned-lawyers practice in? And is there any potential conflict of interests I should be aware of due to my dual capacity as accountant and lawyer? Your advice would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.