[Vnbiz] Intel Vietnam refuses to pay bribes

[AD Marshall]

Last post, for now.  Promise...  ;D

Of yet another extremely coincidental, if not fateful ratio, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle:

The *Pareto principle* (also known as the *80-20 rule*, the *law of the
vital few* and the *principle of factor sparsity*) states that, for many
events, 80% of the effects comes from 20% of the causes. Business management
thinker Joseph M.
Juran<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Joseph_Moses_Juran>suggested
the principle and named it after Italian economist Vilfredo
Pareto <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vilfredo_Pareto>, who observed that 80%
of income in Italy went to 20% of the population. It is a common rule of
thumb <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thumb> in business; e.g., "80%
of your sales comes from 20% of your clients."


On 8/16/07, AD Marshall <admarshall at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Bro' Phong,
>
> Again it seems you anticipated much of what i wrote before i finished it
> -- and so much more concisely [dang it...]  :D
>
> I'd even agree with you that, given Singapore's pre-colonial, colonial and
> post-colonial history, the subject of a Discovery Channel series,
> Singaporeans are as much an ethical product of the rules a minority of the
> most powerful Singaporeans and others imposed.  Singapore is not much of a
> democracy.   The death penalty for many mere vices is not the popular choice
> of an ethically extremist population.  And, as is often seen here in
> SighGone, Sin-a-pore-ians can sin as well as the both the best and worst of
> us.  ;)
>
> But, of the question of "which practically comes first: ethics or laws?",
> i'd have to agree with Brother Hoanh that a legal infrastructure must
> generally be built upon a culture's popular ethics at some specific point in
> that culture's evolution.  Then, both will evolve hand in hand.
>
> I only add that the economics of that particular point in that culture's
> history will almost equally influence the decisions of both legislative
> leaders and those who enforce the laws, and, that, again, the relationship
> between the three, ethics, economics and the Law, becomes a dynamically
> evolving (ie, PROgressing) system of the simultaneously symbiotic,
> interdependent "three", as soon as the first laws are created.
>
> And, now, i'll dare add that, over the long term, this PROgressive
> evolution (a redundancy) seems to happen whether we consciously try to
> achieve it or not, and, that the net quality of the actions of the actors,
> good or bad, and the resulting benefits and costs each enjoys or suffers all
> end up being distributed roughly as they "normally" have been throughout our
> natural history, something like 10:80:10=good:ambivalent:bad, forever and
> ever.  And, near the End, most people finally find out they had never had
> any choice but to begin and keep up living their lives under such an
> equation, "no matter what" -- dang nab it!  ;D
>
> Let the flame wars ensue.  I'm outa here. ;))  Have fun!
>
> Best wishes, later,
> AD
>
>
> On 8/16/07, Tran Dinh Hoanh < tdhoanh at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
> >
> >
> > Dear brother Phong & CACC,
> >
> > Let's try to clarify this issue by being practical.
> >
> > I agree to follow brother Phong's logics:  Our people are so corrupt, we
> > need ruole of law.  But for the rule of law to operate well, we need
> > non-corrupt people to operate the law.  So we are in the chicken-and-egg
> > circle.  Where do you, brother Phong, find non-corrupt people?
> >
> > My solution is:  We find non-corrupt people thourgh promoting ethics,
> > such as the Intel Vietnam's memorandum, we need to teach ethics in
> > universities (for all kinds of professional students, including business
> > students), we need to promote ethic teaching in families (where parents
> > train children to be honest and socially responsible) or in churches and
> > temples or mass organizations like Thanh Doan or Hoi Phu Nu.  We need to
> > bring ethics to the forefront to produce good people, and good people will
> > start good rule of law.
> >
> > Where do you  find non-corrupt people to start your rule of law, brother
> > Phong, or anyone?  I love to hear an answer.
> >
> > Have a great day!
> >
> > Hoanh
> >
> >
> > On 8/15/07, Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov <Hong-Phong_Pho at ita.doc.gov >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > [ Vietnam Business Forum ]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Having a legal system in place is not the same as having the rule of
> > > law.
> > > The rule of law, in short, is my quick answer to chi Lien's question.
> > > The "ultimate victory of goodness" is a lofty goal on the order of the
> > > "from each according to his ability to each according to his needs", they
> > > are great goals to aspire to but are unlikely to happen on a global scale at
> > > this stage of human evolution.  If any force is poweful enough to try to
> > > impose either, we end up with a theocracy or communism, each with their
> > > attendant problems.
> > > In corrupt countries that have laws, there are those in the ruling
> > > class that consider themselves above the law, hence the is no rule of laws.
> > > You wouldn't have had to argue with your friends if the rule of law
> > > was in place and none one is operating outside or above it.
> > > Singaporean have a good sense of ethics.  The question is where does
> > > that sense of ethics came from.  My contention is the rule of law (that was
> > > and is considered so draconian as to infringe on individual freedom/civil
> > > liberty).  How do you explain the decidedly unethical behavior of some
> > > Singaporeans when removed from Singaporean legal proper?  A sudden heart
> > > replacement operation?  How do you explain ethical American companies
> > > belly-aching  about how the FCPA limits them from being corrupted?
> > > There is nothing wrong with being ethical.
> > > The issue I have is when you discuss building ethics moralistic terms,
> > > even confusing it with professional codes of ethics are being more than the
> > > set of rules that they are.  I don't see that anyone in this forum is
> > > resisting building ethics or contending that it is not important or
> > > necessary.  I would be interested in seeing how you came to that conclusion.
> > >  On the other hand, you had earlier confused the rule of law with just a
> > > bunch of laws.
> > > I am glad we agreed that being ethical in business is practical.
> > >  Logically, that means that we may not be/cannot afford to be ethical  in
> > > business anymore when it is no longer practical.  In environments that do
> > > not support being ethical, corruption is easily understood in this context.
> > >  The solution is to fix the environment, ie, institute the rule of law
> > > first.  Training the heart will then be much more practical and doable
> > > because it doesn't conflict with the reality of survival, and can be
> > > accomplished through general education.  Conversely, no amount of heart
> > > training can overcome the forces of corruption when there is no rule of law
> > > or respect for it.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tran Dinh Hoanh, Esq., LLB, JD
> > > Washington DC
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact admins at
> > vnbizadmin at vietlinks.net
> > Info at http://mail.saigon.com/mailman/listinfo/vnbiz
> > Archive at
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vnbiz/
> > or http://groups-beta.google.com/group/VNBIZforum/
> > or http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.saigon.com/pipermail/vnbiz/attachments/20070816/132e4949/attachment-0001.html