希望英雄辈出

非常赞同您的观点，将未来收益权、应收帐款等，通过一种法律规定，通过登记、公示或者是特定帐户的形式，使得它特定化、确定化、类型化，并且能够保证它具有可转让性、隔离性。

股票发行注册制如没有司法作为严肃保障，灾难台同P2P一样。

建立判例制是一个好办法。但是橘生淮南则为橘,生于淮北则为枳。在中国如果各级法院在相关党政领导的压力干预下作出一些恶名昭彰的判例，其他一些法院的法官出于一己私利有样学样又怎么办？

中国古代大量存在判例，问题也相当严重： “比”能补充律令之不足，对维护封建统治更具有灵活性，但也为司法官吏破坏法制提供了方便条件，奸吏以此“因缘为市，所欲活则傅生议，所欲陷则予死比”。

拜读了您的这篇演讲稿，作为正在经历成长过程中的80后，深感读书强大作用，它是在和自身的狭隘与安逸感斗争的过程。书是答疑解惑的良药，相信读书都可以告诉我们经历过的事情中最好的应对方法。我相信，我所经历的，前人早已经历并总结，所以人不做井底温水蛙的方法就是读书，与自己的狭隘和安逸好感比赛，人生中的对手仅仅只是自己。

I don't think it is necessary to compile such a civil code. The cost of amendments would be too high and the governmental interference would destroy its integrity.

The certainty of subject matter is one of the three certainties required by a valid trust. The flexibility of the trust allows future property/interest to be used to create a trust. For example a settlor is allowed to create a trust with his bank interests derived from his term deposit even though the term deposit has not been maturated. But the dividends of shares are not allowed to create a trust because it is contingent. The right to claim dividends is uncertain and it is not an exercisable independent right. it is a collateral right attached to the shares. Therefore it is not a certain interest/property that can be used to create a trust. Even the parties can have a special agreement regarding the alienability of the interest, it will fail for the uncertainty of the subject matter.

有上访压力就是地方冤案的存在，同时也存在地方政府滥用职权或渎职。

王教授您好，文中所述正是我母亲冯改娣，谢谢王教授您的点评

真他妈的欲加之罪何患无辞。这种无耻的流氓政府，看到就来气。

完全同意王老师意见！从信托法的角度来看，政府只是受托人，住房公积金缴存人是委托人同时也是受益人，政府可以拿受托人的管理费，而不能把委托人的增值收益据为己有。

The Chinese government is always economically bullying its people. It does not understand the fiduciary obligations of a trustee and never thinks about such a relationship with its people. The State Treasure is a big black hole absorbing billions of dollars for the central government without justification. Do you think, Professor Wang, that it is useful or hopefully useful to make suggestions to the government? There are too many things like this in China. For example, the gain obtained by a fund manager in breach of his fiduciary duty is taken by the State. However, the fundamental issue in China is constitutionalism. It is so overwhelming and will affect every aspect of law and the Chinese legal system. Only by the time of constitutionalism, I think, it is possible to discuss issues like this.

科技加速分工，让产业链条越来越长，旧分工消失，新分工出现。而科技，如互联网，才促使分工走向共享。生产的分工是一回事，而社会分工是另外一回事。社会分工可消除，同一个人同时承担多种性质的分工。分工越来越细化，但人却可以越来越全面发展，跨越分工。

人家提的法治，是指法家的法，不是法制的法。绝不可能法律面前人人平等，绝不可能司法独立，而只是用严刑峻法进一步约束、压榨百姓。