Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

loquitur · 04-15-2008, 06:33 PM

Actually, host, corruption and prosperity tend to be inversely related. The US may not be the least corrupt country (IIRC it's Finland, but I'd need to dig that study out) but it's fairly low on the list. Truly corrupt countries tend also to have mass poverty and low levels of economic development. (Ah, here we go - it is indeed Finland. Myanmar and Somalia are the most corrupt. Or try this one, which is similar.)

Also, you're collapsing a few different concepts together. As I read you, you're saying a few different things:

1. People who are rich got there through corruption or fraud. This one I think is demonstrably false as a gross statement. The Fortune 400 is not populated by the equivalent of mafia dons.

2. Being rich gives you good connections that help you get things done more easily than people who aren't rich. Partly true, but not exclusive to the rich. Union leaders, for example, or NGO leaders, also have good connections that they can call on, and sometimes they carry more weight than mere money. The NY state legislature is pretty much a wholly owned subsidiary of one of the unions (Local 1199).

3. People who are already rich sometimes do dishonest things. Yup. People who aren't rich also sometimes do dishonest things. People, rich or not, often do things they shouldn't do if they think they can get away with them.

You realize, of course, that because people are different in their talents and abilities there will always be economic inequality even if everyone was scrupulously honest. I find it curious that you seem to dispute that.

04-15-2008, 06:33 PM	#110 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	Actually, host, corruption and prosperity tend to be inversely related. The US may not be the least corrupt country (IIRC it's Finland, but I'd need to dig that study out) but it's fairly low on the list. Truly corrupt countries tend also to have mass poverty and low levels of economic development. (Ah, here we go - it is indeed Finland. Myanmar and Somalia are the most corrupt. Or try this one, which is similar.) Also, you're collapsing a few different concepts together. As I read you, you're saying a few different things: 1. People who are rich got there through corruption or fraud. This one I think is demonstrably false as a gross statement. The Fortune 400 is not populated by the equivalent of mafia dons. 2. Being rich gives you good connections that help you get things done more easily than people who aren't rich. Partly true, but not exclusive to the rich. Union leaders, for example, or NGO leaders, also have good connections that they can call on, and sometimes they carry more weight than mere money. The NY state legislature is pretty much a wholly owned subsidiary of one of the unions (Local 1199). 3. People who are already rich sometimes do dishonest things. Yup. People who aren't rich also sometimes do dishonest things. People, rich or not, often do things they shouldn't do if they think they can get away with them. You realize, of course, that because people are different in their talents and abilities there will always be economic inequality even if everyone was scrupulously honest. I find it curious that you seem to dispute that.