5 ms·
I wish people who downvoted you gave an explanation. I don't understand how this statement is controversial. edit: The pedantry below is incredible. I hope you
by RodericDay 10y ago
I wish people who downvoted you gave an explanation. I don't understand how this statement is controversial.
edit: The pedantry below is incredible. I hope you guys are at least consistent in it.
- hyperliner 10y ago"Completely"? Not sure how that added anything to the conversation.
- bitJericho 10y agoIt answered the question. Every facet of the government I've dealt with is corrupt. Full stop. Period.
- duaneb 10y agoBecause calling a government completely corrupt is hyperbole. Find me a government, I'll find you an honest bureaucrat that manages to help people in spite of being a government employee.
- duderific 10y agoGoing pretty OT here, but I would argue that a much bigger problem than corruptness in government agencies is good old fashioned incompetence. It is damn near impossible to fire someone for poor performance in the federal government. My father was a federal bureaucrat for over 25 years. He related stories of some employees he had to deal with who had major personality disorders, were incompetent, abusive etc., and yet it took years to get them dismissed, even though everyone from top to bottom knew they were nothing but a liability to the agency.
- jessaustin 10y agoWe were already talking about the USA federal government, so the ball was already in your court.
- duaneb 10y agoWhat's the point? If you honestly believe the entire government is corrupt I have no shared basis of rationality. Just enjoy your half of the country, I'll enjoy mine.
- bitJericho 10y agoSo what, your interactions with the government has been wonderful? You sound like you don't know what you're talking about.
- duaneb 10y agoNo, they've been mediocre, like most people. This is entirely different than being "completely" corrupt. I've also certainly not witnessed corruption personally. If the government were "completely" corrupt I doubt this would be the case.
- bitJericho 10y agoLet me know how things go for you when you need the government's support on anything. You won't get any. The only thing you get from the government is a turd sandwich. It's no coincidence, though, that you've had no problem give give giving to the government.
- jessaustin 10y agoIt was merely a point of order. You said, "Find me a government, I'll find you..." in the context of this thread, in which that variable already has a specific value. Don't pretend you're making some sort of general point when this entire discussion is quite a bit more specific. After all, another response to your challenge might have been, ummm, DPRK? Can you find an "honest bureaucrat" complicit in that travesty?
- rayiner 10y agoBecause "completely corrupt" is hyperbole. If the U.S. government is "completely corrupt," what do you call the government of places like India or Bangladesh where you have to bribe a police officer to be allowed to pay a ticket?
- 4ad 10y agoReally? This is what this important discussion has come to? Debating the choice of adjectives? What happens in India or Bangladesh has no bearing whatsoever to the Americans who have to pay for this stuff.
- baddox 10y agoThose governments are also completely corrupt. Perhaps "completely" is throwing you off. I don't think it means "as corrupt as it's possible to be," but rather "fundamentally and routinely corrupt."
- bitJericho 10y agoEvery section of government I've had the pleasure of dealing with is corrupt. Every branch, every service. Frankly, I think the entire American system is corrupt. Ergo, completely corrupt.
- harryh 10y agoThe US is in the top (as in good) decile worldwide when measuring corruption: http://www.transparency.org/cpi2015?gclid=CjwKEAjwjqO_BRDribyJpc_mzHgSJABdnsFWAj8Bz6dyf63atV_Njmb2u4j-0eboDH5WVgWjRgL5vBoCiAXw_wcB#results-table http://www.transparency.org/cpi2015?gclid=CjwKEAjwjqO_BRDrib...