4 ms·

i figured out a while back that the 2 main enablers of political corruption are (1) the allowing of privacy for politicians, and (2) allowing untracked economic

i figured out a while back that the 2 main enablers of political corruption are (1) the allowing of privacy for politicians, and (2) allowing untracked economic transactions (cash handed over, etc.). If you could eliminate those two things it would be much harder for politicians to be corrupt. But it's easier contemplated than implemented, in part because we have inertia and power in the hands of people who would not allow it. Also, there is effectively no "unclaimed" land/sea in the world anymore upon which to start a new country. And in the US, at least, it is considered a high crime for anyone to band together and split off forming a new country (consider Lincoln and the US Civil War). You could still try to start a new country somewhere, but you'd probably need a lot of military power to defend it from existing countries, their puppet forces, and pirates. To this day I still think it's amusing that we supposedly live in The Land of the Free (TM) but we can't "fork" a piece of the US off, even a tiny piece of it that we personally inhabit, and make a new country.

narrator 16y ago
I think the main enabler of political corruption is politicians aren't paid enough. In the U.S, they oversee trillion dollar budgets yet are paid less than $100,000. It's a recipe for corruption. Politicians in Singapore pay themselves a few million dollars annually and Transparency international rates Singapore as the 3rd least corrupt country in the world.
- _delirium 16y ago
  While the U.S. salaries aren't millions of dollars, they're definitely over $100,000 these days, at least for federal office. Senators and Congressmen get $174,000/yr, Supreme Court Justices get $200,000, the Vice President gets $227,000, and the President gets $400,000. They all get very generous benefits, pension packages, and expense reimbursements as well.
mseebach 16y ago
Corruption can take many, many other forms than the handing over of cash. Politician A fixes something for company X in legislation, company X opens a new plant in A's constituency just in time for re-election. A runs on excellent job-creation credentials, and regular meetings with X aren't controversial, after all X is the biggest employer in the district. Also, Politician B fixes something for labour union Y. When it's time to announce his bid for re-election, 400 exited Y-workers show up yielding "Re-elect B" rally signs. Excellent photos for the front page of the paper, and man-of-the-people B-roll for the TV-news for the entire campaign. Are these even corruption, by the way? Or are A and B genuinely looking out for the best interests of their constituents?
extension 16y ago
To this day I still think it's amusing that we supposedly live in The Land of the Free (TM) but we can't "fork" a piece of the US off, even a tiny piece of it that we personally inhabit, and make a new country. I can't blame any nation for not allowing it's citizens to declare their own lawn a sovereign nation and do whatever they please on it. That is beyond libertopia and into plain anarchy.

narrator 16y ago

I think the main enabler of political corruption is politicians aren't paid enough. In the U.S, they oversee trillion dollar budgets yet are paid less than $100,000. It's a recipe for corruption. Politicians in Singapore pay themselves a few million dollars annually and Transparency international rates Singapore as the 3rd least corrupt country in the world.

_delirium 16y ago
While the U.S. salaries aren't millions of dollars, they're definitely over $100,000 these days, at least for federal office. Senators and Congressmen get $174,000/yr, Supreme Court Justices get $200,000, the Vice President gets $227,000, and the President gets $400,000. They all get very generous benefits, pension packages, and expense reimbursements as well.

mseebach 16y ago

Corruption can take many, many other forms than the handing over of cash. Politician A fixes something for company X in legislation, company X opens a new plant in A's constituency just in time for re-election. A runs on excellent job-creation credentials, and regular meetings with X aren't controversial, after all X is the biggest employer in the district. Also, Politician B fixes something for labour union Y. When it's time to announce his bid for re-election, 400 exited Y-workers show up yielding "Re-elect B" rally signs. Excellent photos for the front page of the paper, and man-of-the-people B-roll for the TV-news for the entire campaign. Are these even corruption, by the way? Or are A and B genuinely looking out for the best interests of their constituents?

extension 16y ago

To this day I still think it's amusing that we supposedly live in The Land of the Free (TM) but we can't "fork" a piece of the US off, even a tiny piece of it that we personally inhabit, and make a new country. I can't blame any nation for not allowing it's citizens to declare their own lawn a sovereign nation and do whatever they please on it. That is beyond libertopia and into plain anarchy.