No, it's not that bad in America. The corruption we see in DE is similar to that of US and even Canada - and it's of a different kinds. It's not corruption in

No, it's not that bad in America. The corruption we see in DE is similar to that of US and even Canada - and it's of a different kinds. It's not corruption in the classical sense, it actually is rational for the state to prefer copper, if the state has investments in copper - in a kind of perverse way. Less rational and borderline corruption if an individual state actor has personal investments in copper. 'Big Business' is often done on the basis of relationship, of the advice of consultants, and it's far more of a systematic thing than an overt thing. For example, there is quite a lot of oversight for things like insider trading, and such shenanigans. People are not taking bribes. It's rational for congressional members to 'fight' for the big government contract to be located in their district, even if it's not the ideal outcome. This kind of network/influence dysfunction is a huge issue, and it deserves it's own name, because it operates in a different way, has different results and is way more nuanced. That said it can have major impacts and it is a big deal, it should not be ignored, but it should be recognized as another category. FYI - if contractors, suppliers etc. all did a really good job, it would matter less. There may or may not have been shenanigans in the allocating to CGI for the big Healthcare.gov project, but the worst part is that it was a failure. If CGI had of done a great job ... well that reduces the issue of how contracts are awarded. The city of Montreal had some serious problems with low-level 'corruption' when handing out city contracts - as it turns out, it was partly bad acting, but partly because there was no concept of transparency, bidding, no proper systems and checks for how procurement is made, leaving the door open to city officials getting to go to expensive dinners etc.. It's an issue, but of a different kind.