7 ms·

My two cents: I don't think you can find ANY government (icluding Scandinavia countries, Switzerland and what not) that is NOT engaged in - "donating" money to

My two cents: I don't think you can find ANY government (icluding Scandinavia countries, Switzerland and what not) that is NOT engaged in - "donating" money to a government regulator can induce the regulator to cover up and turn a blind eye to a person's alleged or suspected breaches in the course of investigations and prosecutions." That's how government regulation works, more regulation more opportunities for corruptions.

throwawaylinux 5y ago
I agree that this has been normalized throughout the world, that's the weird thing about it, it's blatant corruption and everybody just goes about pretending it's okay or no big deal.
- hnfong 5y ago
  It's only a problem when a "hostile" government does it. Then you'd make a big deal on the media of how corrupt their government and country is.
- BurningFrog 5y ago
  Those who think it's not OK, often to want to deregulate. With no one to bribe, that brand of corruption goes away. But they/we tend to be dismissed as crazy extremists by polite society.
  - throwaway2048 5y ago
    with no one to regulate, facebook would never have to answer to anyone, ever.
    - BurningFrog 5y ago
      I know this is old fashioned, but in a free society, I don't think you should have to answer to anyone, unless you commit a crime.
      - dTal 5y ago
        You don't think an international megacorp with the 1.2 trillion dollar market cap, under investigation for possible action or inaction leading to the subversion of the democratic process, should have to answer to anyone? You're not wrong - "might makes right" is certainly old-fashioned.
        throwawaylinux 5y ago
        Unfortunately, large corporations like this often utilize lobbying and regulatory capture to actually squash smaller competition which is not able to buy "justice". Might makes right is not old fashioned at all, the mighty are just better at fooling people.
  - dTal 5y ago
    Ah yes, the old "end crime by making everything legal" gambit.
- ryanlol 5y ago
  This is not corruption. Nobody is abusing their position for personal gain, the government (on behalf of the society at large) is simply accepting a payment to compensate for certain activity with negative externalities.
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    I disagree and I think it is corruption, and I'm astounded people don't. The idea that someone can buy their way out of breach of laws and regulations like this is fundamentally unjust. I'm not saying in any one particular instance of it happening any people are taking explicit kickbacks. But the regulating body and process as a whole has become corrupt by allowing this to happen. Whether it's because they get promoted because they netted a lot of fines, or because they later go work for private industry who scratches their backs, or simply that the government likes the revenue so they allow rich people to buy their way out of trouble and that's mutually beneficial for both parties, it is corruption.
chrismsimpson 5y ago
So no regulation would yield a perfect utopia then? An obvious fallacy.
- passing_by_and 5y ago
  The GP made a falsifiable statement. Please attack that instead of creating a straw man.
  - xpe 5y ago
    > My two cents: I don't think you can find ANY government (icluding Scandinavia countries, Switzerland and what not) that is NOT engaged in - "donating" money to a government regulator can induce the regulator to cover up and turn a blind eye to a person's alleged or suspected breaches in the course of investigations and prosecutions." That's how government regulation works, more regulation more opportunities for corruptions. This comment, taken as a whole, is notable in what it does not mention. For example, it doesn't talk about the many kinds of corruption that regulation mitigates (yes, imperfectly). "Is government regulation good or bad?" is perhaps an ok introductory question to start off with. However, it is simplistic and overly generalized. So if one does not progress beyond it, one hasn't gotten very far. A practical question is "What kinds and implementations of government regulation serve our goals?"
lordnacho 5y ago
The problem with this is we then don't get notification of the crime. Chances are there's a lot of these deals happening that aren't so high profile, and when you cut a deal nothing comes out to the rest of society. The prosecutor should just not be allowed to cut such deals. Pursue every case to a conclusion, so that we know what corruption there is.
xpe 5y ago
That is just one of many relationships in play. Regulation also can help mitigate many forms of corruption. A systems analysis is one good (systematic!) way to consider all the factors.

throwawaylinux 5y ago

I agree that this has been normalized throughout the world, that's the weird thing about it, it's blatant corruption and everybody just goes about pretending it's okay or no big deal.

hnfong 5y ago
It's only a problem when a "hostile" government does it. Then you'd make a big deal on the media of how corrupt their government and country is.
BurningFrog 5y ago
Those who think it's not OK, often to want to deregulate. With no one to bribe, that brand of corruption goes away. But they/we tend to be dismissed as crazy extremists by polite society.
- throwaway2048 5y ago
  with no one to regulate, facebook would never have to answer to anyone, ever.
  - BurningFrog 5y ago
    I know this is old fashioned, but in a free society, I don't think you should have to answer to anyone, unless you commit a crime.
    - dTal 5y ago
      You don't think an international megacorp with the 1.2 trillion dollar market cap, under investigation for possible action or inaction leading to the subversion of the democratic process, should have to answer to anyone? You're not wrong - "might makes right" is certainly old-fashioned.
      - throwawaylinux 5y ago
        Unfortunately, large corporations like this often utilize lobbying and regulatory capture to actually squash smaller competition which is not able to buy "justice". Might makes right is not old fashioned at all, the mighty are just better at fooling people.
- dTal 5y ago
  Ah yes, the old "end crime by making everything legal" gambit.
ryanlol 5y ago
This is not corruption. Nobody is abusing their position for personal gain, the government (on behalf of the society at large) is simply accepting a payment to compensate for certain activity with negative externalities.
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  I disagree and I think it is corruption, and I'm astounded people don't. The idea that someone can buy their way out of breach of laws and regulations like this is fundamentally unjust. I'm not saying in any one particular instance of it happening any people are taking explicit kickbacks. But the regulating body and process as a whole has become corrupt by allowing this to happen. Whether it's because they get promoted because they netted a lot of fines, or because they later go work for private industry who scratches their backs, or simply that the government likes the revenue so they allow rich people to buy their way out of trouble and that's mutually beneficial for both parties, it is corruption.

chrismsimpson 5y ago

So no regulation would yield a perfect utopia then? An obvious fallacy.

passing_by_and 5y ago
The GP made a falsifiable statement. Please attack that instead of creating a straw man.
- xpe 5y ago
  > My two cents: I don't think you can find ANY government (icluding Scandinavia countries, Switzerland and what not) that is NOT engaged in - "donating" money to a government regulator can induce the regulator to cover up and turn a blind eye to a person's alleged or suspected breaches in the course of investigations and prosecutions." That's how government regulation works, more regulation more opportunities for corruptions. This comment, taken as a whole, is notable in what it does not mention. For example, it doesn't talk about the many kinds of corruption that regulation mitigates (yes, imperfectly). "Is government regulation good or bad?" is perhaps an ok introductory question to start off with. However, it is simplistic and overly generalized. So if one does not progress beyond it, one hasn't gotten very far. A practical question is "What kinds and implementations of government regulation serve our goals?"

lordnacho 5y ago

The problem with this is we then don't get notification of the crime. Chances are there's a lot of these deals happening that aren't so high profile, and when you cut a deal nothing comes out to the rest of society. The prosecutor should just not be allowed to cut such deals. Pursue every case to a conclusion, so that we know what corruption there is.

xpe 5y ago

That is just one of many relationships in play. Regulation also can help mitigate many forms of corruption. A systems analysis is one good (systematic!) way to consider all the factors.