4 ms·
> should the payers of bribes to government officials be punished as harshly as public officials who take them? It depends. If the bribe is coerced through th
by akira2501 3y ago
> should the payers of bribes to government officials be punished as harshly as public officials who take them?
It depends.
If the bribe is coerced through threats of violence? That should be seen as an extenuating cirumstance.
If there are no such circumstances, then yes, they should absolutely be punished just as harshly. They had an opportunity to report the behavior and they passed on that to benefit themselves at the expense of others.
> Then, the incentive flips for everyone under pressure to pay bribes to instead become skillful 'sting' operatives against corrupt officials.
That's all very interesting. How about instead, we just hire law enforcement with specific skills in combating these crimes, and then let them work on it?
- gojomo 3y ago> They had an opportunity to report the behavior and they passed on that to benefit themselves at the expense of others. Under the systems proposed, their amnesty depends on their cooperation with prosecution. (Under the specifics I described, they must pre-register their reporting before paying anything.) > How about instead, we just hire law enforcement with specific skills in combating these crimes, and then let them work on it? Because that is essentially the current system, which will result in the current results. Just expanding the current approach still leaves both sides of the problem with their incentives to both continue the corruption for mutual, & cooperate in covering-it-up against investigation. Thus, even an extra dollar spent on that enforcement regime that has to fight both payers & recipients, and will be less effective at catching bad actors – and even more importantly, deterring future acts! – than that same extra dollar if the bribe-payers have been turned to assist enforcement.