5 ms·
If the government doesn't want to play by the rules, what's the incentive for the common citizen? The value of the "law abiding citizen" has been evaporating q
by maratd 14y ago
If the government doesn't want to play by the rules, what's the incentive for the common citizen?
The value of the "law abiding citizen" has been evaporating quickly over the last century. Unfortunate. There is no honor in abiding by the law when those entrusted with enforcing it couldn't give a damn about it.
You know where this is going? You'll reach a point where "law abiding citizen" = sucker. Want to know what that's like? Just look at any country where you have to bribe a dozen officials just to take a piss.
- tptacek 14y agoWho do you bribe in the US to get things done?
- angersock 14y agoCongressmen and bureaucrats, mainly. You?
- tptacek 14y agoYou've bribed a congressman to get something done?
- maratd 14y agoIf he did, who in their right mind would admit that in a public forum?
- angersock 14y agoCome now, you know what I mean. You're being obtuse. :| Anyways, what would you consider the lobbyist mechanism and campaign donations if not an authorized de-facto form of bribery?
- aggie 14y agoThe difference is lobbying is soft influence, meaning if the politician's constituents care about an issue, lobbying and donations won't buy policy. What they do buy is sway in cases where the electorate isn't paying attention (essentially establishing a default position on an issue). In other words, the decision process for a politician goes something like: 1. Do voters in my district care[1]/will they notice? 2. What will best attract continued campaign funding? 3. What is best for my district? 4. What is best for the country? [1] The key here is whether voters care enough about an issue for it to influence the representative's reelection. If not, they can move on to step two. Voters do come first if they care enough/make enough noise (e.g., the SOPA protests). The problem is it's impossible for voters to pay attention to every issue and coordinate their voices; that's why we have a republic in the first place.
- anonymoushn 14y ago> Voters do come first if they care enough/make enough noise (e.g., the SOPA protests). I'm not sure about this. EESA passed with an overwhelming majority after an overwhelming (and fairly vocal) majority of American voters opposed it.
- aggie 14y agoNational opinion polls may have been against the bank bailouts, but national public opinion is not what really matters to a politician. Representatives are accountable only to their own districts. Of course, this is why we see pork barrel spending even though everyone hates it. People usually like their rep and hate most of the others around the country. If the representative can pump enough cash into their district, voters in their district will overlook a voting record they mildly disagree with. Many representatives probably saw the bank bailouts as some combination of necessary for the country and a chance to appease their financial backers, offering a favorable trade-off in terms of displeasing their constituents.
- smokeyj 14y agoThey redefined it as lobbying. Convenient, eh?
- dllthomas 14y agoThere is a distinction, and it is important - campaign donations go to keeping them in office, whereas a bribe goes into their pocket directly. Whether it is a sufficient distinction is a separate question, and the real question is if-and-how we can change things so that they function better.
- smokeyj 14y agoI think it's clear we have to out-lobby the lobbyists so we can bribe our government to listen. I have ten bucks, what do you got?
- 001sky 14y agocampaign donations go to keeping them in office, whereas a bribe goes into their pocket directly --Have you seen the % spending of donations? Cross reference MPAA members? There is direct, and then there is direct. The TV ad campaign, with total spending expected to swell to $1.1 billion [In 2012], starts up again now that the party conventions are over and the two-month sprint to the general election is under way.
- learc83 14y agoEver dealt with local stuff--building inspections and the like?
- tptacek 14y agoHave you ever bribed a building inspector?
- smokeyj 14y agoIf you don't think bribery goes on in local government you've never been involved too closely. A city official in my town was just convicted of voter fraud. Imagine how many people go uncaught.
- tptacek 14y agoI've had many building inspections done and I've never even been tempted to bribe anyone. The allusion the parent comment is making is to societies in which bribes are practically required. Dollars to donuts, if I tried to bribe an Oak Park building inspector, I'd end up in administrative court. I have bribed someone: a municipal impound lot that had towed my car, many years ago. Impound lots are the kind of skeezy places where you can kind of tell that the opportunity exists to bribe your way out of a problem. To me, that's the kind of exception that proves the rule; I could tell the difference between the impound lot and, say, a building inspector because there is a difference. Most officials are dangerous to try to bribe.
- Zak 14y agoNot that I'm advocating paying bribes (I'd much rather see corrupt officials jailed), but there's a right way to phrase a bribe offer. Something along the lines of "Is there a fee I can pay for expedited service?" gives you plausible deniability. As some government agencies do provide expedited services for an extra fee, it's an entirely reasonable question.
- 14y ago
- pfedor 14y agoHotel receptionists in Vegas, obviously. Fun fact: At Google, they have (or used to have) a page with advice for employees who are new to the US, where they tell you about things like getting a SSN, buying a car etc. One of the advice items is: If you get pulled over, do not attempt to bribe the police officer. If you try, you will be in real trouble. Whoever thinks that the US is anything like the countries where you need to bribe people, is very disconnected from reality.