By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
haxxiy said:
sc94597 said:
Ka-pi96 said:
sc94597 said:
Corruption and the state go hand in hand, doesn't matter whom you elect.

There are different levels of corruption though. Even if you can't eradicate it entirely, less is still better.

I think different politicians are better at hiding it. The only time corruption seems to be minimized (in the paradigm of a state) is when you have competing elements in government. That is why I don't understand why people love it when the people in government are working together. The less they work together the easier it is to prevent any one power from gaining so much control that they can abuse it with no consequences. 

A cohesive government might translate to more growth and a better direction of public policies, though. It might be that poeple like it because the gains on quality of life and wealth outweight the potential losses with corruption when compared to a clear and competitive, but ultimately inneficient, government.

In that case, they got what they asked for. They wanted somebody to control their lives and make decisions about their lives for them. With the understanding that politicians are humans with their own self-interest and not super humans and wholly altruistic, it is easy to come to the conclusion that the corrupt will find their way into such positions of power with few conseuqences. It is just a matter of time. Even if you vote for an angel, there is nothing preventing you from voting for the masked devil next time around. And I think the most centralized governments in history have had the slowest growth-rates until they've decentralized.