Same in $$$ perhaps. Same in terms of openness, transparency, trust, equality, competition etc not in a million years.
The lack of transparency, equality and competition = inefficiency of the market = what every company wants and needs to make max profit. Every capitalist's wet dream realised in those qualities (or lack of).
I can't tell whether you are arguing for capitalism or against it. All you are pointing out is that the corruption created and encouraged by the socialist government is inefficient and bad for the average citizen.
Never arguing against or for. Corruption is within our nature, whether it is capitalist or socialist, different label, same stuff. Bad for average citizen? Definitely. But since when profitability is about the benefits of the average citizen, it is about the extraction of value from everyone.
I disagree. Are you corrupt? Am I corrupt? How about most people you know? If the capability exists for corruption, then the corrupt people will be drawn to that capability. If it doesn't, then their capability to act out their corrupt ways is much reduced. It's like giving people who have murderous tendencies an army. Most people don't want to murder anyone else. But some do and if you give them power over others they will do a hell of a lot more killing than they otherwise could. And be lauded as great generals and leaders. I'm not sure what you are saying here.
I agree with you Hawkeye. I think some people may have a bias towards thinking corruption is natural, due to cultural experience. Eg, if you have lived/worked in Asia or India, where corruption and bribes are part of everyday life, then it'd be pretty hard to image a corruption-free world. But as you said, corruption it's a product of the system, rather than a persons genetic tendency to be corrupt.
I am not sure if I am corrupt or not, given the right pressure and enough anonymity I think I can be. This also applies to everyone. Corruption might be unthinkable in times of wealth and peace. In times of crisis, people change. What I am trying to say is profit making is all about charging the most that the market would pay, while producing it for as little as the market can make it. When a corporation or entity thinks of profit making, benefits of average citizen does not come into the calculation until later down the track, usually labelled under PR expense or Cost of doing business. I worked in south east asia, corruption and bribes are part of everyday life. It is not hard to imagine a corruption free world, but it is hard not to spot it. Once you understand the dynamics of corruption, it is really hard to ignore its existence everywhere. We do not have genes for corruption, but it is our genetic tendency to be opportunistic. Cultural education gives framework of behaviour and limits corrupt behaviour. This is problematic nowadays because the western cultural education and the asian cultural education is very different, but they are mixing and competing in the same market. Once opportunism runs into corruption once, subsequent acts becomes less morally wrong (because we grew numb). The first time is always the hardest.
Good post jpanggy. I agree, I think this is happening a lot. And anyone who tries to be uncorrupt in a corrupt market will likely find they won't do very well at all. I definitely agree that this is the reality nowdays, although I also think it doesn't have to be that way - and I think it is readily achievable. But, there are some things that need to be fixed first - namely regulatory structures, legal structures, social behaviour (which will follow from the first two anyway), even economic structures (which again will largely follow from the first two), and...the rich/poor divide*. * the rich/poor divide, or at least poverty, pushes people to do things they normally wouldn't. They say everyone has their price, and you don't need to set that price very high if someone is starving. That said, some people would rather die than breach certain moral (and/or religious) codes or ethics, which is an interesting human behaviour.
Yep. And the best structure would be one where people (especially the media) have free speech (to be able to highlight the corruption), equality before the law (to enable due process against the corruption), separation of the judicial, legislative and executive powers, the ability to change the change key political appointments (say through a public vote), the ability and incentive for companies to compete to enable consumers to not use unethical entities, the ability for people to travel freely between regions of the economy, separation of the state and religion. I believe it's called democratic capitalism. The western world didn't rise from poverty to be the economic powerhouse it is today because of some fluke of nature (although more and more people are forgetting how we got here and are taking away many of the very things that made our economies and way of life so great in the first place). Edit: Actually even simpler: it's democracy with the private ownership of property (especially of capital). Quoting Adam Smith: "Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, <should be> left perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man or order of men." Similarly, w.r.t. the pursuit of self-interest: "Every individual necessarily labors to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally indeed neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. He intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention."
