by colorful on Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:27 pm
Very interesting discussion...
I'm certainly not an expert in corruption, but would like to throw my two cents in anyway...
Sumatra, I have heard several people claim that corruption is bad in Indonesia, but that it is really no better in Western countries. Personally, I don't think your argument about fees and taxes makes a lot of sense. (by the way I'm a US citizen who lived there for 27 years). I'm sure there is corruption in the US, but from what I hear, and from what I'm reading in this post, it can in no way be compared to what is in Indonesia.
An 8% interest rate is corruption? Personally I think US citizens way overextend themselves, and take on a lot of debt. I think if a person in the US bought a reasonably priced home, worked regularly, and saved their money they could probably quite easily pay off their mortgage in 10 years. Another scenario: buy a house, then when the price appreciates, sell it and buy another house at the original price, thereby reducing the size of the mortgage.
Re: fees, all of this is fully accounted for and feeds into the public budget. It should be used to pay for the cost of doing business. When I'm in the US I often feel that there is a tendency to overlegislate and require licenses for everything. But then, take fishing licenses for example. The money for the licenses feeds into the bureau responsible for fishing and helps defray their costs.
Re: corruption in Indonesia- Corruption generally favors the wealthy and the powerful, so it wouldnt surprise me that they are not ashamed of it (BaliLife), and even complain about the KPK. Who is it that gets those extra contracts when there is no transparent bidding, or because they have a friend in the Ministry? Its not the up and coming business that is seeking to expand, it's the one that is already wealthy, that has the contacts.
In fact, one of the very reasons why Chinese have such control over the economy in Indonesia may be because of corruption.
And when money is siphoned off the health budget, or the infrastructure budget, who pays, and who benefits? Its the person who has access to the money, and siphons it off, who benefits. And the public, which has less healthcare or poor roads, suffers.
When fees are above the board, and there is transparency, then it can be discussed publicly as a part of policy. When there is corruption, it is hidden and cannot be discussed except in the vague sense.
If officials are poorly paid, let them get a salary raise, and then eliminate the corruption. Better yet, take the power away from the "guy who has the signature", and redistribute the money he was stealing to all of those people working for him, by giving them a salary raise.
Its a vaguely formulated concept in my mind, but it seems like corruption actually hinders the development of a country. It increases the transaction costs, and siphons money away from true production into paying for villas for the high level officials. This money would have been better spent being re-invested into real productive economic activity. And it seems that eliminating corruption would level the playing field in business- when the fees to undertake economic activity are standardized, small and medium sized enterprises have a chance to make it in business. But if its all based on contacts and hidden bribes, then they don't have as much chance- and they don't know if they are paying more or less than the "other guy" who has known "the Minister" for 25 years.
Re: "That's just the way it works here". Well, it probably shouldn't work that way. I think there's a fair argument to say that it is harmful. Why do people continue to pay? Well, probably because they have little choice.
Corruption and justice: Example 1: Its supposed to be free to get an ID card in one's new residence when a person moves to a new locality. But many never get one because of corruption- requests for 3-500,000 for an ID. The result? The migrant can't vote unless they return to their original residence (often a great distance to travel, and probably more expensive than paying for the ID).
Example 2: A nightclub in Bali violates the labor law. The victim considers filing a complaint, but is told by the nightclub management that they will just pay the judge, and the victim has no chance to win. As a result, the victim, believing in the presence of corruption in Indonesia, gives up. Is that justice?
Well, just food for thought...