How bad is corruption in China ? (Temprarily Closed)

Status
Not open for further replies.

jackliu

Banned Idiot
I just had this idea, we all know on surface corruption is all bad, especially when police wants to shake you down, or any other nameless bureaucrats use their power to enlarge their own wallet.

But what about other aspects of corruption that we think as corruption but might be somewhat beneficial. By that I mean personal relationship and informal arrangements that facilitate all business operations in China. For example, if you want to start a business, or if you want to get a license to sell something, the normal bureaucratic procedure would take months to get approval, but if you know someone personally, you can speed up the paperwork process, and this in the end would bring greater value added to the business.

I mean this doesn't necessary to be all bad, I know of course there are plenty of bad sides of this kind of corruption as company that gets projects with no bidding process so that they keep more profit for themselves, then give kickbacks. But on the other hand, this would have faster decision making and turn around time.

Another question is, if China is so corrupt, how is it able to grow it is economy so fast in the recent decades? Because conventional logic would states that if a nation is corrupted, it would became a bad environment to do business in, so that investors would not come to invest, and business would not want to set up shops, and people would not benefit. But clearly this is not the case, overall the economic growth have helped everyone from the poorest to the rich, many people argue that the rich became especially richer, even so, the poor have also benefited tremendously from the economic growth as well.

So if corruption is one force that eat away at economic growth, what is the other force that drove China's growth in the past 2 decades when compare to other nations?
 

nugroho

Junior Member
Corruption is a by product of the Chinese political regime that has indeed caused a lot of social outcry.

However, for the Western media to mostly criticize China for lack of democracy while ignoring a much corrupted India is nothing short of hypocritical.

In my opinion, democracy is indeed an effective deterrent to most of the smaller social corruption issues that may arise but it also serves as the perfect smokescreen for the top 1% to discretely rob the middle class of their wealth AKA Wall Street.

How did ex-Citi CEO Pundit receive over 60M in all forms of compensation in 6 years while the firm's shareholders became stuckholders?

Sorry, I can't agree with this opinion.
Democracy maybe effective if the people are rich
but, when people is poor like Indonesia and India, you will know how democracy will be the root of corruption. ( strange, isn't it ? )
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Sorry, I can't agree with this opinion.
Democracy maybe effective if the people are rich
but, when people is poor like Indonesia and India, you will know how democracy will be the root of corruption. ( strange, isn't it ? )

Well any kind of government system can be corrupted when the masses are sick and tire of being poor and have no confidence on their nation's leaders. We saw it everywhere in life and through out human history in every culture.
 

luhai

Banned Idiot
I just had this idea, we all know on surface corruption is all bad, especially when police wants to shake you down, or any other nameless bureaucrats use their power to enlarge their own wallet.

But what about other aspects of corruption that we think as corruption but might be somewhat beneficial. By that I mean personal relationship and informal arrangements that facilitate all business operations in China. For example, if you want to start a business, or if you want to get a license to sell something, the normal bureaucratic procedure would take months to get approval, but if you know someone personally, you can speed up the paperwork process, and this in the end would bring greater value added to the business.

I mean this doesn't necessary to be all bad, I know of course there are plenty of bad sides of this kind of corruption as company that gets projects with no bidding process so that they keep more profit for themselves, then give kickbacks. But on the other hand, this would have faster decision making and turn around time.

Another question is, if China is so corrupt, how is it able to grow it is economy so fast in the recent decades? Because conventional logic would states that if a nation is corrupted, it would became a bad environment to do business in, so that investors would not come to invest, and business would not want to set up shops, and people would not benefit. But clearly this is not the case, overall the economic growth have helped everyone from the poorest to the rich, many people argue that the rich became especially richer, even so, the poor have also benefited tremendously from the economic growth as well.

So if corruption is one force that eat away at economic growth, what is the other force that drove China's growth in the past 2 decades when compare to other nations?

that depends on how you define corruption, especially since Chinese corruption is aimed more towards leaking sensitive information (say metro stations location, zoning area, procurement plans, limit lines on bids etc), promoting and allowing monopoly (Just look at how state firms are managed), smooth though business deal against regulation (give me money and I'll look away from environmental, procedural, safty concerns) etc. than the simple you need to play me money for me to do this sort of corruption. In some same, it can actually grow the economy, but it damages the environment, create unsafe systems (several HSR lines are delayed because of oversight revealed during last rail minister's investigation) and creating financial problems (public money setting idle been placed on the stock market. It's fine when stocks are up, and officials pocket the earning, but when the market go bad, that public money is gone!).
 

Engineer

Major
Corruption is a by product of the Chinese political regime that has indeed caused a lot of social outcry.

However, for the Western media to mostly criticize China for lack of democracy while ignoring a much corrupted India is nothing short of hypocritical.

In my opinion, democracy is indeed an effective deterrent to most of the smaller social corruption issues that may arise but it also serves as the perfect smokescreen for the top 1% to discretely rob the middle class of their wealth AKA Wall Street.

How did ex-Citi CEO Pundit receive over 60M in all forms of compensation in 6 years while the firm's shareholders became stuckholders?

Corruption exists in other countries so it is clearly not a product of Chinese political regime and not an effective deterrent to corruption. What's more, there have been instances where candidates openly buy votes in China's village elections. So, democracy doesn't fix anything.
 

jackliu

Banned Idiot
that depends on how you define corruption, especially since Chinese corruption is aimed more towards leaking sensitive information (say metro stations location, zoning area, procurement plans, limit lines on bids etc), promoting and allowing monopoly (Just look at how state firms are managed), smooth though business deal against regulation (give me money and I'll look away from environmental, procedural, safty concerns) etc. than the simple you need to play me money for me to do this sort of corruption. In some same, it can actually grow the economy, but it damages the environment, create unsafe systems (several HSR lines are delayed because of oversight revealed during last rail minister's investigation) and creating financial problems (public money setting idle been placed on the stock market. It's fine when stocks are up, and officials pocket the earning, but when the market go bad, that public money is gone!).

You are right about environmental pollution, but I think that is as much as a byproduct of economic growth than result of corruption. It is simply not possible to grow your economy without sacrificing your environment, I think that was one of the deliberate trade off the Chinese leader made when they started all of this.

The other concern you have is efficient allocation of resources, which is a big problem, I read a lot of the stimulus money went into playing housing and stock market. And yes, problem with lack of quality control when government rewards firms with little backing and supervision.

But again... the ultimate question is, overall, is there net gain in economic growth which in the end benefited everyone? Because it is impossible for any society to have perfect resource allocation of resources. For China, despite all the corruption, in the end, is there net growth which benefited the society overall? Do you think all the railroads, roads, the infrastructure building are they all worth it?

Or do you think it is better for people to live in a per-modernization society like 1980's China but with far less corruption and inequality among the rich and poor.

Or do you think it is possible for China to become where it is today, without any corruption, or with corruptions on the level of Western nations today? So in other words, is it possible for a society to undergo such rapid pace of modernization such as China but with very little corruption? My personal opinion is no, because when I look at US and Europe during their rapid stage of industrialization, aka the 1920s, the problem was just as worse. But what is more interesting is how they decreased the problem as the nation transformed into post industrialization society, but it appears today the Western world, especially USA's trend is going back again to more institutionalization corruption.

So that raises a question, is there some kind of forces between corruption and anti corruption that are constantly pushing and pulling against each other. And which ever force come on top solely based on the status of the current society's economic order.
 
Last edited:

luhai

Banned Idiot
Or do you think it is better for people to live in a per-modernization society like 1980's China but with far less corruption and inequality among the rich and poor.

remember pre-modernization society have institutionalized corruption via assignment privileges for either revolutionary cadres (with their own dedicated store, transpiration and housing) or in even old times in Ancien Régime a entire class of nobility with titles, lands and subjects. We see corruption because first and foremost, we expect more. That perfectly normal or even fair in the past is, to us, corrupt and vile.
 

kei3000

New Member
I just hope when I went across Chang An Street to my home yesterday`s afternoon, the traffic police and wardens would not let us normal citizens have to wait the convoys of CPC delegates before 10 minutes they arrived the spot anymore.

They just finished a day`s session and went back to hotel, so I really cannot think a reason why they need first priority on road. The same things had always been occuring under my eyes for too many years since when I was a pupil.

I don`t whether it is about corruption, however I just consider the goverment have had so many unnecessary priveliges in daily life.
 

luhai

Banned Idiot
They just finished a day`s session and went back to hotel, so I really cannot think a reason why they need first priority on road. The same things had always been occurring under my eyes for too many years since when I was a pupil.

That's why I avoid Beijing in general, too many VIPs. I was at the National Museum about 3 month ago, and there was some officials (probably someone important) going there too, use ton of TV camera with CCTV logo behind the main guy and two other guys (sorry I don't recognize faces of politicians) and a bunch of people in people in black suits wicker in front people away, so the camera can get good shots. (though we can stay in the room, I took a picture of the whole thing even.) Is it corruption, probably not, is it annoying, yes.

Anyway, here a photo of it. May be you can tell me who the guy is.
P1030331.jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top