Re: Fidel And The Queen

[Jim Devine <jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx>]

one reason why state-run economies may be more subject to "corruption"
is that in a market (privately-run) economy, a lot of "corruption" is
perfectly legal, e.g., the princely and (much less often) princessly
salaries of CEOs. Thus, it's not defined as "corruption."

On 4/21/06, Charles Brown <cbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Richard Gott
> Tuesday April 18, 2006
> Guardian
>
>  ...deployed in the struggle against corruption, the scourge to
> which state-run  economies have always been peculiarly vulnerable.
>
>
> ^^^
> CB: There is enormous corruption in the privately run economies. No one has
> proven that "state-run" economies are more "vulnerable" to corruption than
> market economies.  I face corrupt, predatory lenders and landlords, consumer
> sales cheaters from the private sector constantly.  There are corrupt
> private conartists from the street and even more in the private suites,
>


--
Jim Devine / "There can be no real individual freedom in the presence
of economic insecurity." -- Chester Bowles