Bitcoin Forum

This to me is far from optimum and has plenty of faily nasty problems, but it seems to be what most nations, including developed nations use and continuing to be in denial is more dangerous than making it legitimate.

If political decisions were bid on, the politicans job being mostly to compete at searching for people with money who can pay them for changes to the law, as it is at the moment, but where they earn only a commission instead of getting to keep the whole bribe and transparency must be strictly adhered to.

The highest bidder winning and so buying the right to make that decision. The mechanism may be different but along similar lines, how much tax would it pay for?

For a basic small government that only enforces basic laws and cannot always achieve even this.

For a government with proper police that also provides benefits for people out of work that gives them a moderate quality of life, but leaves other aspects mostly to the market. Laws can include complex issues such as zoning for use of land, fraud, involving different levels of court etc...

For a large government that provides the above as well as maintaining government owned roads, providing public transport, health and other services.

We already have legalised bribery, it's called lobby groups and campaign donations, though you could argue that lobby groups are extortion and blackmail as well.

Exactly, I think politicians in England at least can still be arrested for outright taking bribes, the press reports as if someone getting caught reduces the amount of it happening, not acknowledging that the whole system is built almost entirely on the idea.

So isn't it strange that there is any penalty to getting caught.

It would allow someone to pay for a law that taxes X to fund Y. As a result you would get more taxes not less.

What balances the system enough at the moment to stop it collapsing entirely under more and more effectively for the private sector tax?

bump