Well I didn't mention Iran but never mind.
The CPI quantifies peoples perceptions of coruption:-
(It also surveys public sector workers to enquire if they have been bribed etc anonymously)
Quote:
|
The CPI focuses on corruption in the public sector and defines corruption as the abuse of public office for private gain. The surveys used in compiling the CPI ask questions relating to the misuse of public power for private benefit. These include for example: bribery of public officials, kickbacks in public procurement, embezzlement of public funds or questions that probe the strength and effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts, thereby encompassing both the administrative and political aspects of corruption.
|
Why is corruption in a quantifiable manner ridiculous?
It's certainly not something that can be easily quantified but I see no reason why you couldn't break it down (financial corruption, nepostism etc etc) and provide decents proxys for the purposes of comparison. It's certainly no more ridiculous an endeavour then relying purely on ideology and dogma to define, decide and determine who and what is corrupt.
That way, yes this is oversimplified, your basically just pointing at folks and saying "your corrupt because I say so". I wish you luck with that Citizen Robespierre
Well I didn't mention Iran but never mind.
The CPI quantifies peoples perceptions of coruption:-
(It also surveys public sector workers to enquire if they have been bribed etc anonymously)
Quote:
|
The CPI focuses on corruption in the public sector and defines corruption as the abuse of public office for private gain. The surveys used in compiling the CPI ask questions relating to the misuse of public power for private benefit. These include for example: bribery of public officials, kickbacks in public procurement, embezzlement of public funds or questions that probe the strength and effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts, thereby encompassing both the administrative and political aspects of corruption.
|
Why is corruption in a quantifiable manner ridiculous?
It's certainly not something that can be easily quantified but I see no reason why you couldn't break it down (financial corruption, nepostism etc etc) and provide decents proxys for the purposes of comparison. It's certainly no more ridiculous an endeavour then relying purely on ideology and dogma to define, decide and determine who and what is corrupt.
That way, yes this is oversimplified, your basically just pointing at folks and saying "your corrupt because I say so". I wish you luck with that Citizen Robespierre
