Trump: "Make Bribery Legal Again"

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 05:12 AM

Quote:

“It’s just so unfair that American companies aren’t allowed to pay bribes to get business overseas,” Trump said, according to a passage published by the Post. “We’re going to change that.” The law is designed to prevent individuals and businesses in the U.S. from paying money or offering gifts to foreign officials as a way to win business overseas. Critics of the law complain that it puts U.S. businesses at a disadvantage in places where bribes are customary.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020...p-bribery-laws

The assault on the rule of law and order from this outlaw fascist regime continues...

Darat · 19th January 2020, 05:19 AM

Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial?

......

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 05:27 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial?

......

And if the country in question thought human sacrifice was just peachy-keen-dandy we would allow our businesses to start cutting the hearts out of employees on altars?

Your argument is literally the "argument from tradition" fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition

phiwum · 19th January 2020, 05:42 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial?

......

The International Anti-Bribery Act makes it illegal in the US for a citizen or corporation to offer a bribe to a public official in another country. It's not just about extradition.

I'm okay with the law, since encouraging corruption overseas is arguably bad for the US.

Darat · 19th January 2020, 05:44 AM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

And if the country in question thought human sacrifice was just peachy-keen-dandy we would allow our businesses to start cutting the hearts out of employees on altars?

Your argument is literally the "argument from tradition" fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition

Nope it ain't.

And businesses have to accept risk.

If the shareholders and CEOs don't want to end up having their beating hearts ripped from their chests then they need to make sure they don't bribe anyone in that country or don't do business with that country.

Indeed if the country is so reprehensible the shareholders and CEOs wouldn't want to do business with that country in the first place would they?

I'm not against people doing business with whoever they want, I am however against them avoiding risks when they do so.

I would probably go one step further. When it was found that people were committing suicide in the factories that were manufacturing Apple products I think Cook and Apple shareholders should have been arrested and charged with something like corporate manslaughter.

I dislike intensely how capital owners have insulated themselves from the consequences of their property. By all means outsource your manufacturing of t-shirts to Bangladesh, but when 30 people die in one of the factories that manufacturers your t-shirts because the fire alarms didn't work and the fire exits were kept padlocked you should be held to the same legal liability as if you owned the factory in your country.

(The above of course is nothing but a fantasy, there is more chance if me winning the lottery than that ever happening, and I don't play the lottery!)

Darat · 19th January 2020, 05:51 AM

Originally Posted by phiwum

The International Anti-Bribery Act makes it illegal in the US for a citizen or corporation to offer a bribe to a public official in another country. It's not just about extradition.

I'm okay with the law, since encouraging corruption overseas is arguably bad for the US.

I'm aware of the laws we currently have, we have similar in the UK and in most other major economies and we do sometimes successfully prosecute people for it.

Just don't think it makes sense for this to be a crime if the country it takes part in doesn't consider it a crime. It's then nothing but standard business practice for that country, akin to say paying someone an agency fee for an introduction.

But if it is a crime in that country the shareholders and CEOs should be held accountable in that country.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 05:55 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Nope it ain't.

And businesses have to accept risk.

If the shareholders and CEOs don't want to end up having their beating hearts ripped from their chests then they need to make sure they don't bribe anyone in that country or don't do business with that country.

Indeed if the country is so reprehensible the shareholders and CEOs wouldn't want to do business with that country in the first place would they?

I'm not against people doing business with whoever they want, I am however against them avoiding risks when they do so.

I would probably go one step further. When it was found that people were committing suicide in the factories that were manufacturing Apple products I think Cook and Apple shareholders should have been arrested and charged with something like corporate manslaughter.

I dislike intensely how capital owners have insulated themselves from the consequences of their property. By all means outsource your manufacturing of t-shirts to Bangladesh, but when 30 people die in one of the factories that manufacturers your t-shirts because the fire alarms didn't work and the fire exits were kept padlocked you should be held to the same legal liability as if you owned the factory in your country.

(The above of course is nothing but a fantasy, there is more chance if me winning the lottery than that ever happening, and I don't play the lottery!)

This is why as a libertarian I oppose incorporation.

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 06:10 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

This is why as a libertarian I oppose incorporation.

Sign of the Apocalypse? I actually semi-agree. Corporations should only exist IF the people running them are on the block for the consequences of their decisions involving them.

Darat · 19th January 2020, 06:16 AM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

Sign of the Apocalypse? I actually semi-agree. Corporations should only exist IF the people running them are on the block for the consequences of their decisions involving them.

I agree but you have to make the owners and the CEOs responsible for what their company does, too often they are insulated because it is "technically" a middle manager who did a particular act. If you want the big bucks and the profit from your property you take the big risks as well.

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

I agree but you have to make the owners and the CEOs responsible for what their company does, too often they are insulated because it is "technically" a middle manager who did a particular act. If you want the big bucks and the profit from your property you take the big risks as well.

Fair point.You esentially are restating what I said, anyway.

theprestige · 19th January 2020, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial?

......

The problem is that bribes are illegal, but still customary, due to corruption.

Some American businesses are complaining that in order to do business in corrupt countries, it's sometimes necessary to bypass local laws and do business via corrupt customs. US law prohibits that kind of "go along to get along" approach.

sackett · 19th January 2020, 09:12 AM

Who gets to say that corruption is customary in any particular country?

Why, the bribe-paying boss, of course!

Silly me, I could have guessed that.

theprestige · 19th January 2020, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by sackett

Who gets to say that corruption is customary in any particular country?

Why, the bribe-paying boss, of course!

Silly me, I could have guessed that.

The bribe-demanding functionary probably has a bigger say.

There are also independent reviews of such things.

This doesn't have to turn into yet another Five Minute Hate, you know.

sackett · 19th January 2020, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

The bribe-demanding functionary probably has a bigger say.

There are also independent reviews of such things.

This doesn't have to turn into yet another Five Minute Hate, you know.

Independent reviews, really? By whom, under Master Trumph's proposed rules?

Alas, prest old man, it remains true that capitalists are like children: if they aren't supervised, they get up to mischief.

theprestige · 19th January 2020, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by sackett

Independent reviews, really? By whom, under Master Trumph's proposed rules?

No, I just mean that there are people in various capacities who examine relative corruption and rule of law between countries, and report on what they see. It's not just a matter of asking the functionary and the businessman.

Quote:

Alas, prest old man, it remains true that capitalists are like children: if they aren't supervised, they get up to mischief.

Yeah, but they don't get up to mischief they don't have to. Nobody's going to pay a bribe if they can do business with that money still in their pocket. If it's not customary, then they're going to look for ways to avoid it.

sackett · 19th January 2020, 09:53 AM

Of course, most nations have pious laws against bribery. Lesser Slobovia might start enforcing them in the case of some bloated yankee boss, even demanding -- and getting! -- his extradition to stand trial.

Unless he knew who to bribe in their Justice Ministry. And then in their National Police. Then in their Bureau of Mines, Slavery, and Pious Reforms. Etc., until he was working for their Immaculate Leader, polishing His golden toilet.

sackett · 19th January 2020, 10:05 AM

Bidnessmen don't pay bribes unless they have to? Well, but, they pretty often want to, when eager to avoid regulations, or to get in ahead of competitors, or to use shoddy materials, or launder money, or put out a contract on a union organizer, or -- well gosh, the wonderful ways of capitalism can always find occasions for being at least a little bit peccant. Or grossly villainous.

Funny, typing about this makes my fingers feel greasy. Believe I'll go wash my hands.

theprestige · 19th January 2020, 10:46 AM

And there it is.

Darat · 19th January 2020, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

The problem is that bribes are illegal, but still customary, due to corruption.

Some American businesses are complaining that in order to do business in corrupt countries, it's sometimes necessary to bypass local laws and do business via corrupt customs. US law prohibits that kind of "go along to get along" approach.

I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit.

theprestige · 19th January 2020, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit.

Tweak them how, though? Make it harder to bribe, or easier?

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

No, I just mean that there are people in various capacities who examine relative corruption and rule of law between countries, and report on what they see. It's not just a matter of asking the functionary and the businessman.

Yeah, but they don't get up to mischief they don't have to. Nobody's going to pay a bribe if they can do business with that money still in their pocket. If it's not customary, then they're going to look for ways to avoid it.

The immorality of customary bribery has been resolved. See bridge v. Your friends

theprestige · 19th January 2020, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

The immorality of customary bribery has been resolved. See bridge v. Your friends

I don't know what this means.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I don't know what this means.

"Bridge v. Your friends" is using the language of law to play on a very common phrase uttered by the mothers of young children. Because these kinds of discussions sometimes reference cases, I thought it would be an interesting combo.

Lukraak_Sisser · 19th January 2020, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit.

Maybe the bribes will have to come directly from the salary of the CEO or the profit payed to the shareholders?

Olmstead · 19th January 2020, 11:09 AM

Did someone steal all the dictionaries and change the definition of "bribe" to something wholesome while I wasn't looking? Yeah, I'm sure it's just like paying an agency, nothing shady going on here at all, no one will get the short end of the stick in this arrangement.

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Nope it ain't.

Yes, it is. When your argument is literally that "this is how things are done there" it is an appeal to tradition.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Olmstead

Did someone steal all the dictionaries and change the definition of "bribe" to something wholesome while I wasn't looking? Yeah, I'm sure it's just like paying an agency, nothing shady going on here at all, no one will get the short end of the stick in this arrangement.

Morality is relative to the different nations.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

Yes, it is. When your argument is literally that "this is how things are done there" it is an appeal to tradition.

That wasn't his argument. He didn't say why we should defer to the other country. But people rarely make a full argument every post.

theprestige · 19th January 2020, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

"Bridge v. Your friends" is using the language of law to play on a very common phrase uttered by the mothers of young children. Because these kinds of discussions sometimes reference cases, I thought it would be an interesting combo.

I still don't know what your previous post means. Is there a way for you to say the same thing without metaphor?

Minoosh · 19th January 2020, 11:27 AM

This apparently was one of the beefs Tillerson had with Trump.

Fire/Silk autofill changed "Tillerson" to "fillets." And "beefs" to "needs." And "autofill" to "autism."

And "auto-fill" to "signup."

Skeptic Ginger · 19th January 2020, 11:39 AM

Trump is day-dreaming about all the people who could be paying him big bribes. It's part of his envy of Putin and other autocrats who've become enormously rich collecting bribes.

Now here Trump is POTUS and his profits have been so limited.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I still don't know what your previous post means. Is there a way for you to say the same thing without metaphor?

If your friends jumped off a bridge would you too?

Because others commit bribery should you?

newyorkguy · 19th January 2020, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit.

I pretty much agree with this sentiment. By the way, I think the law, which passed in 1977, restricts payments mostly to foreign officials. I have read that in some cases it was believed the legislation would give U.S. businesses a way to resist paying those bribes. I have also read where it is sometimes a problem is in developing countries that do not have a institutionalized regulatory system. That instead of meeting regulatory requirements, the business instead makes cash payments to various local officials. If they won't do it the deal is dead.

Of course, to my knowledge the Trump administration is typically vague about what they may propose.

Quote:

“We are looking at it,” White House Economic Adviser Larry Kudlow said at the White House on Friday, in response to a reporter’s question about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Link

The law has been on the books for forty-three years, I'd like to see examples of the how "unfair" it has been before I'd even want to think about changing it. In fact, already it has been stated that under the Trump administration, enforcement of the law has dropped.

The most recent report I found is from 2017.

Quote:

When the law was first passed, the United States was something of an outlier because many other governments did little to stop bribery. Over time, however, attitudes changed. Today, governments around the world are much more likely to cooperate in pursuing wrongdoers.

"In general terms, there's been a dramatic drop-off [in prosecutions] from the average over the previous 10 years, to what we're seeing in the Trump administration," says Witzel, head of the white collar defense and government investigations practice at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson...Southern Illinois University Law School professor Mike Koehler, who writes the FCPA Professor blog, says comparing enforcement records among different administrations is difficult, in part because the data sets are small, with relatively few cases being pursued in any given year. from NPR

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

And there it is.

And "there" [what] is...?

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Morality is relative to the different nations.

No. Right and wrong are universal moral absolutes. Once you start treating them as "relative" you open the door to the Holocaust.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

No. Right and wrong are universal moral absolutes. Once you start treating them as "relative" you open the door to the Holocaust.

So? Morality is relative and they seemed pretty confident in theirs. Relative morality is a social observation, not a claim of value.

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

So? Morality is relative.

Again. No. Murder (the unlawful killing of another, for example, is universally wrong. Raping someone is universally wrong. It is not a matter of your "opinion", the acts are inherently wrong.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

Again. No. Murder (the unlawful killing of another, for example, is universally wrong. Raping someone is universally wrong. It is not a matter of your "opinion", the acts are inherently wrong.

They are not inherently wrong because there is no inherent moral quality to physics. Right or wrong is a construct.

ChristianProgressive · 19th January 2020, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

They are not inherently wrong because there is no inherent moral quality to physics. Right or wrong is a construct.

We aren't talking about physics. We are talking about right and wrong.

BobTheCoward · 19th January 2020, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

We aren't talking about physics. We are talking about right and wrong.

Which is a construct.

19th January 2020, 05:12 AM	#1
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,805	Trump: "Make Bribery Legal Again" Quote: “It’s just so unfair that American companies aren’t allowed to pay bribes to get business overseas,” Trump said, according to a passage published by the Post. “We’re going to change that.” The law is designed to prevent individuals and businesses in the U.S. from paying money or offering gifts to foreign officials as a way to win business overseas. Critics of the law complain that it puts U.S. businesses at a disadvantage in places where bribes are customary. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020...p-bribery-laws The assault on the rule of law and order from this outlaw fascist regime continues...
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

19th January 2020, 05:19 AM	#2
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 96,139	Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial? ......
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

19th January 2020, 05:27 AM	#3
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,805	Originally Posted by Darat Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial? ...... And if the country in question thought human sacrifice was just peachy-keen-dandy we would allow our businesses to start cutting the hearts out of employees on altars? Your argument is literally the "argument from tradition" fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

19th January 2020, 05:44 AM	#5
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 96,139	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive And if the country in question thought human sacrifice was just peachy-keen-dandy we would allow our businesses to start cutting the hearts out of employees on altars? Your argument is literally the "argument from tradition" fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition Nope it ain't. And businesses have to accept risk. If the shareholders and CEOs don't want to end up having their beating hearts ripped from their chests then they need to make sure they don't bribe anyone in that country or don't do business with that country. Indeed if the country is so reprehensible the shareholders and CEOs wouldn't want to do business with that country in the first place would they? I'm not against people doing business with whoever they want, I am however against them avoiding risks when they do so. I would probably go one step further. When it was found that people were committing suicide in the factories that were manufacturing Apple products I think Cook and Apple shareholders should have been arrested and charged with something like corporate manslaughter. I dislike intensely how capital owners have insulated themselves from the consequences of their property. By all means outsource your manufacturing of t-shirts to Bangladesh, but when 30 people die in one of the factories that manufacturers your t-shirts because the fire alarms didn't work and the fire exits were kept padlocked you should be held to the same legal liability as if you owned the factory in your country. (The above of course is nothing but a fantasy, there is more chance if me winning the lottery than that ever happening, and I don't play the lottery!)
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

19th January 2020, 05:51 AM	#6
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 96,139	Originally Posted by phiwum The International Anti-Bribery Act makes it illegal in the US for a citizen or corporation to offer a bribe to a public official in another country. It's not just about extradition. I'm okay with the law, since encouraging corruption overseas is arguably bad for the US. I'm aware of the laws we currently have, we have similar in the UK and in most other major economies and we do sometimes successfully prosecute people for it. Just don't think it makes sense for this to be a crime if the country it takes part in doesn't consider it a crime. It's then nothing but standard business practice for that country, akin to say paying someone an agency fee for an introduction. But if it is a crime in that country the shareholders and CEOs should be held accountable in that country.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

19th January 2020, 05:42 AM	#4
phiwum Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 12,714	Originally Posted by Darat Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial? ...... The International Anti-Bribery Act makes it illegal in the US for a citizen or corporation to offer a bribe to a public official in another country. It's not just about extradition. I'm okay with the law, since encouraging corruption overseas is arguably bad for the US.

19th January 2020, 05:55 AM	#7
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,166	Originally Posted by Darat Nope it ain't. And businesses have to accept risk. If the shareholders and CEOs don't want to end up having their beating hearts ripped from their chests then they need to make sure they don't bribe anyone in that country or don't do business with that country. Indeed if the country is so reprehensible the shareholders and CEOs wouldn't want to do business with that country in the first place would they? I'm not against people doing business with whoever they want, I am however against them avoiding risks when they do so. I would probably go one step further. When it was found that people were committing suicide in the factories that were manufacturing Apple products I think Cook and Apple shareholders should have been arrested and charged with something like corporate manslaughter. I dislike intensely how capital owners have insulated themselves from the consequences of their property. By all means outsource your manufacturing of t-shirts to Bangladesh, but when 30 people die in one of the factories that manufacturers your t-shirts because the fire alarms didn't work and the fire exits were kept padlocked you should be held to the same legal liability as if you owned the factory in your country. (The above of course is nothing but a fantasy, there is more chance if me winning the lottery than that ever happening, and I don't play the lottery!) This is why as a libertarian I oppose incorporation.

19th January 2020, 06:10 AM	#8
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,805	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward This is why as a libertarian I oppose incorporation. Sign of the Apocalypse? I actually semi-agree. Corporations should only exist IF the people running them are on the block for the consequences of their decisions involving them.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

19th January 2020, 06:16 AM	#9
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 96,139	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive Sign of the Apocalypse? I actually semi-agree. Corporations should only exist IF the people running them are on the block for the consequences of their decisions involving them. I agree but you have to make the owners and the CEOs responsible for what their company does, too often they are insulated because it is "technically" a middle manager who did a particular act. If you want the big bucks and the profit from your property you take the big risks as well.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

19th January 2020, 06:36 AM	#10
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,805	Originally Posted by Darat I agree but you have to make the owners and the CEOs responsible for what their company does, too often they are insulated because it is "technically" a middle manager who did a particular act. If you want the big bucks and the profit from your property you take the big risks as well. Fair point.You esentially are restating what I said, anyway.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

19th January 2020, 07:25 AM	#11
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,633	Originally Posted by Darat Surely it should be up to the country in which the bribe takes place to decide if it is illegal of not? Perhaps a more sensible way to look at it is to have a law in your country that if someone is accused of bribary in another country you will will allow that country to extradite the CEO and shareholders to stand trial? ...... The problem is that bribes are illegal, but still customary, due to corruption. Some American businesses are complaining that in order to do business in corrupt countries, it's sometimes necessary to bypass local laws and do business via corrupt customs. US law prohibits that kind of "go along to get along" approach.

19th January 2020, 09:12 AM	#12
sackett Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 6,308	Who gets to say that corruption is customary in any particular country? Why, the bribe-paying boss, of course! Silly me, I could have guessed that.
	__________________ Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil

19th January 2020, 09:37 AM	#13
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,633	Originally Posted by sackett Who gets to say that corruption is customary in any particular country? Why, the bribe-paying boss, of course! Silly me, I could have guessed that. The bribe-demanding functionary probably has a bigger say. There are also independent reviews of such things. This doesn't have to turn into yet another Five Minute Hate, you know.

19th January 2020, 09:43 AM	#14
sackett Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 6,308	One minute's enough Originally Posted by theprestige The bribe-demanding functionary probably has a bigger say. There are also independent reviews of such things. This doesn't have to turn into yet another Five Minute Hate, you know. Independent reviews, really? By whom, under Master Trumph's proposed rules? Alas, prest old man, it remains true that capitalists are like children: if they aren't supervised, they get up to mischief.
	__________________ Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil

19th January 2020, 09:51 AM	#15
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,633	Originally Posted by sackett Independent reviews, really? By whom, under Master Trumph's proposed rules? No, I just mean that there are people in various capacities who examine relative corruption and rule of law between countries, and report on what they see. It's not just a matter of asking the functionary and the businessman. Quote: Alas, prest old man, it remains true that capitalists are like children: if they aren't supervised, they get up to mischief. Yeah, but they don't get up to mischief they don't have to. Nobody's going to pay a bribe if they can do business with that money still in their pocket. If it's not customary, then they're going to look for ways to avoid it.

19th January 2020, 09:53 AM	#16
sackett Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 6,308	Of course, most nations have pious laws against bribery. Lesser Slobovia might start enforcing them in the case of some bloated yankee boss, even demanding -- and getting! -- his extradition to stand trial. Unless he knew who to bribe in their Justice Ministry. And then in their National Police. Then in their Bureau of Mines, Slavery, and Pious Reforms. Etc., until he was working for their Immaculate Leader, polishing His golden toilet.
	__________________ Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil

19th January 2020, 10:05 AM	#17
sackett Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 6,308	Bidnessmen don't pay bribes unless they have to? Well, but, they pretty often want to, when eager to avoid regulations, or to get in ahead of competitors, or to use shoddy materials, or launder money, or put out a contract on a union organizer, or -- well gosh, the wonderful ways of capitalism can always find occasions for being at least a little bit peccant. Or grossly villainous. Funny, typing about this makes my fingers feel greasy. Believe I'll go wash my hands.
	__________________ Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil

19th January 2020, 10:46 AM	#18
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,633	And there it is.

19th January 2020, 10:56 AM	#19
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 96,139	Originally Posted by theprestige The problem is that bribes are illegal, but still customary, due to corruption. Some American businesses are complaining that in order to do business in corrupt countries, it's sometimes necessary to bypass local laws and do business via corrupt customs. US law prohibits that kind of "go along to get along" approach. I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

19th January 2020, 10:59 AM	#20
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,633	Originally Posted by Darat I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit. Tweak them how, though? Make it harder to bribe, or easier?

19th January 2020, 11:02 AM	#21
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,166	Originally Posted by theprestige No, I just mean that there are people in various capacities who examine relative corruption and rule of law between countries, and report on what they see. It's not just a matter of asking the functionary and the businessman. Yeah, but they don't get up to mischief they don't have to. Nobody's going to pay a bribe if they can do business with that money still in their pocket. If it's not customary, then they're going to look for ways to avoid it. The immorality of customary bribery has been resolved. See bridge v. Your friends

19th January 2020, 11:05 AM	#22
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,633	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward The immorality of customary bribery has been resolved. See bridge v. Your friends I don't know what this means.

19th January 2020, 11:07 AM	#23
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,166	Originally Posted by theprestige I don't know what this means. "Bridge v. Your friends" is using the language of law to play on a very common phrase uttered by the mothers of young children. Because these kinds of discussions sometimes reference cases, I thought it would be an interesting combo.
	Last edited by BobTheCoward; 19th January 2020 at 11:08 AM.

19th January 2020, 11:08 AM	#24
Lukraak_Sisser Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 3,922	Originally Posted by Darat I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit. Maybe the bribes will have to come directly from the salary of the CEO or the profit payed to the shareholders?

19th January 2020, 11:09 AM	#25
Olmstead Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 345	Did someone steal all the dictionaries and change the definition of "bribe" to something wholesome while I wasn't looking? Yeah, I'm sure it's just like paying an agency, nothing shady going on here at all, no one will get the short end of the stick in this arrangement.
Olmstead Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 345

19th January 2020, 11:10 AM	#26
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,805	Originally Posted by Darat Nope it ain't. Yes, it is. When your argument is literally that "this is how things are done there" it is an appeal to tradition.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

19th January 2020, 11:11 AM	#27
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,166	Originally Posted by Olmstead Did someone steal all the dictionaries and change the definition of "bribe" to something wholesome while I wasn't looking? Yeah, I'm sure it's just like paying an agency, nothing shady going on here at all, no one will get the short end of the stick in this arrangement. Morality is relative to the different nations.

19th January 2020, 11:16 AM	#28
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,166	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive Yes, it is. When your argument is literally that "this is how things are done there" it is an appeal to tradition. That wasn't his argument. He didn't say why we should defer to the other country. But people rarely make a full argument every post.

19th January 2020, 11:23 AM	#29
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 48,633	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward "Bridge v. Your friends" is using the language of law to play on a very common phrase uttered by the mothers of young children. Because these kinds of discussions sometimes reference cases, I thought it would be an interesting combo. I still don't know what your previous post means. Is there a way for you to say the same thing without metaphor?

19th January 2020, 11:27 AM	#30
Minoosh Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 12,128	This apparently was one of the beefs Tillerson had with Trump. Fire/Silk autofill changed "Tillerson" to "fillets." And "beefs" to "needs." And "autofill" to "autism." And "auto-fill" to "signup."

19th January 2020, 11:39 AM	#31
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 85,869	Trump is day-dreaming about all the people who could be paying him big bribes. It's part of his envy of Putin and other autocrats who've become enormously rich collecting bribes. Now here Trump is POTUS and his profits have been so limited.

19th January 2020, 11:41 AM	#32
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,166	Originally Posted by theprestige I still don't know what your previous post means. Is there a way for you to say the same thing without metaphor? If your friends jumped off a bridge would you too? Because others commit bribery should you?

19th January 2020, 11:45 AM	#33
newyorkguy Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: NY Posts: 11,432	Originally Posted by Darat I understand that, and I understand how we have arrived at the laws we have today and I can see that in some ways they are a good idea. I happen to think we could tweak them a bit. I pretty much agree with this sentiment. By the way, I think the law, which passed in 1977, restricts payments mostly to foreign officials. I have read that in some cases it was believed the legislation would give U.S. businesses a way to resist paying those bribes. I have also read where it is sometimes a problem is in developing countries that do not have a institutionalized regulatory system. That instead of meeting regulatory requirements, the business instead makes cash payments to various local officials. If they won't do it the deal is dead. Of course, to my knowledge the Trump administration is typically vague about what they may propose. Quote: “We are looking at it,” White House Economic Adviser Larry Kudlow said at the White House on Friday, in response to a reporter’s question about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Link The law has been on the books for forty-three years, I'd like to see examples of the how "unfair" it has been before I'd even want to think about changing it. In fact, already it has been stated that under the Trump administration, enforcement of the law has dropped. The most recent report I found is from 2017. Quote: When the law was first passed, the United States was something of an outlier because many other governments did little to stop bribery. Over time, however, attitudes changed. Today, governments around the world are much more likely to cooperate in pursuing wrongdoers. "In general terms, there's been a dramatic drop-off [in prosecutions] from the average over the previous 10 years, to what we're seeing in the Trump administration," says Witzel, head of the white collar defense and government investigations practice at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson...Southern Illinois University Law School professor Mike Koehler, who writes the FCPA Professor blog, says comparing enforcement records among different administrations is difficult, in part because the data sets are small, with relatively few cases being pursued in any given year. from NPR

19th January 2020, 12:18 PM	#34
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,805	Originally Posted by theprestige And there it is. And "there" [what] is...?
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

19th January 2020, 12:22 PM	#35
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,805	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Morality is relative to the different nations. No. Right and wrong are universal moral absolutes. Once you start treating them as "relative" you open the door to the Holocaust.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28