Impact of Bribery
Impact of Bribery:-
The bribery itself reduces the freedom of choice by altering the conditions under which a decision is made.
Its appeal of additional gains for some government officials would lure them to select the less attractive alternative which provides less total satisfaction. By doing so, it adversely would disrupt the official’s decision and undermined fair competition among the industry.
If the De La Rua administration’s doubt that the cost of each electronic ID reported by Siemens was twice what the government estimated is true, then the government has to pay the price for the hidden payment with more governmental expenditure, which leads to a greater loss of money of the government.
Secondly, it would damage the authority, prestige and force of laws and regulations.
Thirdly, it would undermines attempts by governments to improve the overall wealth of the nation, diminish the image of government and governing party, and further lose people's trust.
For Argentine community, from the perspective of whole economy system and environment, it would: I. Hinder fair and just competition and disrupt the order of the whole economic system. Instead of gain market share with quality, businesses would turn to shortcuts like relationship with government officials II. Result in allocating more resources to a less desirable alternative. The failure of the allocation system would lead to stagnation of technology, service and the whole industry structure. III. Increase the cost of transaction, and do harm to public's interest. The higher cost would result in higher prices or even monopoly.
From the whole society, it would:
i. Cast damage to social credit and rot the social conduct. On one hand, the prevalence of bribery destroys the mutual trust and equity of businesses; on the other hand, businesses with good compliance to laws are suppressed and discouraged. ii. Violate code of ethics iii. Breed more and more relative
The bribery itself reduces the freedom of choice by altering the conditions under which a decision is made.
Its appeal of additional gains for some government officials would lure them to select the less attractive alternative which provides less total satisfaction. By doing so, it adversely would disrupt the official’s decision and undermined fair competition among the industry.
If the De La Rua administration’s doubt that the cost of each electronic ID reported by Siemens was twice what the government estimated is true, then the government has to pay the price for the hidden payment with more governmental expenditure, which leads to a greater loss of money of the government.
Secondly, it would damage the authority, prestige and force of laws and regulations.
Thirdly, it would undermines attempts by governments to improve the overall wealth of the nation, diminish the image of government and governing party, and further lose people's trust.
For Argentine community, from the perspective of whole economy system and environment, it would: I. Hinder fair and just competition and disrupt the order of the whole economic system. Instead of gain market share with quality, businesses would turn to shortcuts like relationship with government officials II. Result in allocating more resources to a less desirable alternative. The failure of the allocation system would lead to stagnation of technology, service and the whole industry structure. III. Increase the cost of transaction, and do harm to public's interest. The higher cost would result in higher prices or even monopoly.
From the whole society, it would:
i. Cast damage to social credit and rot the social conduct. On one hand, the prevalence of bribery destroys the mutual trust and equity of businesses; on the other hand, businesses with good compliance to laws are suppressed and discouraged. ii. Violate code of ethics iii. Breed more and more relative