🚀 go-pugleaf

The courts and the ballot boxes are not effective enough for making
government (in general) accountable.  Take for example Marcos who
"lost" an election and still has a lot of money which is badly needed
in the Philippines.  A whole country suffers while the court
proceedings drag on.

The assumption in using the ballot boxes is that the government
official involved wants to be re-elected.  If he/she knows that the
punishment for some corrupt action which results in making him/her
rich is just not to get re-elected, that is a small price to pay for
the ill-gotten wealth.  The case for the courts are stronger but
someone still has to incur the cost (in dollars and in time) of
bringing the crook to court before any settlement can be reached.

Actually there might be another way to make government better without
enforcing a strict accountability system---competition among
governments for your skill (there was a write up along this line in
the Wall Street Journal a few weeks ago).  If the government of a
country wants your skill badly enough, they would do things to induce
you to migrate to that country.  But this can get complicated.  For
example low tax rates can be thought of as a way for inducing
migration to a state (New Hampshire) from another state
(Massachusetts).  This inducement is effective only if all other
things are considered equal e.g. both states have equally good
universities, hospitals, industries, entertainment facilities,
airports, etc.  Many people in the high-tech industries in
Massachusetts at one time or another have consider taking up residence
in NH but somehow the tax incentives don't seem to be big enough to
cause many of us to leave Massachusetts for NH.  But the idea of a
"free-market of governments" is fascinating.


Willie
-------
-------