Earlier quoted context omitted.
It used to be that way. Right now in the United States, the level of corruption that we see is absolutely off the charts and out in the open. It's akin to a strange alien weapon for most Americans, that goes off near you, putting you in a state of trance, and you don't even know what's happening. There is brazenness and blatancy to it, as in "yeah, I did it, what are YOU going to do about it?" In many other countries…
No, it's not that bad in America. The corruption we see in DE is similar to that of US and even Canada - and it's of a different kinds. It's not corruption in the classical sense, it actually is rational for the state to prefer copper, if the state has investments in copper - in a kind of perverse way. Less rational and borderline corruption if an individual state actor has personal investments in copper. 'Big Busine…
A country preferring copper internet because they have large stocks of copper (which makes the project cheaper) is arguably the right thing to do. If it turns out it's a bad decision in the long run (because the negative impact of slow internet outweighs the savings brought by the cheap copper), that's just a bad investment. At worst, it's a mismanaged government.
An individual doing something to gain personal benefits (i.e. Cheney) is more regular, high level-corruption.
Somewhere in between the two, you get regulatory capture.
Then you have things like Old Boys' Clubs where you can't get hired in high-paying jobs unless you went to school with the right people. I'd call that an unequal society.
These are different types of problems which require radically different solutions.