Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Even if you don't believe they're all psychopaths, even normal people act according to incentives, and no one does anything without some sort of (perceived) benefit to themselves. > I really don't think people in local government are any worse or better than people working in X, for any X. If you think otherways - your choice, but would be nice if you show some proofs. You're not really addressing what I said ther…
> You're not really addressing what I said there. I am - you basicaly said that public sector is more corrupt than average, and you try to prove it by saying: a) people working in public sector are selected for corruption b) even if not - all people are suspectible to corruption. My argument against a) is - you haven't shown any data suggesting that public sector is more corrupt, and you haven't shown any mechanism w…
What I'm saying is that people act according to incentives, and their actions are purposeful. We have ends and means towards them. No one does anything without some perceived gain for himself, no matter what that might be.
What I'm also saying is that officials and politicians are psychopaths, because that's exactly the kind of "people" who are most attracted to those jobs, and the most adept at getting them too.
That's a claim, and some reasoning (based on premises) to back it up. You won't find studies that have determined all politicians to be psychopaths though, but that doesn't matter wrt. whether the reasoning is sound enough to accept the conclusion as "likely enough to be true".
> My argument against a) is - you haven't shown any data suggesting that public sector is more corrupt
You know, it would be the public sector itself publishing (and publicizing) that data. Do you think they might be biased?
> and you haven't shown any mechanism which should select for corruption in public sector, that isn't also present in private sector.
So what? Psychopaths are certainly everywhere, but the problem I'm talking about is that they rule over us.
> My argument against b) is - if all people are suspectible to corruption - then why assume they are corrupt by default, when you don't assume the same for people working in private sector?
Because psychopaths are not quite human. Do some research, but.. don't put too much emphasis on academic sources, because most of those have been produced by psychos themselves, and they're a bit biased.
Here's a breadcrumb to follow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsiTyPHMPh8
Of course, you might be one too, and just playing games with me.
> And public officials are paid with public money to do what people want them to do. They may do that, or try to cheat. Same as the programmer.
Public officials aren't exactly held accountable for their actions though, whereas programmers (with no political connections) are.
Pfft.. OK, I should be working instead of wasting time here, so I'll stop.