U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations

#71

Post by saint_fiasco » Wed, Aug 30, 2017, 3:21 PM UTC

ImSkeptical wrote: post #52

adventured wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument you're leveling is equivalent to: never start a business in any country and never do business in any country. It requires a perfect bureaucracy in terms of government and requires perfect knowledge by all participants and at all times (ie it will never exist). Even well run nations generally have very large numbers of regulations on the books, frequently outdated or poorly thought-through, requiring you…

You're right that there are more laws than any one person knows. There are also complex interactions between laws and interpretations of laws such that even diligent legal scholars acting in good faith would struggle to do complex actions without arguably violating some law. I definitely believe the law should be simplified and clarified to improve comprehension. However, there is a world of difference between unwitt…

> Bribery is inefficient. Systems that operate according to law are safer, cleaner, and more productive

Not always. If bribery had been common in the US, Michael Brown would still be alive and the Ferguson scandal would not have happened.

A lot of other bad things would have occurred instead, but it's not 100% black and white.

Re: U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations

#72

Post by remline » Wed, Aug 30, 2017, 3:24 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #65

remline wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, what could possibly go wrong if an official doesn't respect the fact that you can't bribe them, pay their "official" fee, or hire a consultant from a very short list of "approved" consultants? Anyone who hasn't chosen to spend years in jail when they were a victim of the airport mall shoplifter scam is an example of someone who has violated the FCPA.

If they're holding you on trumped up allegations demanding a bribe to let you go, that falls under the FCPA's duress exception: http://www.fcpablog.com/blog/2012/11/14/doj-and-sec-release-...

Could you bribe someone to avoid imprisonment for trial in US courts for health or safety reasons?

I don't think the DOJ will necessarily honor that unless you have some kind of health condition and evidence the foreign court is refusing to hear about it.. I don't think anyone in the cases I referenced made medical arguments before bribing officials.

Re: U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations

#73

Post by ImSkeptical » Wed, Aug 30, 2017, 5:43 PM UTC

saint_fiasco wrote: post #71

ImSkeptical wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right that there are more laws than any one person knows. There are also complex interactions between laws and interpretations of laws such that even diligent legal scholars acting in good faith would struggle to do complex actions without arguably violating some law. I definitely believe the law should be simplified and clarified to improve comprehension. However, there is a world of difference between unwitt…

> Bribery is inefficient. Systems that operate according to law are safer, cleaner, and more productive Not always. If bribery had been common in the US, Michael Brown would still be alive and the Ferguson scandal would not have happened. A lot of other bad things would have occurred instead, but it's not 100% black and white.

I'm not sure what I understand what you mean. Could you explain how the illegality or rarity of bribery in the US led to the Ferguson scandal, or the death of Michael Brown?

Re: U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations

#74

Post by saint_fiasco » Wed, Aug 30, 2017, 6:49 PM UTC

ImSkeptical wrote: post #73

saint_fiasco wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bribery is inefficient. Systems that operate according to law are safer, cleaner, and more productive Not always. If bribery had been common in the US, Michael Brown would still be alive and the Ferguson scandal would not have happened. A lot of other bad things would have occurred instead, but it's not 100% black and white.

I'm not sure what I understand what you mean. Could you explain how the illegality or rarity of bribery in the US led to the Ferguson scandal, or the death of Michael Brown?

As I understand it, one of the causes of the death of Michael Brown was the civil unrest due to law enforcement malpractice. The city needed money so they heavily enforced lots of minor traffic laws to increase the revenue from court fines and traffic tickets.

That sort of thing cannot happen in a corrupt city because people would bribe the cops directly instead of paying or disputing traffic tickets, and the city government wouldn't see any of that money. Such a city wouldn't even try something like that.

Re: U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations

#75

Post by ImSkeptical » Wed, Aug 30, 2017, 10:09 PM UTC

saint_fiasco wrote: post #74

ImSkeptical wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what I understand what you mean. Could you explain how the illegality or rarity of bribery in the US led to the Ferguson scandal, or the death of Michael Brown?

As I understand it, one of the causes of the death of Michael Brown was the civil unrest due to law enforcement malpractice. The city needed money so they heavily enforced lots of minor traffic laws to increase the revenue from court fines and traffic tickets. That sort of thing cannot happen in a corrupt city because people would bribe the cops directly instead of paying or disputing traffic tickets, and the city go…

But surely the locals were upset that they were losing money, not that the money they lost went to city hall. In other words, I doubt they'd be relieved that their money was going to corrupt policeman rather than the city government.

If all the available money for fines was being extorted from drivers by corrupt cops, the city would have to get money another way, or cut services. This would likely upset the people of Ferguson even more.

Another way of looking at it is, what wealthy, safe, clean, productive societies regularly engage in bribery?

Re: U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations

#76

Post by saint_fiasco » Thu, Aug 31, 2017, 4:27 AM UTC

ImSkeptical wrote: post #75

saint_fiasco wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, one of the causes of the death of Michael Brown was the civil unrest due to law enforcement malpractice. The city needed money so they heavily enforced lots of minor traffic laws to increase the revenue from court fines and traffic tickets. That sort of thing cannot happen in a corrupt city because people would bribe the cops directly instead of paying or disputing traffic tickets, and the city go…

But surely the locals were upset that they were losing money, not that the money they lost went to city hall. In other words, I doubt they'd be relieved that their money was going to corrupt policeman rather than the city government. If all the available money for fines was being extorted from drivers by corrupt cops, the city would have to get money another way, or cut services. This would likely upset the people of…

Cutting services is awful and harmful but it's not dangerous in the same way that using heavily armed police as emergency tax collectors is. It's bad but the depressingly stable self-perpetuating kind of bad, not the unstable riot-causing kind of bad.

Re: U.S. probes Uber for possible bribery law violations

#77

Post by ImSkeptical » Thu, Aug 31, 2017, 2:18 PM UTC

saint_fiasco wrote: post #76

ImSkeptical wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But surely the locals were upset that they were losing money, not that the money they lost went to city hall. In other words, I doubt they'd be relieved that their money was going to corrupt policeman rather than the city government. If all the available money for fines was being extorted from drivers by corrupt cops, the city would have to get money another way, or cut services. This would likely upset the people of…

Cutting services is awful and harmful but it's not dangerous in the same way that using heavily armed police as emergency tax collectors is. It's bad but the depressingly stable self-perpetuating kind of bad, not the unstable riot-causing kind of bad.

My point is that, in a bribery society, the police would be collecting the tax anyway. The difference is that they would keep most or all of it for themselves personally. Thus, all of the anger would be there over losing money, plus anger at the injustice of having to bribe corrupt cops, plus diminished services.

I also think cutting services can be dangerous. For example, a service to feed the elderly, inspect water safety, maintain roads, deploy police to prevent or reduce crime, after school programs for disadvantaged teens who might otherwise get into or cause dangerous situations, etc.