The World's Most and Least Corrupt Countries

I just came from hearing a very interesting guest speaker from Colgate who came to Geneseo to talk about globalization and corruption. Before I discuss what he had to say I will give you your fix on what countries are most and least corrupt according to Transparency International
, the leading experts on the matter. I will warn you that their results are not the end all be all, as corruption is a difficult thing to define and measure.

Top Ten Most Corrupt Countries

1.Somalia
2.Afghanistan
3.Myanmar
4.Sudan
5.Iraq
6.Chad
7.Uzbekistan
8.Turkmenistan
9.Iran
10.Haiti (watch out for your relief donations)

Top Ten Least Corrupt Countries

1.New Zealand
2.Denmark
3.Singapore
3.Sweden
5.Switzerland
6.Finland
6.Netherlands
8.Australia
8.Canada
8.Iceland

The repeat numbers represent ties.

In case you were wondering the U.S. was ranked 19th least corrupt. I'm sure some of you were expecting it to be on the top ten and others on the bottom ten.
For the complete list click here

As I mentioned before these results are only relative because of how difficult measuring corruption is. Often times corruption can be mistakenly swept into one category or measured in one scale that produces skewed results. If you think about how variable cultures are around the world the specific ways in which each interprets and takes part in corruption can be very different. For instance economist Ray Fismin did a study on which UN diplomats do or do not pay their parking tickets. The results showed that diplomats coming from statistically more corrupt countries were much less likely to pay up. An interesting point our guest speaker brought up was that America has less corruption because of its lack of economic restrictions. This lack of restrictions creates less barriers for acquiring wealth and therefore makes corruption a less necessary part of pursuing it.

A country having a reputation of being more corrupt also tends to be a self fulfilling prophecy. Our guest speaker told us that in the past government officials going abroad were actually given bribery budgets for doing business. The most consistent indicator of corruption according to the TI index is poverty. As outside businesses view certain countries as being more corrupt they are far less likely to do business with them, therefore hurting that country's economy and contributing to their level of poverty (and in turn corruption). He also mentioned that a friend of his who held one of the highest ranking government finance positions in Sierra Leone only made enough money to buy one bag of rice a month...so he had access to immense amounts of money but did not make enough to feed his family. Such poor economic conditions as this cannot help but lend themselves to increased corruption. Studies have also shown corruption to hinder economic growth which stagnates the problem further. Even a country's attempts to pull itself out of corruption can also be counterproductive because by unearthing such problems they are drawing more international attention to how corrupt they are.

Get Out and Vote! (with your money)

During the 2008 election I took an economics course offered every four years called Economics and the Election. Throughout the semester we badgered the professor to tell us who he was voting for and finally on the last day, after much anticipation he told us. He tallied up all the issues and where the candidates stood as well as his thoughts on them. The resulting score favored John McCain by about 16 to 4. Then he finally announced that he had not voted for John McCain, or Barrack Obama but in fact had voted for a third party candidate none of us had ever heard of. Shocked and disappointed, our class begged the obvious question, What the hell?
Our professor, the former state economist of Vermont, simply laughed saying, and I quote "Who cares? My vote doesn't matter!"

As surprising (and ironic) as this may be, we actually learned on the first day of class that economically speaking, voting isn't worth the time and effort. When you put everything in perspective, the marginal cost of voting outweighs the marginal benefit. The marginal cost is the extensive time spent researching issues, listening to debates, following current events and stories, in addition to the inconvenience of voting itself. The marginal benefit is the hopelessly minimal effect that your vote has on society and your life.

As pessimistic as that may sound you still posses a ballot of extreme significance, your wallet. We live in a capitalist society with a relatively free market. This means that that market is a reflection of who it serves, aka us. My favorite example of this is Walmart. Most people claim to dislike Walmart and use it as an example of an evil corporation that runs local shops out of business and exploits its employees. The large scale public opinion of Walmart is that it is "bad" and the people who run it are also "bad". If we live in a capitalist society where supply (businesses) reflects demand (the people) then how is it possible that Walmart exists if everyone claims to hate it? The government certainly doesn't subsidize it. You didn't vote for one to be put in your town, yet there it is. The truth is that every dollar spent at Walmart is a vote against your local shop. Every DVD purchased is vote for the employees they exploit. None of this is news but it is something to think about. Every dollar you spend is a vote for or against something that affects your life.I personally am not avidly for or against Walmart although I do try to support local businesses. I don't do it out of some moral crusade against big business, thats simply what I prefer and therefore what I "vote" for.

The types of stores that surround us aren't the only thing our monetary ballots count for. Instead of casting an insignificant vote for a politician who might follow up his promise to improve the environment, you can buy green products. Not only does using such products have a lower impact on the environment but it also encourages businesses big and small to be more green if they perceive that is what the people want. My sociology professor said it best "If people stopped buying candescent light bulbs today the factories would close tomorrow"

Over the course of the next couple days think about what you are buying and what it is that you are really voting on. My grandmother was actually sued by Walmart for trying to fight one being put up behind her house. However, she still purchased her dog food there because it was the cheapest in town.

Also, here's a hilarious South Park Episode about Walmart that is also very insightful if you can read between the lines.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103890

Aww Globalization, You Shouldn't Have

I'm excited today because a new pair of Nikes I ordered will be here within a few hours. These are particularly cool to me because they were custom designed by my youngest sister Meghan on Nike.com's NikeID, where you can design your own shoes and they will make and ship them to you. On top of that I got the regular, affordable, UPS ground shipping, which has taken FOUR DAYS to ship to me from CHINA. Not only is this fast and cheap but I have been able to follow my shipment from GUANGZHO, China to Anchorage, AK to Louisville, KY to Syracuse, NY and finally to Henrieta, NY from where the truck left with my shoes at exactly 5:49 AM. It amazes me how quickly our world is developing via globalization. Just a few years ago neither custom made shoes nor such expeditious long distance shipping would have been possible with said convenience and reasonable prices.

Today globalization is a touchy subject. For members of technological and business communities, it evokes futuristic sentiments of satellites linking up in space, people from all cultures and backgrounds meeting and learning from each other and every byte of information known to man being blown across the universe for all to share.
For others, globalization beckons thoughts of sweatshops, impoverishment and local cultures fading into western uniformity.

Last semester I took a Sociology class where we watched a documentary about Mexican factory workers called Maquilapolis. It was essentially like those sad Sarah McLaughlin commercials you hate but cannot turn off. A significant portion of the film was actually just close-ups of sad faces and violin music. The rest of it however did an excellent job of exposing the poor working conditions of the factory workers. They are exposed to dangerous chemicals on a daily basis, work around the clock and face living conditions that nobody reading this would tolerate. After the documentary was over the professor turned it off and the class was silent. The white guilt in the room was palpable.
"Any questions or comments?", the professor asked. Not one to be swayed by propaganda (or at least feel like I am being swayed by propaganda), I raised my hand and asked what it was like where all those people had come from. "What do you mean?" the professor said. "Well, they all chose to work and live there by their own free will so unless they are there for the sake being exploited, where they came from must be worse". The entire class, decked out in Nike shoes and Sony laptops looked at me like I was an asshole for not sympathizing with the people in the video.

I am certainly not saying that these working conditions are preferable or that what the companies are doing is right, but for most of the people working in these factories they are coming from even worse backgrounds. Maybe the family can't pile into the mini van and go to Dairy Queen after dinner but at least there is dinner.

MMMM, Negative Conotations

Right now this is my favorite commercial on television.

It's a Free Market, Bro

When it comes the romance of free market economics Milton Friedman might as well be Barry White. Enjoy this complete 180 from my previous post as Milton Friedman dominates Cornell hippies like Lebron in the playoffs. Socialists and hippies be warned, this may temporarily blind you for two to three days.

hippies vs. milton friedman from eric hanson on Vimeo.

Spittin Game at UVM

I just came across this English essay I wrote freshmen year about hitting on girls at UVM that was published in "The Water Tower" at UVM. I admit it has no relevance but I can't rob you guys of this one. It's a great read if you have a second to kill (I know you do, its winter break)

Sup Girl?

Sketchy, Funny and Douchey may sound like the long lost three of the Seven Dwarves, but in reality make up the three schools of what the average UVM male likes to call “game”. Every year, Mid-April rolls around, and with it, comes beautiful weather. The sun is shining, flowers are blooming, and the elements of attraction are in motion. Female students sunbathe innocently on the campus greens as young men half-heartedly take part in games of ultimate frisby and football catches. The campus erupts with such palpable energy that even the most asexual beings cannot help but stir. At night, girls get “dolled up” in their best makeup and spring outfits before subjecting themselves to the calculated motives of their male counterparts. Men iron out their favorite old collared shirt and clean off their favorite pair of Nikes, or Birkenstocks if a resident of U-Heights South. From walking to classes, to partying downtown, the exuberant sexual tension is undeniable. When holding a door or filling a cup, every eye contact trances on for an extra instance. All the players are on the field, equipment in hand (not literally), but the real matter remains how to play. Like dogs finally catching up to that neighborhood car, the young men just aren’t sure what to do with it. Someone should say something, but what?

Unable to bridge the gap of conversation and social fluidity with their own sparkling personas, the young men of UVM retreat to the lowest form of human relation know as “game”. “Game” is the process by which a young male projects an artificial personality that is seen as being universally relatable onto the opposite sex with the intention of attraction. Although the intentions of both parties are clear, a medium is required through which the interaction can take place without making either uncomfortable. Not many guys want to immediately sit somewhere quiet and have an intimate conversation, nor would most girls respond positively to an introduction such as “Sup girl, wanna bang?” “Game” allows for each to become slowly more comfortable with the other. Suddenly, where you live on campus becomes overwhelming interesting, along with other golden nuggets of conversation such as “I see you are drinking this, I am drinking that” and “Wow, you are undecided in the School of Arts and Sciences too?, what a coincidence!” Luckily, there are personalities students can don to rescue them from having to bare their true selves to a stranger and they come in three flavors; Sketchy, Funny and Douchey. These three types of game stimulate some of the most basic aspects of human nature to achieve the common male’s goal of “slaying mad biddies”.

Sketchy, one of the more challenging and risqué of the games, relies on the neglect of social norms, especially those pertaining to character and moral quality, for the satisfaction of more basic human desires and curiosities. The sketchy gamer doesn’t know you or your friends, but sees no reason for that to obstruct the flow of good times to be had. It was the sketchy gamer who coined such cliché phrases as “So, do you come here often?” or “So are you two sisters?” The implementation of the word “so” seems to define this gamer’s persona. Its use can almost be interpreted as saying “So what if we don’t know each other, want to talk to a stranger?” The sketchy gamer is more than willing to cut through social “red tape” and head straight for the finish. He can be found in the hallways of residence halls intercepting girls on their way to the bathroom or back to their own dorms. Casual unthreatening conversation leads to questions like “So do you guys want to come “chill” at room 265?” The very essence of the word sketchy embodies him completely. For anything to be sketchy it must be out of the realm of what is considered regular or standard. Sketchiness provides no sure thing and makes no promises. The possibilities of what could go wrong are quite apparent and other dangers may still lurk in the shadows. Shrouded in mystery, the sketchy gamer is at the same time intriguing. While people tend to fear what they don’t know, they can also be drawn to it. It is here where the sketchy gamer distinguishes himself from his failure of a counterpart, the creep. The successful sketchy gamer knows exactly how to tug on the strings of curiosity in their targets and draw them in. The creep simply asserts his socially unacceptable intentions without managing to draw any intrigue. To call a true sketchy gamer a creep would be on par with calling a professional poker player lucky. He doesn’t just throw his chips out and hope for the best, so much as he reads people, calculates odds, and moves purposefully with specific intent. What type of “prey” might find themselves entranced by a sketchy gamer? The answer is, of course, sketchy girls. Sketchy girls can be found anywhere from dorm hallways, to wandering the streets of downtown Burlington looking for a place to “rage”. They are notorious for their skimpy dress and inside jokes that suggest other sketchy activities such as doing hard drugs or having other sketchy encounters with other sketchy guys. Sketchy girls feel comfortable with their sketchy actions primarily because they tend to surround themselves with other sketchy friends. Next to their sketchy friends, their actions seem far more socially acceptable and eventually, by comparison, become the norm.

As a school, funny is the most “innocent” and straight-forward of the three. The funny gamer is goofy, loveable and endearingly self defeating. He doesn’t come right out and toot his own horn, but breaks the ice with an unconvincing joke at his own expense. He doesn’t approach those he has no business talking to, but instead seeks the friends of his female acquaintances. The funny gamer targets the corner of human nature seeking emotional fulfillment. His loveable, unselfish appeal allows his potential “hook ups” to feel as if they have truly met someone they can appreciate as a person. The funny gamer makes his “in” by sharing a joke or teaching a menial party secret. A friendly joke puts out the vibe that everyone is just there to have fun. Teaching a trivial secret creates a mini bond with their target and allows them something to have in common. These “secrets” are easy to point out because they all begin with “You see the secret is when you…” After this phrase any party game or skill can be inserted such flip cup, Beirut, keg stands, etc. Not to mention that a skill shared about a certain drinking activity leads to repeatedly consuming more alcohol, mans most efficient social lubricant. With his lovable jest, the funny gamer creates a seemingly safe environment where girls can let their guards down. Once the girls have comfortably left themselves open and vulnerable, the funny gamer begins to plant inside jokes and hypothetical commitments like “Hey we should all go rip bowls later” or “What do you mean you’ve never had a Rise and Shiner from KKD’s?, we’ll have to go.” His most common inside jokes will often mock sketchy guys and girls, putting both himself and his target on a higher social plateau, together, giving them another reason for to feel like they’ve met “someone”. The type of girl drawn to the funny gamer is typically more “wholesome”, or at least that is how they would like to be perceived by both themselves and others. The “wholesome” girl’s infatuation with funny, “lovable” guys is oftentimes used to solidify their moral superiority over the “sketchy” girls. It is this sense of condescending insecurity that makes them so susceptible to the funny gamer.

The third, and most arrogant, school of game is douchey. The douchey gamer, known plainly as “The Douche”, can be seen at parties hanging around female friends of his friends. Overwhelmingly self confident, The Douche sees no reason for any lady in the room not to be flustered by his splendor. Unlike sketchy and funny gamers, The Douche has no elaborate game plan or strategy. His game can be seen both at parties and on the Discovery Channel. The Douche can best be understood by the mating approach of a male peacock, stomping amongst the females, displaying his elaborate, colorful feathers. Spewing facts, stereotypes and numbers at his prey, The Douche lets young women know what exactly it is that makes him so awesome. Maybe it’s the horsepower of his car, or wattage of his “system”, but the unsuspecting Douchet cannot help but be enthralled with what kind of car he drives and why. Naturally, The Douche targets more materialistic female students who are relived to be able to stick a price tag on their own lives according to their material possessions, a far easier task than spawning personalities or original thoughts of their own

Although the vast majority of male students at the University of Vermont fit in to one of these three categories, we can’t forget the poor souls tethered to the benches by the weakest game of all, no game. The non-gamer can be seen at parties hanging out with his friends. He sees the females guests but just can’t conjure a way to bridge the gap. He instead immerses himself in a world of disillusionment and excuses such as, “Hey, man I just have high standards.” Or “Hey man, I just want to get really fucked up.” Any owner of a disillusionment thesaurus can easily translate this into “Hey man, I just can’t do it.” Just because these three, or possibly four, types of game are utilized on a weekly basis, however, does not mean the good students of UVM are doomed to an artificial existence of unsatisfying relationships. The very existence of “Game” simply serves the purpose of providing a social platform by which people can break the uncomfortable restraints of their unfamiliarity with those around them.

$290,000 Speeding Ticket

How fast do you have to drive to get a $290,000 speeding ticket in Switzerland? If you are a Swiss millionaire the answer is 85mph in a 50. A Swiss court determined this record speeding ticket according to the millionaire's $22.7 million net worth and numerous repeat offenses. This story begs the question: should the rich face higher monetary penalties for their violations?

I found this story funny because I was recently driving with a friend of mine who is a lot more wealthy than myself. On the side of the road there was an electronic sign flashing the message "THE PENALTY FOR SPEEDING IS $100" As we passed it my friend laughed, accelerated, and said he would gladly pay $100 to speed home. As a broke college student, $100 is certainly enough of a consequence for me to not take the risk but what about those rich enough to cruise by unphased?

Life's daily decisions are based on managing scarcity through marginal costs and benefits. The marginal benefit of speeding is the time saved with each mile per hour increase in speed while the increasing monetary penalty for every mile per hour driven over the speed limit is the marginal cost.
Although it seems downright unamerican to impose more severe penalties on the rich we should also consider the proportion of their marginal costs to marginal benefits. Because the wealthy have an abundance of money, each minute is comparatively more scarce in the balance of time vs. money that is the logic of speeding. Lets say my bank balance is $1,000 while my friends is $10,000. Although our marginal benefits are the same, our marginal costs are different. In terms of percentage of wealth my friend's marginal cost of speeding is ten times lower than my own so it is therefore ten times more worth it to speed. However, if we both drive recklessly and crash our cars do they not do an equal amount of damage?