Search This Blog

Friday, October 02, 2009

A case for corruption

Everyone in the world (barring the politicians) decry the need for a corruption free society for the betterment of humanity. However, I think in some cases, the existence of corruption has actually been a boon rather than a problem, obviously unintentionally. I can think of two good scenarios.



Better health As a kid in India, we used to get milk from the local milkman and occasionally from a government run co-op depot that used to sell milk in packets. There were only two choices - cow's milk or buffalo's milk - and both of them organic, whole milks.

It is an open-secret that milkmen generally make money by diluting the milk with water to increase the quantity for the same price. While this corrupt behavior was lamented upon by my mom and pretty much everyone else, it was accepted as something that you just can't get rid of.

Cut to the current day - I purchased a gallon of whole milk a couple of days in expectation of my friend's visit with his 2 year old kid. Obviously the kid didn't drink the whole gallon and I had plenty left. I made a cup of coffee only to realize that I had only the whole milk and not the regular 2% that I use. So, I did the natural thing - diluted the whole milk with some water so that it is not as 'rich' and 'fatty' - at least in volume.

So, in essence, the 'corrupt' practice that the milkmen followed were in fact indirectly helping us by reducing the fat in the milk, which is now considered as a good thing!

Government Health Care India, having socialist roots thanks to Nehru, the first Indian prime minister, has both private and public health care systems. Government-run hospitals are available for almost everyone to have basic health care without need for any insurance and mostly for minimal price.

Currently, there is a big debate raging in the US about government-run health care option and how it will throw all the private practices out of business. Coming from a country where this is in vogue, I say that it does not happen, thanks to the general idea of corruption that is linked to the government!

While I think that most doctors are honest and carry their business like any other place, the bureaucracy surrounding any government institution has created a perception that Government hospitals are inferior to private hospitals and hence have lower quality of care. As a result, those who can afford private care (such as middle-class and higher) tend to avoid government hospitals, while those in real need (lower-middle-class and below) opt for the option as they cannot afford anything else.

So, in an indirect way, corruption has actually helped provide universal health care, although not in glowing terms!

Social equality No other mechanism than corruption has created a level of social equality in developing nations. The power that is usually attributed to CEOs and politicians can be seen in almost all levels of public service - from hospitals to police to ration systems to pretty much everything else. Since most of these positions are held by middle-class citizens, in a way corruption has made them as powerful as the upper-class citizens. Everyone has to bribe everyone else for one form of service or the other - what better way to create social equality?!

Can you think of any other scenarios where corruption has had an unintended side of being perceived as helpful?

PS: While I am not a fan of disclaimers, I do want to say that the above piece is meant as sarcasm (if it was not obvious already) with a tinge of truth than be considered as a defense for corruption. Obviously the drawbacks far outweigh the 'potential' advantages, but I am curious to know if there are any!

3 comments:

Vasu said...

Good comparison on milk. A fundamental difference though. While the milkman in India dilutes the *actual* cows milk with water, i'm not too sure whats the fatfree, 1%, 2% are 'diluted' with in the name of reducing fat. Yeah organic is better than 'harmonal' milk, but is homogenized better at all?

Unknown said...

Cynicism aside, an excellent question indeed! And the answer can be found in Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". I'll post the excerpt shortly. In general, the reduction is in the "milk fat" (primarily by use of centrifugal force). Did you know that whole milk is actually not 100% (compared to 1% and 2%), but rather only 3.5%?

Homogenized is apparently better mainly because it breaks down the fat molecules in the milk (primarily by use of high pressure steam) to make sure that the milk fat does not form lumps or create any off-flavors. While the resultant milk is relatively bland, it preserves better over time.

dreams said...

Only way to curb corruption is to stop printing cash