[HN Gopher] I tried starting a manufacturing unit in India (2020)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       I tried starting a manufacturing unit in India (2020)
        
       Author : godelmachine
       Score  : 474 points
       Date   : 2022-10-28 05:48 UTC (17 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (superr.in)
 (TXT) w3m dump (superr.in)
        
       | iKevinShah wrote:
       | While this post is specifically about a manufacturing unit and
       | usually will involve land, acquisition (if not already), NOCs (as
       | shown in the post). This is standard and can / should / would be
       | done digitally in near future, once all the units and officials
       | have the awareness.
       | 
       | To offer an alternative, starting business in India is extremely
       | easy (at least Software Business), People have been running a
       | business, filing GST, owning trademarks without leaving their
       | apartment - Thanks to online services which ease these things.
       | But yes, things are still difficult for manufacturing and land
       | related things (and I assume it would be similar in other parts
       | of the world, granted not so difficult).
        
       | mindaslab wrote:
       | Unless you are willing to pay bribes and have the right contacts.
       | Business in India is impossible.
        
       | lbriner wrote:
       | There are two big problems with bureaucracy (apart from never
       | knowing how to spell it). The first is that bureaucratic
       | processes always seem to get bigger/longer/more complex and
       | secondly, by its nature, it is hard to improve because the same
       | bureaucracy you want to remove requires just as much effort to
       | change as the effort you are trying to save.
       | 
       | It would make more sense to time-limit some of these things and
       | make the various departments reapply every 2 years if they think
       | the process serves a purpose still. Perhaps they pay $1M as well.
       | As soon as the cost is more than the benefit, all of a sudden we
       | realise that we don't really need 100 differnt people to sign off
       | on everything.
       | 
       | Another easy win in this example would just be to make more of it
       | electronic e.g. you apply in one place and they send out the
       | relevant permissions to the various departments, some of whom
       | could fill them in immediately/automatically and wire them back.
        
       | pseudo0 wrote:
       | It seems like the problem is that the author has a moral
       | objection to paying bribes in an area where bribery is customary:
       | 
       | > Obviously, they are playing "hard to get" to get me to pay some
       | bribe and initiate the process. But after going through all this,
       | I am not going to pay any bribe to anyone.
       | 
       | And:
       | 
       | > And they openly demanded bribes after waiting for four months.
       | 
       | > So the Gram Panchayat NOC is stuck because of non payment of
       | bribe.
        
         | LatteLazy wrote:
         | We should use different terms for what is currently covered by
         | "bribes":
         | 
         | Money paid illegally to gain an unfair advantage, that will
         | result in local prosecution if discovered and is not the usual
         | practise is a "bribe". No one should pay those.
         | 
         | Money paid illegally to gain normal access/approvals/licenses
         | etc, where it is entirely normal to pay and unlikely to lead to
         | local prosecution is "extortion".
         | 
         | Op isn't really paying a bride, he's being extorted.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | dottedmag wrote:
         | India Penal code, 171E.
         | 
         | Up to 1 year in prison.
        
         | agileAlligator wrote:
         | > It seems like the problem is that the author has a moral
         | objection to paying bribes
         | 
         | Duh?
        
           | lelanthran wrote:
           | >> It seems like the problem is that the author has a moral
           | objection to paying bribes
           | 
           | > Duh?
           | 
           | It's only "Duh" because you snipped the qualifier out. It's
           | not "Duh" if you read until the end of the sentence like you
           | normally do:
           | 
           | > in an area where bribery is customary
           | 
           | See?
        
             | primax wrote:
             | I mean, isn't it extraordinarily clear that he doesn't want
             | to pay bribes and that bribes are customary. Hence... duh?
        
             | otikik wrote:
             | The fact that a lot of people do it customarily doesn't
             | preclude for it to me morally reprehensible.
             | 
             | To bring it to the extremes: If I found myself visiting
             | Germany during World War 2, I would still strongly object
             | to killing jews, even if it was "customary" there.
             | 
             | And since know this is a reductio-at-hitlerum, I will try
             | again: I would not seek or consent or engage to having
             | pedophilic sexual intercourse if I found myself in certain
             | neighborhoods of Thailand, where apparently it is
             | commonplace.
             | 
             | Perhaps a bit less extreme: I would not expect someone who
             | is a convinced vegetarian to start consuming meat when they
             | arrive to my country just because meat is consumed in
             | almost every meal here.
        
             | agileAlligator wrote:
             | It doesn't matter whether it is customary. I live about
             | 200km away from where the author is, I have never paid a
             | bribe in my life, and I never will. They make you sweat it
             | out for 4-5 months and then eventually it gets done.
        
           | pseudo0 wrote:
           | In a region where bribery is customary, trying to get stuff
           | done without bribes is a case of tilting at windmills. I
           | applaud the author's willingness to stand up for his
           | convictions, but realistically his options are to either pay
           | the bribes or set up his business in a less corrupt region.
           | An entrenched local bureaucracy can easily outlast a typical
           | small business when it comes to a fight like this.
        
           | sonthonax wrote:
           | There's a distinction to be made between a small customary
           | bribe to an seriously underpaid state employee, and a
           | larcenous bribe to a high official.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | Bribes scale up. How much is the underpaid state employee
             | "tipping out" to his boss? Or had to pay to get the job in
             | the first place?
        
             | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
             | Not according to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
             | 
             | The FCPA basically says that as a representative of a US
             | corporation (in my case, anyone at a Staff Engineer level
             | or above), it's illegal to bribe an official of a foreign
             | government.
             | 
             | It does try to make a distinction (sort of) between the
             | kinds of bribe you're talking about but in my FCPA
             | training, that "distinction" boils down to "go ask your
             | lawyer." The lawyer will just tell you how to do it in a
             | way that doesn't look like a bribe, even though it still
             | is.
        
             | agileAlligator wrote:
             | They are both immoral
        
             | silon42 wrote:
             | So it is a "tip" for quality of service.
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _a distinction to be made between a small customary bribe
             | to an seriously underpaid state employee, and a larcenous
             | bribe to a high official_
             | 
             | Not really. If normalized, it's part of their expected
             | compensation package. Practically speaking, I think I'd
             | suck it up and pay the bribe in the author's position. But
             | I'd know I was doing wrong.
        
               | LeanderK wrote:
               | > If normalized, it's part of their expected compensation
               | package.
               | 
               | But it already is normalised. I think this is morally
               | difficult because it is customary, expected and if you
               | refuse you will not get anything done but also won't
               | change anything. So what have you gained?
               | 
               | I don't think you can fight corruption this way, you just
               | can't do it alone.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | egorfine wrote:
           | Exactly. This is what the rest of the world usually says on
           | the first encounter with "tips culture" in the US.
           | 
           | As I see it, cultures are different and one thing that is
           | considered an absolute taboo in one culture might be
           | _customary_ in another. Tips in the US are customary yet at
           | the same time they are offensive in Japan. Bribes are killing
           | the economy in my country yet it makes economy moving in
           | India.
           | 
           | PS: I personally hate corruption more than anything.
        
             | otikik wrote:
             | > Exactly. This is what the rest of the world usually says
             | on the first encounter with "tips culture" in the US.
             | 
             | I think my shock was greater when I discovered that
             | lobbying in the US means "literal legal bribery". In a lot
             | of the western world that word it means things "having
             | meetings" and perhaps "organizing PR campaigns". Straight
             | up giving money to politicians is against the law.
        
               | jeffdn wrote:
               | This may sound like a distinction without a difference,
               | but it is explicitly illegal to give money directly to
               | politicians in the United States. Lobbying is giving
               | money to their campaign committees, which get them
               | elected or re-elected. It is also explicitly very illegal
               | for campaign committees to use their funds to do anything
               | for the candidate -- there are a huge[0] number[1] of
               | politicians[2] who have been severely[3] penalized for
               | flouting campaign finance laws. Further, there are severe
               | restrictions on what the campaign committee can use their
               | money for, which is largely restricted to travel for the
               | campaign, advertising, and paying campaign staff.
               | 
               | These are just some recent examples of federal
               | politicians who have run afoul of these laws, but they
               | apply at all levels of government, as well as to staff
               | (both campaign staff and the official staff of elected
               | officials).
               | 
               | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Cunningham
               | 
               | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_D._Hunter
               | 
               | [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Jackson_Jr.
               | 
               | [3]:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Grimm_(politician)
        
               | otikik wrote:
               | Yes it is totally a meaningless distinction to me. On the
               | level of "this is not gambling, because we use a virtual
               | currency (that can be purchased with dollars)" that is
               | prevalent on mobile video games these days. It is
               | gambling, just with extra steps. And it is bribery, just
               | with extra steps.
        
               | Aunche wrote:
               | >I think my shock was greater when I discovered that
               | lobbying in the US means "literal legal bribery".
               | 
               | This is what the internet thinking lobbying means because
               | they just want to be angry at a thing without bothering
               | to learn about it because that would expose their own
               | political apathy. Lobbying in the US means the exact same
               | things that it means in the rest of the world. Companies
               | will donate a few thousand dollars, so that a legislature
               | will hear them out, but the legislature doesn't have to
               | listen to them. There is some sketchy stuff going on with
               | campaign finance for sure, but it's no where near as bad
               | as "legalized bribery."
        
               | otikik wrote:
               | > a few thousand dollars
               | 
               | You might want to revise that assumption.
        
               | Aunche wrote:
               | You might want to revise your assumptions. These are the
               | top lobbying recipients:
               | https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-
               | recipients. All things considered it's not a lot of
               | money. The vast majority of lobbying spending goes
               | towards mundane expenses like payroll at lobbying firms.
               | The reason lobbying is so powerful is that regular people
               | don't pay attention to actual legislation, so politicians
               | spend too much of their time campaigning and end up
               | outsourcing the hard work of writing legislation to the
               | lobbyists. Regardless, it's definitely not "literal
               | legalized bribery."
        
               | otikik wrote:
               | Using your own resource:
               | 
               | https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/top-spenders
               | 
               | I believe that's at least 4 orders of magnitude higher
               | than "thousands of dollars". I rest my case
        
               | Aunche wrote:
               | ...as I mentioned, the vast majority of this money goes
               | towards things like paying people to read legislation,
               | prepare presentations, and speak with politicians. It's
               | not "literal legalized bribery."
        
             | kumarvvr wrote:
             | First time I am hearing about this. Could you elaborate on
             | the Tips culture in US?
             | 
             | Do you have any first hand or second hand experience with
             | it?
        
               | inkcapmushroom wrote:
               | For waitstaff at a restaurant, baristas at a coffee shop,
               | bartenders, or people giving personalized service (for
               | example a tattoo artist) it's customary to give a tip of
               | ~20% extra on top of the bill. The expectation is that
               | extra money goes directly to the staff giving you the
               | service, and you are expected to pay it; many of these
               | services jobs are actually legally allowed to pay less
               | than minimum wage with the expectation that the tips will
               | cover the difference. You are allowed to give less if you
               | feel the service wasn't satisfactory, or if it's an
               | especially large bill, but to give no tip at all means
               | you are a terrible person.
               | 
               | From my experience most people working these jobs prefer
               | the tips system the way it is because a lot of times it's
               | in cash so they can fudge their tax numbers if they want
               | (might not be true nowadays as less people use cash), and
               | also because often they make more money through tips than
               | minimum wage, and they think if tips were removed the
               | restaurants would only pay them minimum wage.
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | US waitstaff aren't covered by minimum wage laws -
               | effectively a very large component of their income is
               | "variable compensation" through tips. This is "expected"
               | to be 10-20%. The culture doesn't quite come out and say
               | "you need to put down 10% more than the number stated on
               | your bill in order for the person serving you to make
               | rent", but if you don't it will be interpreted as an
               | insult.
        
         | sebstefan wrote:
         | I wouldn't consider the author to be the problem.
        
       | thunkshift1 wrote:
       | This is not an honest take on 'ease of doing business in india'.
       | What the author is trying to do is re-purpose his agricultural
       | land for non agricultural use. For various socio-political
       | reasons this is big no-no in many states in India and is known to
       | be a very long winding and drawn out process because the govt
       | does not want agricultural land to be re-purposed. I expected
       | something along the lines of 'I tried to setup a unit on land
       | that I already have which allows this'. Note that agricultural
       | land goes for a pittance compared to non na one. Author probably
       | tried to pull a fast one onthe govt.
        
         | RxVhmD5v wrote:
         | Thanks for the context. I remember this when this blog made the
         | rounds originally. Didn't realize it's the same one that made
         | HN front page again. Interesting that this is being floated
         | around when India is trying hard to make a good foray into
         | manufacturing. On a related note, a former central bank (RBI)
         | governor is trying to sabotage India's manufacturing
         | aspirations. Inimical forces that aspirational Indians will
         | face while they dig out of the current mess is unimaginably
         | powerful.
        
         | boole1854 wrote:
         | > Author probably tried to pull a fast one onthe govt.
         | 
         | In what sense is the author trying to pull a fast one? They own
         | agricultural land. It is legal to convert agricultural-use land
         | to non-agricultural-use land. There is a legal procedure for
         | doing so. The author is trying to follow the procedure. The
         | procedure turns out to be very difficult, and they publicize
         | this fact. Where is the 'fast one' being pulled and who is it
         | being pulled on?
        
           | thunkshift1 wrote:
           | Why dont you try building a residential property or factory
           | on a land zoned for public parks and tell me how that goes in
           | your country?
        
             | asdff wrote:
             | Most US cities as they exist today would not exist if you
             | could not convert agricultural land to other uses. Where
             | does suburbia come from? Former farms.
        
             | gautamcgoel wrote:
             | ...the author owns the land he is trying to build on, which
             | is very different than trying to build something in the
             | middle of a public park.
        
         | closetohome wrote:
         | That caught my eye as well. If I wanted to buy some
         | agricultural land in my state and convert it to industrial
         | manufacturing, I would be mired in red tape for _years_.
        
       | fareesh wrote:
       | Missing was the grease to turn the wheels of bureaucracy
        
       | clivefx wrote:
       | This is almost identical to the process of setting up a
       | manufacturing facility here in the bay area. Difference is that
       | you never do all this yourself. You use permit sherpas and
       | general contractors to handle most of the paperwork. Source: done
       | it three times
        
         | e-_pusher wrote:
         | Do you have any contacts you recommend for this process?
        
       | aktuel wrote:
       | Not surprised. The amount of paperwork I had to fill out just as
       | a tourist in India already boggled my mind. I had to fill out
       | basically the same information three times over just between the
       | airport and the hotel.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | rockyj wrote:
       | I assume building a manufacturing on agricultural land will be
       | hard, what about government designated "manufacturing / SEZ
       | (special economic)" zones?
        
       | throwaway0x7E6 wrote:
       | this reads like the main quest from a RPG
        
       | captn3m0 wrote:
       | Previously on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24106545
       | (with a few comments from the author as well).
       | 
       | The author had added a correction to the post (12th August 2020)
       | stating that this was a mistake, and that the actual procedure
       | was much less cumbersome:
       | 
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20200812093618/https://superr.in...
       | 
       | > It has been bought to my attention that there was a mistake by
       | an entry level employee.
       | 
       | > So the Revenue Department itself was supposed to get all the
       | NOCs required by going to all those offices, but an entry level
       | employee forgot to add my file to the list of NA's to be done.
       | 
       | > [...] But PLEASE UNDERSTAND that "it was a mistake" in filing
       | by an Entry Level Employee and normally this procedure takes less
       | than 2 months and all the heavy lifting is done by the Revenue
       | Department, Collector Office.
       | 
       | Tweet from the author about the correction:
       | https://twitter.com/mrohanshah/status/1293170591441104902
       | 
       | But the correction was removed after a while, so maybe a bit of
       | clarification will help.
        
         | rohan_shah wrote:
         | Hey! I'm the author and here's the clarification:
         | 
         | That was the official response I got from the district
         | administration so had to post it. Also was being pressured by
         | the government (indirectly) to take it down. So that was all
         | bs. Next update I'll give is when I will have solved the
         | problem.
        
           | rag-hav wrote:
           | > Also was being pressured by the government (indirectly) to
           | take it down
           | 
           | Why am I not surprised.
        
           | spaceman_2020 wrote:
           | > Also was being pressured by the government (indirectly) to
           | take it down
           | 
           | Do you mind sharing how?
        
           | hionnode wrote:
           | So, it's still pending ?
        
             | _448 wrote:
             | Here is Narayana Murthy, founder of Infosys, explaining the
             | early days of Infosys :)
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IuqHUA2mQY
        
               | mprovost wrote:
               | Also the father in law of the new UK prime minister...
        
               | nisegami wrote:
               | This might be the worst thing I have heard in weeks.
        
         | karterk wrote:
         | Here's the 2022 edition:
         | https://twitter.com/mrohanshah/status/1579829414916784128
        
       | TheRealPomax wrote:
       | > Yes, you need to obtain "permission" before you build any
       | manufacturing structure on your own land with your own money.
       | 
       | I don't understand why this is phrased as incredulous. Are there
       | countries where this isn't the case? Just because you own the
       | land -which you don't, you merely have a title that grants you
       | the exclusive, but limited, usage rights of that land- does not
       | mean you are free to just build whatever you want?
       | 
       | That said, Indian paperwork is famous for being Futurama levels
       | of bureaucracy with Balkan levels of bribery. It's why giant
       | corporations just don't bother with India, and why small store
       | owners just don't even bother: just run your business until they
       | crack down, which they won't as long as you keep a low profile.
        
         | yrgulation wrote:
         | > Balkan levels of bribery.
         | 
         | Yeah think again.
        
           | TheRealPomax wrote:
           | think again because "there's no bribes in the balkan" (rural
           | cops in the balkan will pull you over for literally nothing
           | just to make you pay them to go away again) or "it's so much
           | worse than the balkan" (I won't argue that one, it really is)
        
             | yrgulation wrote:
             | The latter. It may be bad in the balkans, which it is, but
             | nowhere near as bad as in other places. Either way both
             | regions will improve. If anything, i'd invest now even if i
             | wouldnt be able to exploit that investment. Nationalism
             | aside i think india has a bright future. The balkans will
             | end up in the eu as well if the eu doesnt break up. Worth
             | investing there too.
        
               | TheRealPomax wrote:
               | Investing and "opening a business" are two very different
               | things though. I'd definitely invest in India (BRIC is
               | about to loose China, but the rest are still improving
               | year over year at a rate that looks sustainable), but I'm
               | not mad enough to try to actually open a physical
               | business there. It's kind of a well-known bureaucratic
               | black hole in economics circles. The best you can hope
               | for is to buy an existing company (whether that's
               | outright buying, or "buying" through some contractual
               | subsidiary/merger/etc. arrangement)
        
               | yrgulation wrote:
               | Do you even need to open business? I'd just buy land near
               | promising areas, say near where motorways are likely to
               | be built, or regions with tourist potential (ie tall
               | mountains, as snow will be at a premium in the future,
               | thermal water reserves, agricultural potential, etc).
               | That in itself can be good business. Buy it and leave it
               | there for a while. Unlike china, india will indeed take a
               | different trajectory - if it doesnt go down the route of
               | petty nationalism. Similarly, i'd invest in real estate
               | in the balkan region or moldavia should it join the eu. I
               | know in some countries once they joined the eu they
               | 10x'd.
        
       | DocTomoe wrote:
       | So India has a process for turning agricultural land to
       | manufacturing land. Compare that to Europe, where such endeavours
       | are often impossible completely (if you are a landowner), and
       | quite easy (if you are a local government). We've had this guy
       | [1] protest on TV lately. Sums it up well.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mnB5Q5Hay4 ... translated
       | subtitles are decent. Money shot: "It's like that: We can't all
       | sit with a MacBook in Berlin in a cafe, sipping on a chai latte
       | and programming the tenth dating app. Sometimes, someone has to
       | work with their hands."
        
       | akhilramolla wrote:
       | Try the signle window policy of Telangana.
       | https://ipass.telangana.gov.in/about.aspx
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | Dhruvok and Jalammad at Telangana
        
         | nikanj wrote:
         | There is a single window, but it's only open on the third
         | monday of every other month, and the person manning it is
         | illiterate - unless you pay them a small fee to activate their
         | reading skills.
        
         | kumarvvr wrote:
         | I am from Hyderabad. Can you share any success stories with
         | this? I am very interested. Do you have any first hand
         | knowledge or experience with this system?
        
       | klausjensen wrote:
       | ~5 years ago, I hired three Indian developers. They asked me if
       | we could set up an Indian legal entity, so that they could just
       | get regular salaries in India with tax payments, deductions etc
       | taken care of. I agreed and we got it done.
       | 
       | One of the worst business-decisions of my life. The amount of red
       | tape, stupid rules, corruption, signatures, stamps, showing up
       | physically in a certain office etc etc... Mindblowing.
       | 
       | I will not tire you with all the details, but to this day, Indian
       | tax authorities still hold money hostage, that they agree my
       | Indian company is owed (GST refunds). But all attempts to
       | actually get the money back falls on deaf ears. We have sent
       | experts to the relevant tax offices etc, but the ONLY guy who can
       | handle it is never there, refuses to deal with it, then says we
       | need to go somewhere else - where we are sent back etc etc. Sent
       | around in circles, basically - with everybody recognizing the
       | money is in fact owed...
       | 
       | I will never do business in India again. Happy to work with
       | Indian developers (I still do), but they will get paid as
       | freelancers and deal with the red tape on their end.
        
         | primitivesuave wrote:
         | I came to the comments to warn exactly this, perhaps more
         | emphatically.
         | 
         | Do not set up a legal entity in India. It will become a never-
         | ending void where money and time go to die. The bureaucracy is
         | hilariously inept and bloated, and if you are not willing to
         | pay the bribes or for some entity to navigate the systemic
         | corruption on your behalf, you will end up in OP's situation.
         | 
         | Source: hired many Indian developers in recent years for a SV
         | startup
        
           | dirkg wrote:
           | also at every level, where you are expected to file forms or
           | deal with any officials, you will be asked to pay some bribe,
           | and there will be 'agents' who offer to do it for you using
           | whatever illegal means they can, for a 'fee', and in many
           | cases they are the only feasible way of getting it done. This
           | happens in every corrupt economy/country but in India its an
           | art form and taken to its logical extreme.
        
           | ignoramous wrote:
           | > _Do not set up a legal entity in India._
           | 
           | I am curious to know how the Stripe Atlas-like services from
           | razorpay.com and clear.in have worked out for folks here in
           | dealing with govt-facing work?
        
           | grepfru_it wrote:
           | When I visited a Cisco office in India, I noticed there was a
           | prominent notice of business application and listed the
           | Indian owner of the company. I thought that was interesting
           | and went digging into India law about ownership. When I came
           | out of that rabbit hole I immediately had zero interest in
           | starting up in India. Simply because of the bureaucracy and
           | would be way more wink-wink-$$$-nudge-nudge than what I'm
           | even used to today with my dealings in the West Indies. Then
           | I read the article and by the time I got to the Irrigation
           | NOC I was nodding my head 'yup, exactly what i expected'.
           | 
           | It's very easy to read these requirements and agree that
           | there are natural resources that (a) you don't want exploited
           | and (b) want preserved, so all of these hurdles are
           | necessary. But the timeline involved and the MULTIPLE bribes
           | really drives home the fact that reforms are needed.
        
             | dr_dshiv wrote:
             | Well, I expected this article to be about bribes, because I
             | assume it happens a lot. However, there were no bribes.
             | Does anyone have actual experience with bribes in India
             | (not traffic police)?
             | 
             | Edit: sorry, one person openly asked for a bribe, the
             | Panchayat. I would like to understand more about this. Do
             | they just ask for an amount?
        
               | bornfreddy wrote:
               | I read the article a bit differently... Whenever there is
               | a "no bribes" note, all went well - elsewhere there were
               | obstacles which could probably be solved with bribes.
        
               | nabusman wrote:
               | IME the bribes are often not asked directly but instead
               | the people in the office throw up insurmountable
               | obstacles so that you initiate the conversation of
               | bribes. I don't know why they do this, maybe because it
               | puts them in a better negotiating position?
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Soliciting a bribe is probably illegal.
               | 
               | But accepting a gift to do your actual job, how could
               | that be illegal, hmmmm?
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | If you go first you are offering a bribe. If the police
               | are investigating offering a bribe is entrapment and your
               | lawyer will run with that in court.
               | 
               | In short it is a way to avoid getting caught.
        
               | elmomle wrote:
               | Not the OP but typically bureaucrats will talk about fees
               | and fines, which continue without documentation of their
               | purpose (at which point they are explicitly bribes).
               | 
               | Baksheesh, whereby people expect a tip ahead of time if
               | you want decent service, is quite common in India and is
               | essentially another form of corruption, especially when
               | practiced by police, bureaucrats, etc.
        
               | vishnugupta wrote:
               | House/plot registration is a common place where most
               | folks encounter bribe. The person/company selling you the
               | house/plot will ask you to bring INR 15-20K in cash to
               | the registrar office. It'll be paid to an agent who is a
               | conduit.
               | 
               | Driving license is another. You'll see tens of touts in
               | and around the govt office; you pay about INR 2-3K and
               | get your drivers' license. Again, a tout/agent will
               | handle it for you end to end.
               | 
               | Both are very well oiled machine; money goes all the way
               | up to politicians. Getting a posting in those offices in
               | turn requires millions of rupees of bribe, besides
               | influence, caste angle etc.,
               | 
               | Speaking from personal experience.
        
           | tkk23 wrote:
           | India is huge. Could there be a district with enough
           | integrity that it can become the place to establish a company
           | in India?
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | primitivesuave wrote:
             | I _highly_ doubt it. Bribery is baked into the culture.
             | Everyone takes bribes, and the act of solicitation does not
             | have the negative connotations or legal ramifications that
             | it would have elsewhere. Most Indian people who pay regular
             | bribes are on friendly terms with the people they pay
             | bribes to.
             | 
             | Also, political parties are mostly funded by bribery, and
             | rely on literally buying the votes of villagers to maintain
             | power. Any political entity with the power to actually
             | tackle corruption would have little incentive to do so.
        
             | nabusman wrote:
             | I think the state of Bihar is trying to do that (just
             | armchair analysis from reading the news)
        
               | ummonk wrote:
               | Bihar is run by elected thugs and is the last place in
               | India that an honest business would want to go.
        
               | boruto wrote:
               | Seriously, Is this a joke. Bihar would be right at the
               | bottom of states if I ever setup shop.
        
           | dr_dshiv wrote:
           | Wondering--is it easier to buy an existing entity?
        
             | loudmax wrote:
             | Possibly, if for no other reason than the existing entity
             | has the right connections, knows how to navigate the
             | framework, and knows who to bribe to make things happen.
        
         | m12k wrote:
         | In the meantime companies like remote.com and similar have
         | sprung up, providing "employer of record" services. Basically
         | they let you outsource the act of having a company in a given
         | country and employing people through it, much like how Stripe
         | lets you outsource the whole merchant account thing for
         | payments.
         | 
         | It seems that whenever there's red tape, there's a business
         | opportunity in paving over it and providing a sane interface on
         | top of it instead.
        
           | aaroninsf wrote:
           | That is the business model of TriNet, paving over the hassles
           | of operating in different US states.
        
           | 19h wrote:
           | I would like to second this recommendation. We've been using
           | remote.com and hiring internationally suddenly became very
           | possible and we can't be any more happy.
           | 
           | Before this hiring internationally was a pure nightmare to
           | the point that we simply didn't accept international remote
           | developers.
           | 
           | Thanks Remote!
        
             | vwcx wrote:
             | And how has that shell set-up been for your international
             | team members?
             | 
             | In my experience, it added just enough of a layer of
             | obscuration to perpetuate a caste system, similar to how
             | full time temps and vendors are currently treated in tech.
             | US FTE employees had full HR support while Indian
             | subcontractors had really poor HR/payroll/benefits
             | resources from Remote. YMMV
        
               | awestroke wrote:
               | Blame the employer, not remote.com. The employer decides
               | what benefits they will pay remote.com to give to
               | employees
        
               | spaniard89277 wrote:
               | Maybe you can compensate with higher pay?
        
               | chaghalibaghali wrote:
               | As someone currently working on the employee side of a
               | remote.com setup, it's been great.
               | 
               | They have a much better understanding of my local laws,
               | tax systems etc than the US-based HR and Payroll
               | departments at companies I've worked for in the past.
        
               | ceoatpiedpiper wrote:
               | Hi , how do you get hired via Remote ? All I can see is
               | services to hire for employers.
        
               | disgruntledphd2 wrote:
               | You get hired by a company that uses Remote (or Deel).
        
               | synu wrote:
               | Or Pilot.co
        
               | nightpool wrote:
               | Remote isn't a hiring platform, it's a service companies
               | can use to manage HR compliance. You get hired by the
               | company, and your employment goes through Remote for
               | compliance with local laws.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | My intuition is that bribes would tend to scale with the
           | square root of the size of the enterprise, so working with a
           | large company would reduce your overhead versus talking to
           | the government yourself.
        
         | dr-detroit wrote:
        
         | loceng wrote:
         | Well, certainly someone got your money.
        
         | daniel-cussen wrote:
        
         | BilalBudhani wrote:
         | Being an Indian who ran a sole proprietorship company which is
         | suppose to be relatively easier with bureaucracy I strongly
         | relate to this comment.
         | 
         | Not only the ease of doing business is non-existent but also
         | the entire running the company's operations is exhaustive and
         | riddled with inconsistencies regulations. Plus, the amount of
         | reporting required to stay compliant is never ending.
         | 
         | Every month you will have to file for multiple GST reports,
         | then file quarterly GST reports again to reconcile. On the
         | other hand, file for quarterly advance tax, then finally file
         | for annual income tax. To top it of, GST rules changes so
         | frequently that the entire book keeping process becomes complex
         | & convoluted.
         | 
         | You will end up spending more time in keeping all the things in
         | check with the regulation instead of spending time on growing
         | the business itself.
        
         | j45 wrote:
         | I've heard some countries don't have the same level of rule of
         | law (and corruption instead) as anticipated.
        
         | karterk wrote:
         | Back when GST was introduced, they asked all exporters of
         | software services to pay the 18% GST and then claim a refund
         | because exports are exempted. This was before they introduced a
         | process to apply for a "NOC" (which must be renewed
         | periodically I think). So, I duly paid GST for the first couple
         | of months.
         | 
         | 5 years later, I'm yet to receive the refunds. First, they said
         | that they were authorized to only sanction refunds for
         | exporters of physical goods and then they said that this is
         | handled by the State government, who said that it was handled
         | by the Central. Finally Central accepted that they are in-
         | charge of the refund, but by then COVID happened and I could
         | not follow up for 2 years. In May, when I tried to claim the
         | refund again, they said that this refund pertains to 2016 and
         | it's difficult to "reopen" the accounts for that year and
         | that's handled by yet another department. So, they have written
         | to them to ask for the process. No replies after two emails.
         | Story continues...
        
           | hawk_ wrote:
           | That sounds awful. Curious to hear if you were able to avoid
           | GST payments in later years as should be the case for
           | exports.
        
           | solardev wrote:
           | Are you sure these aren't just thinly-veiled requests for a
           | bribe?
        
           | BilalBudhani wrote:
           | This is awful.
           | 
           | I had to apply for Foreign Export of Services Certificate as
           | well which turned out to be the PAN number.
           | 
           | They also made it impossible for services exporters to claim
           | GST back on business expenses.
        
           | eldaisfish wrote:
           | My family's liquor shop was forced to close because our
           | accountants could not keep up with the constant GST changes.
           | They quit and we could not find another on short notice. The
           | worst part was that the shop was on the hook for the unpaid
           | taxes of upstream suppliers - money that is yet to be fully
           | refunded after years.
           | 
           | India's legal systems and the enforcement of laws are one of
           | the biggest drags on a country with immense potential.
        
           | klausjensen wrote:
           | This is exactly what happened to me.
        
         | codegeek wrote:
         | I am a US Citizen (Indian Origin) who has a US company and a
         | subsidiary in India as well. It is certainly very difficult and
         | cumbersome to set up entity in India but it is possible as long
         | as you have a few things sorted out:
         | 
         | - Have a local point of contact. If you are not Indian yourself
         | or at least of Indian Origin, you will need to have a good
         | local contact ideally your lead tech. who can be part of the
         | entity
         | 
         | - Find a good Chartered Accountant/CA (equivalent to CPA in US)
         | who can help you set it up. DO NOT DO IT by yourself
         | 
         | - For a US based company, I had to do something called
         | "Appostille" which is equivalent of a Notary but for Foreign
         | stuff.
         | 
         | I can recommend the company we used that we still use. We pay
         | them about 20,000 INR per month (about $250/Month) for a team
         | of roughly 15 developers and they do all the setup, taxes,
         | payroll, filings etc etc. PM me if anyone is interested.
        
         | blobbers wrote:
         | This is precisely why upwork exists.
        
         | reactspa wrote:
         | Two anecdotes from me (based in USA).
         | 
         | 1) India's IRS still owes me tax-refund from 1998, 1999, 2000,
         | 2001. I gave up trying to recoup long ago.
         | 
         | 2) I inherited an inheritance in India from someone passing
         | away (who died without a will). A family member managed to have
         | everything put in their name.
         | 
         | Mindboggling.
        
         | ramraj07 wrote:
         | You should watch the Japanese movie ikiru - that's how I felt
         | when I tried to navigate the kafkaesque GST system. I received
         | a letter, and just to find out who I received from, I was
         | shuffled around between 7 offices in just my cities with a
         | total travel of 60 kilometers (my city is itself only 15km
         | across lol).
        
         | pythonbase wrote:
         | Perhaps they were looking for some under-the-table deal,
         | commonplace in the government offices of the subcontinent, that
         | you failed to realise. Here, you need to may money to get your
         | money back.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | Lutger wrote:
         | It's a signal you need to pay a bribe, sorry. That's the only
         | way to get something done.
        
         | soperj wrote:
         | > We have sent experts to the relevant tax offices etc, but the
         | ONLY guy who can handle it is never there, refuses to deal with
         | it, then says we need to go somewhere else - where we are sent
         | back etc etc. Sent around in circles, basically - with
         | everybody recognizing the money is in fact owed...
         | 
         | That sounds exactly like they're needing a bribe, but you're
         | too rooted in western ways of doing things that you don't
         | realize it.
        
           | draw_down wrote:
        
           | cafard wrote:
           | US citizens bribing foreign officials can be convicted of a
           | felony under (I think it is) The Foreign Corrupt Practices
           | act. Whether DOJ chases down three-developer scale stuff, or
           | has only the staff for multi-zillion class bribes, I don't
           | know.
        
             | radicaldreamer wrote:
             | There have been many smaller companies charged with FPCA
             | violations and even in cases where no charges were brought,
             | the investigation cost the company enough to basically put
             | it out of business.[0]
             | 
             | [0]: https://fcpablog.com/2017/05/24/hyperdynamics-another-
             | fcpa-i...
        
             | bluGill wrote:
             | not just the us. most of europe has similar laws.
        
             | stefan_ wrote:
             | Paying an official to do something they were going to do
             | (eventually) anyway does not qualify as a bribe.
        
               | ninju wrote:
               | citation please :-)
               | 
               | To me...if I have to pay someone to do their assigned job
               | it seems like a bribe to me https://www.merriam-
               | webster.com/dictionary/bribe (using money to affect the
               | conduct of a person)
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | NovemberWhiskey wrote:
               | > _citation please :-)_
               | 
               | 15 U.S. Code SS 78dd-1(b)
        
               | VBprogrammer wrote:
               | Jesus. Please no one take that as legal advice. Paying a
               | bribe to get preferential treatment (even if that
               | treatment is just to get the person to do their actual
               | job) is a bribe none the less.
        
               | NovemberWhiskey wrote:
               | Paying an official to perform their job (perform a
               | "routine governmental action") is a _facilitating
               | payment_ and is an exemption from the prohibitions of the
               | Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
               | 
               | https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/78dd-1
               | 
               | The point with a facilitating payment is that you've done
               | everything that's actually required by law to e.g. get a
               | business license and the official is still giving you the
               | run-around, you are allowed to pay them. It doesn't apply
               | in cases that relate to paying decision makers for
               | contracts, for example.
               | 
               | If you're thinking about doing this, you should
               | absolutely consult a lawyer, but the post above is wrong
               | on the general construction of the law.
        
               | VBprogrammer wrote:
               | That's interesting. In the UK these would also be
               | considered bribes. From a quick search the US and
               | Australia are the the only countries with this principle.
        
               | renewiltord wrote:
               | Yeah, dude doesn't deserve getting downvoted as hard as
               | he is. Neither the "You'll get killed by FCPA" nor the
               | "FCPA lets you do this" comments are legal advice. But
               | what you're saying is, in fact, true. It allows US
               | companies to continue to be competitive in places where
               | this stuff is expected.
        
               | stefan_ wrote:
               | It's an obvious exemption in FCPA that would be
               | surprising to the majority of people, hence why I posted
               | the gist of it. That earns you a "Jesus" by clueless
               | people on HN these days.
        
               | shrewduser wrote:
               | it does sound a lot like a bribe to me.
        
               | coredog64 wrote:
               | Maybe. From the multitude of FCPA training I've had to
               | endure, you can pay to have processing expedited if there
               | is an official policy for it. You cannot pay $1K to the
               | head of the office because he hints that it will speed
               | things up.
               | 
               | Technically, you're not even protected if you hire a
               | local agent to do all of this for you.
        
             | MichaelCollins wrote:
             | If you are paying them to do something they're supposed to
             | do but refuse to do in a timely manner, that _may_ be
             | legal. It 's called a facilitating payment or grease
             | payment, and is an exception to the Foreign Corrupt
             | Practices Act.
             | 
             | Ask a real lawyer, obviously.
        
               | ridgered4 wrote:
               | Yeah, I remember this from my compliance training because
               | it was so ridiculous. It is just a type of bribe, but
               | since it has a special name and a carve out it is
               | potentially not a problem!
        
               | MichaelCollins wrote:
               | I think it's a distinction that matters, morally. A
               | regular bribe is paying an official to do something the
               | law says the official shouldn't do. Whereas grease money
               | is essentially paying the official to follow the law and
               | do their job properly. The latter rewards the official
               | for their show of tactical incompetence, but at least it
               | isn't paying them to break the law on your behalf. More
               | like it's paying them to _stop_ breaking the law.
        
               | VBprogrammer wrote:
               | As far as I can make out facilitation payments are a
               | legal exception in US law, but they are illegal in Indian
               | law. This is definitely in the ask a lawyer before you go
               | making this kind of payment territory.
        
       | trustingtrust wrote:
       | As someone who lives in Maharashtra and I am close with people in
       | manufacturing I can confirm that the corruption and mafia here is
       | on a different level. You can't get anything done unless you know
       | people and are willing to bribe at every step.
        
       | agileAlligator wrote:
       | As soon as I read the title, I knew the article would be pure
       | pain.
        
       | ltbarcly3 wrote:
       | Systems like this are set up to be almost impossible to get
       | through because the higher the cost to go through the legitimate
       | process the more likely you are to pay a bribe, and the higher
       | that bribe will have to be.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | ssivark wrote:
       | (from August 2020, FWIW)
       | 
       | I wonder what it would take to digitize this whole process, so
       | that a single application can trigger all the relevant approval
       | requests, and the overall status can be tracked -- both by the
       | applicant, and at the systemic level to see whether certain
       | departments become (cough) bottlenecks.
        
         | newyankee wrote:
         | The biggest bottleneck is the power sharing between Central,
         | State and local Govts with the judiciary acting as its own
         | entity sometimes. By design a lot of entities would not want to
         | cede power and control. This has been happening with the
         | implementation of Goods and Service Tax (GST) in India which
         | was considered politically unfeasible as recently as 10 years
         | back
        
       | newyankee wrote:
       | I tried buying some land but it was very difficult to get some
       | agri land without significant cash in the area i was looking for.
       | Paperwork is never perfect, but to make it acceptable you need to
       | feed the right people.
        
       | gumby wrote:
       | About a decade ago I did set up an entity in India which employed
       | people. However I did it as a JV with a subgroup of one of the
       | big dynastic families. They had to own 50%+1 share, I am a PIO so
       | owned the rest.
       | 
       | They had all the connections so setting things up was quick. Then
       | we needed a factory so I visited a bunch of factories owned by
       | the conglomerate. We picked one and they set aside some space to
       | build our stuff. We didn't get soaked in that deal; I think that
       | was because the factory wasn't really making much money and they
       | figured the JV would throw off more cash.
       | 
       | We also worked with some other suppliers; I visited them
       | directly, negotiated terms, and only then brought in the big guns
       | from our partner. I figured that would mean we'd get the best
       | deal: either the special deal for a new customer or the special
       | deal for one of the big guys, whichever was cheaper. The latter
       | was always cheaper, but I always wondered: would that have been
       | true had we not already negotiated a ceiling on the price?
       | 
       | And in the end...the person assigned to be the CEO of the JV by
       | the partner, a nice guy who seemed to work hard...embezzled most
       | of the capital!
       | 
       | But my big lessons were: 1 - work with a partner who already
       | knows whose hand to shake and 2 - don't try to do anything new;
       | modify an existing structure. In that, the latter case is similar
       | to what apparently is the standard way to open a restaurant in
       | America: don't rent an empty space and fit it out as a
       | restaurant; instead take over the lease and permits from someone
       | who went bankrupt doing that, and run your restaurant on their
       | kitchen setup and permits.
        
       | anovikov wrote:
       | If building something on agricultural land is hard, it is good:
       | it is called agricultural for a reason. Maybe buying a parcel of
       | industrial or commercial land would have ended up cheaper?
        
         | rohan_shah wrote:
         | Author of the article here:
         | 
         | All the land in India is agricultural by default. Except in
         | some desert states.
        
           | newyankee wrote:
           | Fellow Pune resident here. I think there is a potential for a
           | transparency startup here. Parts of stuff like these exist. I
           | would buy you lunch/ beer/ whatever to learn from some of
           | your experiences.
        
             | rohan_shah wrote:
             | I'm building a startup for solving this. Let's meet.
             | Twitter DM @ mrohanshah
        
           | godelmachine wrote:
           | Hey author, this is OP. Thanks for documenting your ordeal.
        
           | kumarvvr wrote:
           | Really? Lots of land parcels are identified as Non-
           | agricultural.
        
             | RxVhmD5v wrote:
             | Yeah. His motivations seem a bit suspicious. Is he so
             | ignorant to claim all land in India is agricultural land.
        
               | programmer_dude wrote:
               | Sure it's not 100% but more like 50.4%.
        
             | programmer_dude wrote:
             | Guess which country has the most arable land in the world?
        
       | merely-unlikely wrote:
       | > Yes, you need to obtain "permission" before you build any
       | manufacturing structure on your own land with your own money.
       | 
       | > I understand the reasoning behind the need for a PWD NOC. _What
       | if they're planning to build a road through the land on which we
       | intend to do our construction._ It's certainly worth notifying
       | the public works department before we do any construction
       | activity.
       | 
       | Seems strange to me that it is on you to check that the
       | government isn't planning on building on the land _you own_.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | qikInNdOutReply wrote:
       | The time spend is the request for a bribe.. waiting 8h at a
       | checkpoint or the local police station is the punishment for not
       | paying up.
        
       | rippercushions wrote:
       | This kind of ridiculousness is why governments serious about
       | attracting enterprise have "one stop shops" for sorting out the
       | paperwork. Here's the one for Thailand, which is hardly a paragon
       | of governmental efficiency, but is a _lot_ friendlier to small
       | businesses than India.
       | 
       | https://osos.boi.go.th/One-Stop/home/
        
       | giva wrote:
       | > Yes, you need to obtain "permission" before you build any
       | manufacturing structure on your own land with your own money.
       | This permission is called the NA or Non-Agricultural Certificate.
       | 
       | Well, I though it was this way everywhere in the world. In
       | Europe, at least, you cannot build anything on agricultural land
       | unless it is a n agricultural structure or you get the
       | classification changed, which is not easy.
        
         | rob74 wrote:
         | This! In Germany it's simply not possible to declare a parcel
         | of your own choosing as "Non-Agricultural". Land is of course
         | taken out of agricultural use and reclassified for industrial
         | or residential use, but only in predefined areas. Of course
         | there's lobbying and speculation involved, because
         | reclassification multiplies the value of the parcels, but it
         | takes much longer than a year from the first proposal until you
         | can actually build something, and certain conditions have to be
         | met, e.g. good accessibility by road, other infrastructure
         | (power supply, sewage etc.)...
        
           | tomcam wrote:
           | Very similar in most parts of the US
        
           | protomolecule wrote:
           | Same thing in Russia. All land is classified according to its
           | use and changing intended use is a lot of paperwork.
        
         | mminer237 wrote:
         | In the US you typically have to make sure the land is in the
         | right "zoning" for manufacturing, but that's typically not too
         | hard to find. How easy it is to get preexisting land changed
         | varies widely. If it's agricultural land, that often won't need
         | rezoned in places with cumulative zoning:
         | https://matthewminer.name/law/outlines/1L/2nd+Semester/LAW+5...
         | 
         | Then you probably need a building permit, but they usually just
         | need the plans for the building to be built for that.
        
         | dreen wrote:
         | In Poland atm you can't even buy farmland unless you are a
         | registered farmer in the local county already. Its a new rule
         | and hopefully they remove it cause its insane.
         | 
         | And then of course you can't just build on it. You may attempt
         | to reclassify it into building land but from TFA it seems the
         | process is just as tedious as in India and definietely not
         | guaranteed to succeed.
         | 
         | Theres a big chance, once you get to the building, you will
         | have to monitor the builders constantly otherwise they rob you
         | blind. From my friend in India I was told they have the same
         | problem.
        
           | orangepurple wrote:
           | First you have to ask yourself why would such a rule exist?
           | Sometimes it is done in the interest of national security. Or
           | you run into issues such as a desert kingdom purchasing
           | rights to use massive quantities of farmland where water is
           | already scarce. See Saudi Alfalfa in California. Or why Bill
           | Gates is the biggest private farm land owner in the United
           | States at around 242,000 acres and climbing. You need to look
           | past the knee jerk assumption that the government is
           | schizophrenic. There may be greater forces at play this
           | intends to put the brakes on without overtly prohibiting
           | those activities.
        
             | throwaway2037 wrote:
             | This reply is the perfect "Chesterson's Fence"!
        
             | dreen wrote:
             | The policy doesn't make sense. Farming benefits massively
             | from economies of scale, and farmland in most of Eastern
             | Europe is already very fragmented due to "agricultural
             | reforms" in 45. If you're not familiar with that situation
             | it is you who need to ask themselves some questions. Look
             | at how messed up Haiti is, much of that results from the
             | way they delt with land ownership. Every family owing their
             | own little scrap of land sounds nice, but makes zero
             | economic sense.
             | 
             | I didn't say the goverment is schizofrenic, but their
             | message certainly plays on xenophobic fears. Its clearly a
             | part of a populist agenda, because we need people with
             | capital buying up land, but its super easy to frame this as
             | a malevolent action to less educated people, and that is
             | what is being done for purely political reasons. And this
             | policy is exactly what I would call "overly prohibiting": I
             | can't sell my farmland even to local farmers who live a few
             | miles away cause they happen to be in a different couty.
             | Cmon thats just stupid.
        
         | kumarvvr wrote:
         | Yeah, that statement is a bit of a hyperbole.
         | 
         | I think in the US this is called Zoning and you need Zoning
         | permissions or something similar.
        
         | newyankee wrote:
         | Everything is right in theory. This article is about how
         | difficult it is for a small entrepreneur, you essentially need
         | big pockets and right connections to start something even very
         | small.
         | 
         | All this does is creates a set of entrenched local businesses
         | which run hand-in-hand very transparently with local political
         | interests. This is the whole reason Western folks never
         | understand why China succeeded so fast, it is because they made
         | the trade-offs necessary for growth. For rapid growth you
         | cannot make everyone happy right away.
         | 
         | The good thing about India is that e-Governance initiatives
         | have at least provided some transparency and understanding for
         | the average person which did not exist before.
        
           | giva wrote:
           | Had this article been the difficulties to build a
           | manufacturing plan on an area reserved for industrial use, I
           | would agree. But I don't believe that changing the
           | destination of agricultural land has to be a fast and easy
           | process.
        
             | postingawayonhn wrote:
             | It should be fast and easy, but not necessarily guaranteed.
             | You should be able to get a decision quickly regardless of
             | whether it's 'yes' or 'no'.
        
         | Vespasian wrote:
         | The idea itself is sound and reasonable. If you let people
         | built wherever you'll find yourself out of arable land in an
         | instant.
         | 
         | What seems overly complex and inefficient is the amount of
         | permissions and the subpermissions.
         | 
         | Even to my German bueorcracy adjusted ears this sounds like a
         | great way to extract bribes and fees. At least the process here
         | is quite clear (but not always fast)
        
           | kragen wrote:
           | This does not seem sound and reasonable. Yes, India has been
           | civilized for 5000 years, with the result that it's very
           | densely populated; but "very densely populated" is only 418
           | people per square kilometer, less than twice Germany's 232.
           | 
           | 53% of India's land area is arable land: 790 people per
           | square kilometer of arable land, or 1270 square meters of
           | arable land per person. I feel like 100 square meters of
           | factory area per person is more than adequate, which would
           | decrease the arable land by some 8% if you built it all on
           | previously cultivated fields, rather than mountains or
           | forests or deserts (or polders!); but that assumes you're
           | employing the entire population in the factories.
           | 
           | Some factories do have lower density than that; for example,
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUMMI was 370 acres (150
           | hectares in modern units) and employed 5500 people at its
           | closure in 02006. This works out to 270 square meters per
           | worker. But now
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Fremont_Factory occupies
           | that space and some additional (175 hectares total) and
           | employs 22000 people, 80 square meters per person, despite
           | extensive automation.
           | 
           | If some of those factories are producing fertilizers,
           | tractors, irrigation equipment, and food products, converting
           | some fields into factories might actually increase your
           | agricultural production rather than decreasing it. Germany
           | harvests 7 tonnes of cereals per hectare that's planted in
           | cereals; India, despite being tropical, harvests only 3.3:
           | https://tradingeconomics.com/india/cereal-yield-kg-per-
           | hecta...
           | 
           | Allocating scarce resources like land by means of capitalism
           | is maybe not ideal unless you can make more of them
           | (polders!), but it does seem to work better than allocating
           | them by bureaucracy and laws.
        
             | throwaway2037 wrote:
             | Population density of Nederlands: >500 people/sq.km.
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | See, with industrialization you can support higher
               | population densities than India can.
        
         | franciscop wrote:
         | I have a funny story from Spain:
         | 
         | My father's has an orange field, so at some point he wanted to
         | dig a well to get some water.
         | 
         | He went to the City Hall, got all the tricky paperwork and
         | applied for permission to build it. Months passed by without
         | hearing anything, and at some point he just forgot about it,
         | assuming he'd be denied silently. There's some people in the
         | city hall don't like him too much BTW.
         | 
         | Few years later an official from the government came, "I'm here
         | to check on the well you built", to which my father was of
         | course confused "what well? You never gave me permission to dig
         | it!". Apparently and according to this official, the normal
         | thing to do is that you apply for permission, then build the
         | project and finally then you'll receive the permission
         | eventually, so he'd assumed my father had the well built
         | already. Since as mentioned some people were against him, he
         | was also not gonna officially break the law and build it before
         | getting permission.
        
           | pelorat wrote:
           | A friend of mine in Spain bought a masia, but was not allowed
           | to tear down the old building to build a new house (protected
           | heritage or something, even though it was junk). So the way
           | around it was to do it in steps. Replace it whole building
           | part by part. So now he has a new house (but it looks like
           | the old one in shape), but there's nothing left of the
           | original.
        
             | jefftk wrote:
             | Not limited to Spain: here in Somerville MA I see people
             | doing this pretty often. They leave just enough of the
             | building standing (two walls?) that it counts as a remodel
             | and they can keep all the zoning exemptions from the old
             | structure. If they tore it down entirely they wouldn't be
             | able to build anything nearly as large.
             | 
             | Completely legal, but a good illustration of how even our
             | new (and honestly much improved) zoning is too restrictive.
        
             | Mizza wrote:
             | Seen this a lot in Philadelphia lately. Part of one outer
             | wall remains standing, everything else is totally destroyed
             | and built new around it. Creates some interesting looking
             | collage-buildings.
        
             | ROTMetro wrote:
             | This is the main way people under the California Coastal
             | Commission's authority did projects up until I moved as
             | well.
        
           | giorgioz wrote:
           | don't ask permission, ask forgiveness
        
             | merely-unlikely wrote:
             | That sometimes backfires. My dad built a fence while the
             | application was pending. The city approved the application
             | but made him tear down the fence anyway and rebuild it
             | since he didn't have permission when it was first built.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | ssmw wrote:
       | This person forgot to pay the right people.
        
       | spaceman_2020 wrote:
       | India's obsession with paperwork is unceasing and baffling.
       | Everything requires an application, even when everything can be
       | done digitally. You need letters and stamps to get anything done.
       | 
       | Case in point: the "company stamps" that are required for
       | everything you do with your business. From getting a debit card
       | to changing the maturity instructions for a corporate deposit,
       | you need to sign your name AND stamp it with your company stamp.
       | 
       | The company stamp can be made by anyone for $1-2. It has no
       | bearing on security at all. Yet, you need to carry it with you if
       | you want to get anything done.
       | 
       | It's utterly baffling. I can access my corporate bank account
       | online and make any number of transactions, yet if I want to
       | apply for a debit card, I need my company stamp and signatures
       | from all directors.
       | 
       | Why? I have no idea!
        
         | swooni wrote:
         | A company stamp isn't a security device any more than a
         | signature. It's an abstraction similar to a "power of attorney"
         | type thing. They are going away but has been used in Japan and
         | China, including Hong Kong, as well.
        
         | callamdelaney wrote:
         | With so many people pointless busywork is a good way to keep
         | people busy and 'employed'.
        
         | rqtwteye wrote:
         | I remember buying a train ticket in Goa. This involved showing
         | the passport and filling out multiple forms. It was pretty
         | crazy.
        
           | gautamdivgi wrote:
           | Isn't train ticketing online now? I know my 75 yr old dad
           | just does it at home on his laptop.
           | 
           | Edit- echoing a comment further down. I got an Indian visa.
           | It was done online and was emailed to me in 24hrs.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | hef19898 wrote:
           | That reminds of a story about an Indian couple travelling
           | Europe. SO, obviously, within the Schengen countries you do
           | not need additional visas, something foreign to said couple.
           | So, they crossed Eu border by train and ended up in another
           | country. Confused over what to do next, they talked to the
           | next police officer they found, because the couple was _sure_
           | they couldn 't just continue their journey without any
           | further control. Explanations didn't work, so the easy
           | solution was to use an official looking, but totally
           | irrelevant, stamp to put on the back of their train tickets
           | (in order to not cause confusion with the tickets or official
           | passports). Source: I know the police officer in question.
        
           | throwaway2037 wrote:
           | Real question: What year? I notice there are lot of stories
           | online about "20 years this crazy thing happened to me in
           | India", but now no more. Example: You can do eVisa for India
           | travel. Super easy online. Most train tickets you can buy
           | online or via "concierge" (minor fee). Hotel booking? Yeah,
           | that too, even smaller places via Internet "aggregator"
           | websites. Travel in India is not so backwards as people
           | think!
           | 
           | I think the funniest and most embarassing story I have about
           | travel in India: The first day in downtown Mumbai, I go to
           | the train stain to buy a ticket for a Churchgate station a
           | few stops away. Honestly, I have no idea what the price will
           | be, but I assume 20-30 rupees. I only have 100 rupee notes. I
           | go to the ticket window: Lady tells me: "5 rupees". I gasped,
           | and looked at my 100 rupee note. She rejects my 100 rupee
           | note! (She was not disrespectful; said: you will take all my
           | change! Wait here; after next person, I can sell it to you.)
           | Next person pays with _enough_ change, then me. All good. We
           | both laughed. To put that in perspective, that is about 2-3
           | Euro CENTS to ride the train!
        
         | devoutsalsa wrote:
         | I was in Tunisia at the airport in Tunis for a departing
         | flight. Having already checked online, I tried going through
         | security with my electronic boarding pass. The security told me
         | I needed my boarding pass. I pointed again to the electronic
         | copy as politely as I could. The security said "this is
         | Tunisia, you need the paper copy." XD
        
           | eitally wrote:
           | This happened to me in Mumbai several years ago. I had
           | thankfully been forewarned, but there were military police
           | checking boarding passes for entering passengers _outside_
           | the airport, and no one without a paper boarding pass +
           | appropriate government ID was allowed into the terminal. This
           | was right up there with the  "requirement" that business
           | travelers in India provide a physical business card to the
           | hotel when checking in. I haven't been a in few years, so
           | hopefully that's at least no longer the case.
        
             | throwaway2037 wrote:
             | What year? I cannot believe this was in the last 20 years.
             | The "physical business card" thing never happened to me.
        
           | ricardobayes wrote:
           | Is smoking still allowed there indoors (in the airport)?
        
             | devoutsalsa wrote:
             | Not sure, I didn't notice. A lot of airports have a
             | designated smoking room, but I think you're asking about
             | smoking in general.
        
               | ricardobayes wrote:
               | It's probably banned then since. A few years ago people
               | were lighting up cigarettes in the lobby, which was very
               | odd to me.
        
         | newsclues wrote:
         | The results of British and east India company influences?
        
         | protomolecule wrote:
         | We had company stamps and sole proprietor's stamps in Russia
         | too but they became optional 7 years ago. It was Soviet legacy
         | and it's surprising that India still hasn't got rid of it.
        
           | cameronh90 wrote:
           | Singapore still has company stamps.
        
             | throwaway2037 wrote:
             | I guess it is a legacy of (inherited?) Chinese bureaucracy.
             | Hong Kong has it too.
        
           | unmole wrote:
           | India got rid of it in 2015.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Seanambers wrote:
         | In India they optimize for maximum employment. It's the only
         | place I've seen 7 people needed to refill a soda vending
         | machine.
         | 
         | Once I ordered some drinks brought up to my hotel room around
         | 10 in the evening. It took forever - turned out the guy who
         | made the drinks was sent home for the day. So the hotel called
         | him back and had him return just so he could come and make the
         | drinks and bring them to my room. Because that was his job -
         | nobody elses.
         | 
         | This was at a five star hotel in Amritsar.
         | 
         | Our driver slept in the car outside the hotel and was on call
         | 24/7 for our entire stay.
         | 
         | Quite different from western countries for sure.
        
           | throwaway2037 wrote:
           | Weird question: Did you feel embarassed when you learned
           | driver was sleeping in the car? I would be. You: Sleeping in
           | a 5 star. Them: In an uncomfortable car seat. When I traveled
           | to Seam Reap, Cambodia, I was constantly embarassed when my
           | driver did not come to eat with me. It was a weird,
           | unpleasant peasant-ruler divide that I did not enjoy.
        
             | mradek wrote:
             | Honestly this kind of stuff is why I don't travel to such
             | places. Im sure they're beautiful and whatever but I'd
             | rather go spend time in an advanced country like Japan. The
             | constant guilt tripping is not fun.
        
             | howinteresting wrote:
             | Unfortunately, in rich countries, the peasant-ruler divide
             | is just abstracted away and out of sight, often
             | internationally.
        
           | CPUstring wrote:
           | I'm not sure that is maximizing employment as much as it is
           | taking advantage of labor that is too cheap to meter.
        
         | signal11 wrote:
         | > Everything requires an application, even when everything can
         | be done digitally.
         | 
         | Please also provide two self attested photocopies.
         | 
         | (It's interesting to think about why attestation is required.)
        
           | spaceman_2020 wrote:
           | Now they ask for "official Aadhar". Even though its a digital
           | document and Aadhar website explicitly states that every copy
           | of Aadhar is an "official" copy.
           | 
           | If you get a color print and get it laminated, your
           | unofficial Aadhar suddenly becomes "official".
           | 
           | I've had so many arguments with officials about this its
           | unreal.
        
             | sundarurfriend wrote:
             | Huh, is that a thing people ask for? I've had to explain
             | the
             | 
             | > its a digital document and Aadhar website explicitly
             | states that every copy of Aadhar is an "official" copy
             | 
             | part multiple times to people in my family, but had assumed
             | this would be basic knowledge to government officials.
        
         | vishnugupta wrote:
         | Worth noting that a vast majority of these rules were created
         | by the British and have been carried over as it is post
         | independence and till this day. Quite a lot of them have become
         | irrelevant but no one's bothered to purge them.
        
         | 1024core wrote:
         | > India's obsession with paperwork is unceasing and baffling.
         | Everything requires an application, even when everything can be
         | done digitally. You need letters and stamps to get anything
         | done.
         | 
         | I remember once my wife and I wanted to travel by train to a
         | tourist town. After buying the tickets, we realized we had made
         | a mistake (actually, _they_ had made a mistake). So we decided
         | to cancel our tickets and just buy new ones.
         | 
         | We had to fill in an application, attach photos of ourselves,
         | as well as our copies of our passports ... all to cancel a
         | ticket! Boggles the mind.
         | 
         | It feels like a Kabuki theater, set up to keep the people busy
         | and employed.
        
         | eunos wrote:
         | >Why? I have no idea!
         | 
         | Legacy of British civil service and bureaucracy ?
        
           | automatic6131 wrote:
           | "No, you don't understand, we have to operate like this
           | seventy plus years after the end of British rule - not
           | because we are incapable or we aren't agents - no no but
           | because the British set up this system, and who are we to
           | change it?"
           | 
           | See also, "no you don't understand, we had to start a war
           | with the Muslims in the West because the British didn't tell
           | them to be our second class citizens fast enough"
        
             | usrusr wrote:
             | A bureaucratic system selects for people who are good at
             | that kind of process. Unsurprisingly, they aren't too eager
             | to change the environment they thrive in.
        
             | eunos wrote:
             | Indian civil service do have stronger gravitas compared to
             | other civil service. Looking from Indian Civil Services
             | Examination, it really attracts huge amount of talents and
             | required preparations.
        
           | Alkim wrote:
           | ...and an effectively unlimited labour supply
        
         | srmarm wrote:
         | I remember dropping my bag at a luggage store at the big train
         | station in Mumbai. Bags needed to be scanned before being
         | stored, not uncommon. Except the scanner was on the other side
         | of the station.
         | 
         | So I was sent off and queued up to get my bag scanned and more
         | importantly get my receipt stamped to say it'd been scanned
         | walked back through the crowds where I could have done anything
         | with the bag - to the luggage drop where the attendant checked
         | that I had the correct stamps to say it had been checked! No
         | seals on the bag, nothing to stop me giving them a different
         | bag, just the essential stamp on a bit of paper!
        
           | spaceman_2020 wrote:
           | Malls are the worst when it comes to security theater. Most
           | will check your car's boot for illicit materials when you
           | park. But they won't check the car's interios - you could
           | have anything inside!
           | 
           | You'll usually be frisked at the mall entrance. Women will
           | only get frisked by a female security guard. If the female
           | security guard is absent (pretty common), any female visitor
           | can just walk through without getting frisked.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | Tryk wrote:
             | Do you mean shopping malls?
        
               | trendroid wrote:
               | Not op but yes they meant that.
        
             | markdown wrote:
             | Wait, everyone gets frisked at Indian malls?
             | 
             | Was certainly not my experience 20 years ago.
        
               | vinaypai wrote:
               | You're right it wasn't true back then. I don't live in
               | India anymore, but I believe a lot of security measures
               | (and security theater) were implemented after the 2008
               | terrorist attacks in Mumbai:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mumbai_attacks.
        
               | sundarurfriend wrote:
               | Not in South India, in any of the cities I've been to.
               | There was a brief period (possibly after the 2008 attacks
               | that the others mention) when that was the case, but that
               | didn't last long.
        
               | spaceman_2020 wrote:
               | At least happens here in Delhi. I can't remember if it
               | happened before the 26th November 2008 Mumbai terror
               | attacks, but that might have been the instigating factor.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | raverbashing wrote:
           | Ah yes, it's the "yessir" bureaucracy, the "magical piece of
           | paper" bureaucracy. Designed to keep privileges and maybe as
           | a job program
        
         | etaioinshrdlu wrote:
         | Countries with high paperwork and bureaucratic burden are
         | famous for also being highly corrupt. This is probably not a
         | coincidence. Likely all the excess paperwork makes it easier to
         | hide what's really going on, easy to provide roadblocks for
         | those who don't pay, and easier to generally hide bad activity
         | in a sea of noise.
        
           | rqtwteye wrote:
           | I would replace "countries" with "systems". You can see this
           | in the US with government contracting or health billing. Tons
           | of paperwork but totally opaque and prone to corruption.
        
           | systemvoltage wrote:
           | This has nothing to do with physical paperwork (See Japan
           | which runs on paper forms even today; most hospitals in US
           | are paperless but they're far from efficient), but the
           | underlying policies that dictate the requirements and how the
           | approval process must be conducted, number of
           | parties/agencies/teams involved and the incentives put in
           | place to make sure it gets done within a certain timeframe
           | (QA controls). Some governments are better than others.
           | 
           | Paperwork really isn't to blame here because even if
           | everything was digital, the people behind the operation and
           | the policies that govern their behavior is still the same.
           | The problem isn't the interface between citizens and the
           | government, it is the backend source code of the government.
           | 
           | You are all barking at the wrong tree.
        
             | wincy wrote:
             | During the pandemic I paid for a concierge care doctor and
             | man it was the most convenient experience I've ever had
             | with a medical provider. Cut out the insurance, he had a
             | nurse and one office assistant and virtually no paperwork.
             | Guy actually had brain power leftover to know who I was and
             | what my situation was. I feel really bad for anyone wanting
             | to become a doctor in this day and age, it seems absolutely
             | grueling. I don't know why anyone would go through all that
             | trouble.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | Wow, please share more details. What city and what was
               | the total cost compared to other options? I have heard
               | this exists in very rich places in New York City, but it
               | costs a pretty penny!
        
             | silasdavis wrote:
             | Paperwork and bureaucracy conducted face-to-face is
             | completely different in its capacity for bribery, cronyism,
             | and discriminatory behaviour outside of the official
             | system.
             | 
             | Automated systems can be quite awful (original research:
             | Spain) but neither paper or digital systems would
             | officially state the human factors involved in turning them
             | over. There's simply less opportunity for these human
             | factors in more automated digital systems.
        
               | usrusr wrote:
               | Particularly if you consider the on-ramp to corruption:
               | being a little more lenient and helpful to those who are
               | more polite than others blends into being a little more
               | lenient and helpful to those who you consider "on your
               | team" blends into blends into being a little more lenient
               | and helpful to those who give favors in return blends
               | into being a little more lenient and helpful to those who
               | offer cash. Only then the artificial roadblocks begin.
               | Fully developed corruption would likely find ways to
               | continue after digitalization, but the ramp to get there
               | would be so much less inviting.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | I wouldn't consider Germany and Switzerland that corrupt.
        
             | jwr wrote:
             | Ahem. We're talking about a country where a chancellor that
             | pushed for building a gas pipeline from a foreign country
             | went straight to the board of the foreign company running
             | that pipeline after ending his term as chancellor.
             | 
             | Corruption is everywhere, it's just on different levels.
             | Usually in more "developed" (I don't like that word)
             | countries you see corruption on the highest levels, and
             | people actually get away with it.
        
               | Shaanie wrote:
               | The way you word it makes it sound like "the corruption
               | in developing countries is low-level, whereas in
               | developed countries it's high-level". In reality, the
               | corruption in developing countries is on _all_ levels,
               | whereas it 's mostly only happening at a higher level in
               | developing countries.
        
               | AlmostAnyone wrote:
               | I wouldn't say so. To get the appropriate doctor to check
               | my brother's broken arm and shoulder sooner than in more
               | than a month (he needed surgery within 3 weeks max to
               | avoid permanent damage) we had to employ personal
               | contacts and gifts. I live in EU and this happened this
               | summer.
        
               | ekianjo wrote:
               | in The US recently a commissioner at The FDA got offered
               | a high exec position at Pfizer. Nobody says anything
               | about that...
        
               | PubliusMI wrote:
               | There's literally an entire political party dedicated to
               | ridiculing Democratic nonsense during the pandemic.
        
               | otikik wrote:
               | Which party is that? The Republicans?
        
               | comte7092 wrote:
               | Gottleib was the FDA commissioner under the Trump
               | administration, though.
               | 
               | This isn't about a particular political party.
               | 
               | Even the much hated fauci was a career bureaucrat under
               | numerous administrations, of both parties.
        
               | foverzar wrote:
               | > We're talking about a country where a chancellor that
               | pushed for building a gas pipeline from a foreign country
               | went straight to the board of the foreign company running
               | that pipeline after ending his term as chancellor.
               | 
               | Yeah, and long after that they decided to build a second
               | pipeline (Nord Stream 2).
               | 
               | And before that, they've been received the same gas from
               | the same foreign company over the ex-SU Ukrainian
               | pipelines.
               | 
               | And five years later we will likely see Turkish pipelines
               | (still bearing Russian gas) prolonged to Hungary, from
               | where it will reach Germany once again.
               | 
               | And that foreign company isn't even running those Nord
               | Stream pipelines - they were largely German, due to
               | legislations requiring separation of the pipeline
               | operator and the supplier.
               | 
               | Don't underestimate how much Germany had profited from
               | all the cheap gas and infrastructure investments from the
               | said foreign country, up until they managed to loose it
               | all just for the sake of political appearance and no real
               | substantial win.
               | 
               | I wonder if we would some day see Scholz in some American
               | LNG company for which the nation now has to pay order of
               | magnitude more, than it ever paid to Russia.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | It is another league, not like back home in Portugal,
               | where everyone does everyone little "favours", you cannot
               | even get into some hospitals without a little help.
        
             | martopix wrote:
             | I have dealt with bureaucracy in Italy and in Switzerland
             | and if you think Switzerland has bad bureaucracy, you have
             | _no idea what you 're talking about_.
        
             | hef19898 wrote:
             | Just google Franz Josef Strauss for some history on German
             | corruption. Followed by a quick search on how exactly the
             | government sourced face masks during COVID (same political
             | part basically).
             | 
             | For Switzerland, well, a quick search for money laundering
             | gives you all the information you need.
             | 
             | EDIT: Both the FIFA and the IOCI, probably the most corrupt
             | organizations on earth, are having their seats in
             | Switzerland.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | Your two orgs are not part of the Swiss gov't. Nor is the
               | United Nations. On the whole Swiss society, business, and
               | its gov't has very low corruption.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | I checked his Wiki page:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Josef_Strauss
               | 
               | I cannot find the word "corruption" anywhere. What am I
               | missing?
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | Weapons deals with saudi arabia, the Starfighter, the
               | Spiegel affaire (more an abuse of power than corruption),
               | none of this is mentioned?
               | 
               | Edit: Both, the Spiegel affaire and the Lockheed
               | _bribery_ scandal are mentioned.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Yeah but that isn't like back home in Portugal, where
               | everyone does everyone little "favours", you cannot even
               | get into some hospitals without a little help.
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | At least for Germany... we're not _overtly_ corrupt: you
             | don 't need to bribe policemen to get out of fake charges
             | or traffic stops, you don't need to bribe city officials
             | for building permits.
             | 
             | But at the large scale, we are absolutely a corrupt nation:
             | our former Chancellor Schroder sold us out to Russia, there
             | have been dozens of millions euros worth of (shockingly
             | ruled legal) corruption during the pandemic, the large
             | companies ("Deutschland AG") have an extremely cozy
             | relationship with almost all parties in Germany, not to
             | mention corporate donations and sponsorship of party
             | gatherings (except far-right AfD whom no one serious wants
             | to donate money to and far-left Linke who refuse to take
             | corporate donations out of principle).
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | True, for building permits, either fast or out of the
               | usual and other edge cases, you don't need to bribe
               | people, you need to know the people in charge _very_
               | well.
               | 
               | EDIT: Nobody wants to donate overtly to the AfD, that's
               | why they had already multiple investigations into their
               | finances and donations. A large part of which came from
               | Switzerland. They do have those donation scandals in
               | common with the CDU and CSU, those received anonymous
               | donations in cash in briefcases. And Schauble, who ended
               | up as Finance Minister in the federal government later,
               | got away with, I kid you not, "I do not remember _that_
               | briefcase containing 100,000 bucks " (emphasize from me).
               | So, it seems all parties in Germany are corrupt, some
               | more than others, with the exact degree of corruption
               | directly proportional to the time in actual power.
        
               | pantalaimon wrote:
               | Another classic is regulatory capture.
               | 
               | Oh that new building code or electrical code just so
               | happens to only be fulfilled by using the latest
               | (patented) product by company X?
               | 
               | Well it's the state of the art, we can't build below that
               | standard anymore.
        
               | LurkerAtTheGate wrote:
               | Or union labor. I needed some electrical work on a new
               | house, but there's no electricians available for months.
               | Hanging out with a contractor friend, I mentioned that
               | the state law says "the homeowner OR a licensed
               | electrician", and he reacted like doing it myself meant
               | wiring the house with dead orphans or something. I've
               | done electrical work, I just make more money in software
               | so I'm not licensed, but that is somehow even worse
               | because I'm depriving the union electricians of work. So
               | now its a secret I take to my grave apparently.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | You wrote: <<the large companies ... have an extremely
               | cozy relationship with almost all parties in Germany>>
               | 
               | This is true in most highly industrialised countries. Can
               | you name any where this is not true? I don't know any.
               | 
               | Another way to think about it: What is the polar
               | opposite? "the large companies ... extremely unhealthy /
               | combative relationship with almost all [political]
               | parties". That sounds like the bad old days in 1980s
               | India. Most economies would be a wreck if that were true.
        
             | DocTomoe wrote:
             | Oh, corruption still exist, but most people are too poor to
             | play in that league. Compare that to "developing country
             | corruption", where you can often ... ahem ... prematurely
             | show your gratitude towards an official for as little as 20
             | bucks.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Sure, but it is another league, not like back home in
               | Portugal, where everyone does everyone little "favours",
               | you cannot even get into some hospitals without a little
               | help.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | How many times are you going to copy-pasta this exact
               | same comment? Quick search shows three times. Keep it up.
               | Great work.
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | I care for the lazy readers that don't bother to read all
               | comments, as means to find out why I made the top
               | comment.
               | 
               | Congratulations you aren't one of them.
        
             | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
             | Switzerland is far less bureaucratic than Germany.
        
               | soco wrote:
               | There was a saying "if I look at myself I hate myself, if
               | I compare myself I love myself"
        
               | pjmlp wrote:
               | Only if has improved in the last 20 years since I lived
               | in Geneva.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | They aren't, but there's definitely some present at the
             | top. With enough money on the table, how could it be
             | otherwise? Others have mentioned gas, but there's also
             | BaFin/Wirecard:
             | https://newrepublic.com/article/162084/weird-extremely-
             | germa...
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | In the finance industry, BaFin is widely regarded as slow
               | moving, out-of-date, and incompetant. Note that I did not
               | use the term corrupt. Do you really think some BaFin
               | staffers got bribes from Wirecard not to investigate? I
               | doubt it.
        
               | hef19898 wrote:
               | Almost forgot about _that_ one... I wonder how they are
               | going to contain the fallout from this to some low level
               | BaFin employees and Wirecard 's leadership. because it
               | will be contained, nobody went to jail for things like
               | the 2006 FIFA World Cup for example, or the various
               | defense contracts in the last decade, or...
        
           | throwaway2037 wrote:
           | How do explain doing business in Japan and Korea? They are
           | famous for stamps, applications, and exceedingly complex
           | rules and regulations. Yet, there are relatively low
           | corruption. I heard Germany and Austria are also very heavy
           | on paperwork and bureaucracy. They essentially have zero
           | obvious corruption.
           | 
           | Corruption is a weird thing. Why do some countries have more
           | of it than others -- holding GDP per capita constant? I
           | cannot explain it. Look at the United States -- "googols" of
           | money spent to influence lawmakers. It cannot be healthy and
           | looks like legalised bribery in comparison to other highly
           | developed democracies.
        
           | slim wrote:
           | the corruption business is very similar to racket. the threat
           | being making you lose indefinite amount of time (instead of
           | violence). as a business you have deadlines and not meeting
           | them would make you lose money. sometimes losing money can be
           | deadly to the company, that's why people unwillingly
           | participate in corruption.
           | 
           | the business model of corruption is : 1- slow the process as
           | much as you can 2- some people will have deadlines and will
           | be willing to pay to meet them 3- profit
           | 
           | the slowness is there on purpose, to be able to provide quick
           | process as a paid service
        
           | megablast wrote:
           | Is Japan the exception?
        
             | ekianjo wrote:
             | Corruption at the government level is rampant in Japan
        
             | sn41 wrote:
             | From my experience with both countries, surprisingly, Japan
             | is more paperwork oriented than India. For some reason,
             | they really want things in hard-copy, too.
             | 
             | The difference, and it's a major one, is that paperwork
             | does not slow the pace of work in Japan. Once papers are
             | there, progress is usually instantaneous.
        
             | Vibgyor5 wrote:
             | Not really - Germany is equally infamous for its obsession
             | with paperwork and bureaucracy (unlike India, Germany still
             | used fax)
        
             | resonious wrote:
             | To my knowledge, Japan's Yakuza used to be highly involved
             | with the government. That's basically just a rumor though.
             | I don't have any details. The rumor also says that this is
             | no longer really the case anymore.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | I cannot answer about the original rumor, but I can say
               | in the last ten years there has been a dramatic
               | (economic) fall for the Yakuza. Slowly, the Japan gov't
               | has passed tighter and tighter domestic money laundering
               | laws -- taxes, building / business permits, banking, etc.
               | Many times I have been asked to sign a form stating no
               | connection with "anti-social forces". The Japan gov't is
               | putting the economic equivalent of the "sleeper hold" on
               | Yakuza. You hardly see them now (in visibly obvious
               | forms) except the dodgiest places. I never see anyone
               | with a missing half their pinky finger. (Yes, it is real
               | / weird / scary.)
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | phonon wrote:
           | Japan being a notable exception.
        
             | mrkstu wrote:
             | No, it's there. Look at the scandal around the
             | assassination of Abe and the Unification Church. The church
             | has had the main party of Japan bought and paid for for
             | decades.
        
           | somat wrote:
           | The paperwork is an attempt(usually misguided) to stop the
           | corruption. The idea is that if you have to account and
           | document all actions you will have act in the proscribed
           | manner and not in a way that benefits you.
           | 
           | This usually fails for the reason you posted. I am not really
           | sure how you are supposed to stop corruption once it gets
           | rooted in your society. It is a vile and subversive menace
           | that turns every one into a criminal, preying on their fellow
           | man. A very unpleasant environment to live in.
           | 
           | The best article on corruption I have seen.(if you have time
           | for an hour long power point presentation )
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9i47sgi-V4
        
             | mmsimanga wrote:
             | It feels similar to the sometimes unintended consequence of
             | having more legislation only serving to entrench the
             | incumbents by making it hard for new players to enter. In a
             | couple of African countries I am familiar with it is the
             | same story. An endless series of papers and stamps and
             | signatures that are supposed to stop corruption but really
             | just serve as an opportunity to be corrupt. I am so
             | paranoid now of not having the right paper I tend to store
             | all papers issued by a government official.
        
             | loudmax wrote:
             | Perun has been making some of the best videos on Youtube
             | since the start of the Ukraine invasion. Mostly on how
             | military procurement works. It sounds like a dull topic,
             | but when you start to understand the intricacies and the
             | stakes involves it becomes fascinating. Absolutely
             | recommend this channel.
        
               | gotorazor wrote:
               | @loudmax wasn't totally clear, but I understood what he
               | was pointing to: Perun made a video about how corruption
               | can destroy military procurement. And, possibly, why the
               | Russians are doing so poorly in Ukraine. It was a
               | terrific powerpoint slide video.
        
             | selimthegrim wrote:
             | Prescribed, not proscribed
        
             | bergkvist wrote:
             | It is funny because it is the exact opposite of what you
             | should do if you want to stop corruption.
             | 
             | Deregulation is the best cure for corruption, because it
             | makes the gatekeepers obsolete. There would be no reason to
             | bribe them because you don't need their approval in the
             | first place.
        
             | roenxi wrote:
             | > I am not really sure how you are supposed to stop
             | corruption once it gets rooted in your society.
             | 
             | Well, assuming that all people are roughly the same as each
             | other, the answer would be to adopt traditions and systems
             | from countries that aren't corrupt. Attempt the sisyphean
             | task of convincing people that giving power to the middle
             | class is going to lead to a better future.
             | 
             | As your comment reveals, the instinct when confronted with
             | corruption is ... centralise power and try to force it to
             | be used for good. That doesn't work, so try to convince
             | people to decentralise power. Political and bureaucratic
             | elites are regularly revealed to be corrupt, so stop making
             | them the bottleneck for handing out the "allowed to run a
             | business!" stamp. Centralising power just gives corrupt
             | people a target to aim for and increases the blast radius
             | when they worm their way in to a position.
             | 
             | How you convince people to do the sensible thing and
             | decentralise power is beyond me though. The instinct to
             | push power to a single leader is remarkably strong in
             | humans.
        
               | narrator wrote:
               | I am a fan of the Singapore anti-corruption method of
               | paying bureaucrats a lot of money. That way they don't
               | have to have corruption side hustles and you can attract
               | good talent to these positions. Somehow this is more
               | unpopular than widespread political corruption.
        
               | dash2 wrote:
               | This is the very famous in economics theory of Becker and
               | Stigler. The high pay isn't so that they don't need side
               | hustles, it is to make the (small) chance of being
               | discovered and losing their job painful. You pay much
               | above market wages, people will not risk losing their
               | job.
               | 
               | Is it true? Well, maybe. From Van Rijckeghem and Weder
               | (2001):
               | 
               | > ... we find evidence of a statistically and
               | economically significant relationship between relative
               | wages and corruption.... While economically significant,
               | the relationship, nevertheless, implies that a large
               | increase in wages is required to eradicate corruption
               | solely by raising wages... The relationship between wages
               | and corruption is not found in regressions with country-
               | fixed effects which points to ineffectual wage policy in
               | the short run...
               | 
               | I haven't found much better evidence than that, though
               | there is Di Tella & Schargrodsky (2004) with a detailed
               | study on a hospital.
        
               | Lio wrote:
               | I'd be sceptical given just how greedy corrupt
               | bureaucrats can be.
               | 
               | There's not much to stop a crook being both officially
               | well paid and totally corrupt.
        
               | drran wrote:
               | Yes, but the position will be taken by a honest guy
               | already.
        
               | Lio wrote:
               | Ah, you have a good heart to give them the benefit of the
               | doubt but remember these aphorisms:
               | 
               |  _A fish rots from the head down._
               | 
               | and
               | 
               |  _Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely._
               | 
               | and
               | 
               |  _Nothing disinfects better than sun light._
               | 
               | IMHO they all apply when dealing with public servants in
               | unchecked positions of power.
        
               | TremendousJudge wrote:
               | Why?
        
               | narrator wrote:
               | According to transparency international, Singapore is one
               | of the least corrupt countries on earth. If a politician
               | could make several million dollars a year just from his
               | job, you could attract major corporation CEO caliber
               | people. Otherwise, why would a highly talented person
               | want to deal with untangling that mess?
        
               | ano88888 wrote:
               | incredibly naive answer from someone who probably haven't
               | lived in a corrupt country and deal with the process on a
               | daily basis.
        
               | leidenfrost wrote:
               | But the parent comment is right.
               | 
               | The knee jerk reaction against corruption is to
               | centralize power: "X institutions are corrupt, we will
               | give more power to this candidate who demonstrated to be
               | a good person, so he will vanish those institutions and
               | saves us fron corruption".
               | 
               | That's what Bolsonaro did in Brazil. In his campaign, he
               | demonstrated to be a good christian and a person of
               | faith. In Brazil, people strongly associate that with
               | being a good person.
               | 
               | Guess what happened after.
        
               | miroljub wrote:
               | > That's what Bolsonaro did in Brazil. In his campaign,
               | he demonstrated to be a good christian and a person of
               | faith. In Brazil, people strongly associate that with
               | being a good person.
               | 
               | Wasn't Bolsonaro elected because the previous president
               | and his main opponent (Lula?) was so corrupt that he even
               | landed in jail, which is a rare event for a prominent
               | politician?
               | 
               | > Guess what happened after.
               | 
               | Care to explain to non Brazilians?
        
               | Spooky23 wrote:
               | In a nutshell, he decided that streamlining things by
               | eliminating courts and elections would help him achieve
               | his vision.
        
               | nine_k wrote:
               | Ah, a good king! The ever-popular fairy-tale character.
        
               | jkestner wrote:
               | I don't know if Lula committed corruption, but he
               | apparently wasn't more corrupt than the judge who tried
               | him, who became Bolsonaro's Minister of Justice. All the
               | charges were dismissed eventually because of court bias.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luiz_Inacio_Lula_da_Silva
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | Lula was condemned in 3 different courts. Not unanimously
               | because the higher court judges disagreed about
               | increasing his sentence by a small amount or a lrge
               | amount.
               | 
               | Al the cases were dismissed because a new law was passed
               | that created a new court and said every case like Lula's
               | should be judged only on that new court.
        
               | miroljub wrote:
               | Thanks for the info. I don't follow Brazilian politics,
               | but somehow the picture of a corrupt ex-president going
               | to jail persisted in my head, since that was the news we
               | were getting here back in the time.
               | 
               | I couldn't understand why our news in Germany was
               | pretending that a guy convinced of corruption would be a
               | saviour of Brazil against the evil Bolsonaro.
               | 
               | That highlights one of the main problems in our
               | societies. We just accept information served to us by our
               | governments without much checking. Either because we
               | don't care about every topic, or because we don't have a
               | means to actually check.
        
               | leidenfrost wrote:
               | When the baseline of corruption is high enough and those
               | who judge you are equally or more corrupt, convictions
               | for "corruption" are a weapon from those who do not want
               | a specific someone on the government rather than real
               | intention of reducing corruption.
               | 
               | Simplifying, it's like this: If the road to presidency is
               | corrupt, you either become also corrupt (on a varying
               | degree) or stay as one of those parties with no more than
               | 1% of the votes. But then, there's a pact of silence
               | between cronies. And those who are accused of corruption
               | are the ones that either went too far or went against
               | powerful people in the government.
               | 
               | I take all those trials with a grain of salt.
        
               | merely-unlikely wrote:
               | This reminds me of why I hate when government agencies
               | excuse an overly broad rule by saying they "won't
               | prioritize enforcement" against favored/minor actors. Eg
               | [1].
               | 
               | [1] https://www.axios.com/2022/09/13/us-treasury-
               | department-torn...
        
             | cubancigar11 wrote:
             | This is a popular misconception. Paperwork is basically
             | created as part of job being done by the government
             | employee. This employee is hired due to connections and the
             | paperwork created to justify the job. The pointlessness
             | makes people exert the tiniest amount of power they have,
             | like reddit mods. The monetary corruption is more related
             | to salary which is related to well being of economy.
             | 
             | For example, during British Raj almost any British who
             | could, got a job to move these papers in India. India
             | inherited that machinery and hasn't moved to economical
             | right yet. The current government is trying but you can
             | read how it is a bad government in western media since it
             | came to power. The corruption in government allows foreign
             | interference so of course.
             | 
             | - unhappy Indian
        
               | selimthegrim wrote:
               | Raj era ICS was much smaller, Congress and Nehru created
               | a lot of the bureaucracy
        
               | cubancigar11 wrote:
               | You are, I am sorry to say, mistaken. The Raj era was
               | huge. There is very old article (https://www.theatlantic.
               | com/magazine/archive/1908/10/the-new...).
               | 
               | <blockquote>But the government is as complete a
               | bureaucracy as that of Russia.</blockquote>
               | 
               | The British Raj kept creating more and more bureaucracy
               | paid for taxes exacted by causing famines, increasing in
               | frequency and intensity. This system was inherited by
               | Nehru and Congress. They were socialists so they
               | increased bureaucracy but they didn't increase corruption
               | - independent India has not seen a famine caused by taxes
               | even in the direst of times.
        
               | winter_blue wrote:
               | Do you have any stuff I could read up on this?
        
             | ClumsyPilot wrote:
             | The video talk about Russian military handing out Million
             | dollar contracts to companies registered weeks before the
             | tender.
             | 
             | Well, guess what, the exact same thing happened in UK for
             | PPE contracts:
             | 
             | "Within weeks of the company's incorporation on 12 May
             | 2020, PPE Medpro was awarded contracts worth PS203m to
             | supply millions of masks and gowns."
             | 
             | https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/07/michelle-
             | mo...
        
               | ricardobayes wrote:
               | It's actually kind of disturbing how there are basically
               | only a handful of countries on the planet without
               | systematic corruption. Maybe there are none. Perhaps it's
               | a human trait.
        
               | otikik wrote:
               | I would go as far as to say that a little bit of
               | corruption is healthy. It adds flexibility.
               | 
               | For example: you don't want to register your neighbor's
               | daughter for taxes just so that she can babysit your
               | child once or twice. That is crazytalk. And yes, a lot of
               | countries make sure that small payments don't require
               | registration or taxes. This was just a quick example to
               | make the point, sometimes the general law is just not
               | applicable to a local event and it is better that
               | everyone ignores it.
               | 
               | But this is like cholesterol. The right amount in your
               | body makes everything better. Too much and you are in
               | deep trouble.
        
               | eastbound wrote:
               | Well for small payments we need a simple tax box, no
               | country is doing that, all countries require a ton of
               | paperwork for each new "employee".
        
               | Spooky23 wrote:
               | The problem is that the revenue leakage for babysitters
               | and other under the table services is lower than the
               | scaled grifts that an "easy box" would generate.
        
               | riskable wrote:
               | Why not just have _one payment system to rule them all_
               | run by the government that is required by law for all
               | payment of employee-driven services? Businesses could
               | save a TON of money on payroll systems and HR.
               | 
               | A government-run system--presumably--would take care of
               | withholding the correct amount of taxes and also making
               | sure the business/person paying a salary never has to
               | worry about running afoul of the law (having the IRS or
               | equivalent) come after them.
        
               | eastbound wrote:
               | In France there are more than a hundred mandatory numbers
               | on the paysheet. Each class of worker has its own
               | retirement/health/subhealth/old-age-
               | health/unemployment/family benefits. Each has a different
               | rate.
        
               | goodcanadian wrote:
               | I realise that you are making an off the cuff example,
               | and I agree with your basic point. However, in the places
               | I have lived, the babysitter would be an independent
               | contractor and thus responsible for her own taxes.
               | Moreover, it is unlikely that she would be making enough
               | money to exceed the personal exemption, and therefore, it
               | is unlikely that she would owe taxes anyway. An argument
               | could be made that she should collect and remit sales tax
               | or VAT where applicable, but again, there are usually
               | thresholds below which there is no obligation.
               | 
               | My point is that well run, non-corrupt, systems tend to
               | have exemptions to make everything sane and reasonable.
               | If these exemptions don't exist, you can believe that it
               | is because the system is corrupt and not because they are
               | trying to stop corruption.
        
               | skippyboxedhero wrote:
               | > I would go as far as to say...
               | 
               | In the UK, it wasn't corruption. These people were paid
               | money for products, they delivered those products, the
               | price paid wasn't excessive.
               | 
               | The UK has an independent auditor that found no evidence
               | of corruption, and that (where product was delivered
               | incorrectly) it was due to problems with contract specs.
               | 
               | Afaik, there is only one case where a person was directly
               | involved in politics and was related to a vendor, they
               | went to great lengths to hide their connection to a
               | vendor, repeatedly lied to civil servants who questioned
               | them, and is now being charged criminally (for some
               | reason, the person who made the original comment about
               | the UK chose not to mention it, it was PPE Medpro).
               | 
               | The issue was that at the start of Covid, the govt called
               | up all their suppliers asked for PPE, and they said they
               | didn't have any. So the govt started using suppliers who
               | often had other businesses that imported product from
               | China (and had to set up new companies). The level of
               | profit on the contract was normal, the price was higher
               | but that was related to the pandemic (how quickly
               | forgotten, in the UK there was literally no PPE for most
               | of 2020, you couldn't buy masks at any price).
               | 
               | So the flexibility already exists...the UK is not
               | corrupt, things happen naturally. Corruption is only
               | necessary where there are supply-side bottlenecks due to
               | politics (i.e. Qatar, Russia, India).
        
               | VBprogrammer wrote:
               | I think your argument boils down to don't assign to
               | corruption what could more easily be assigned to
               | incompetence.
               | 
               | Which I think is a fair point but does raise some
               | questions about the competency of the civil servants and
               | politicians we trust with a fairly large chunk of our
               | income.
        
               | ectopod wrote:
               | Private Eye has covered this. The level of profit was not
               | normal. Some of the companies were making 50%. And the
               | government had two lists of companies when they were
               | awarding contracts. The priority list was for the
               | acquaintances of ministers and MPs.
               | 
               | It smells very bad.
        
               | Vespasian wrote:
               | Some types corruption are worse than others.
               | 
               | With the typical Western "overpay for a modern
               | tank/gun/piece of equipment by a factor of 2" style you
               | still get a modern tank/gun/piece of equipment in the
               | end.
               | 
               | From what I heard, for example, in Russia you do that but
               | then the quartermaster goes and sells half of your
               | equipment off on the black market and the grunts sell off
               | the other half and replace it with something much
               | inferior.
               | 
               | The first kind of corruption is bad and should be rooted
               | out, but the second type is much more destructive as can
               | be seen in Ukraine right now. Secrecy at all levels and
               | for minor details, as well as "encouragement" from the
               | highest levels of politics for this kind of theft are
               | core ingredients.
        
               | FredPret wrote:
               | 100%, I'm originally from a really corrupt country. They
               | steal the money, and then still refuse to do the work.
               | Result: no money, nothing works.
               | 
               | Here in the West, there is much less corruption to begin
               | with, but the work gets done for the most part. Result:
               | things work
        
               | riskable wrote:
               | > With the typical Western "overpay for a modern
               | tank/gun/piece of equipment by a factor of 2" style you
               | still get a modern tank/gun/piece of equipment in the
               | end.
               | 
               | Many studies have been done and this isn't really a
               | thing. The government isn't paying 2x (or 100-1000x as is
               | often the rumor) for a given thing. What they're paying
               | is _the price of certification and guarantees_. If the
               | law requires that a procured item be guaranteed to NOT
               | catch fire in an oxygen-rich environment (because it
               | could be used in space) then the price of that product--
               | no matter how seemingly mundane--is going to be more
               | expensive than if you  "just bought it from the store".
               | Because someone had to setup a complicated bureaucracy
               | and certification testing process to cover that product
               | and actually carry out the testing.
               | 
               | There's also product availability guarantees that add to
               | the price of government-procured things: A lot of stuff
               | the government buys _must_ continue to be manufactured
               | for the effective life of the product _in the
               | government_. This means that companies supplying _stuff_
               | need to stock and _maintain_ replacement parts for
               | lifespans that would normally be _vastly_ longer that a
               | typical product cycle. They may even need to keep people
               | trained at making and repairing these goods. That costs a
               | lot of money!
               | 
               | If you're looking for corruption in Western governments
               | it's in the form of paying political campaigns (or entire
               | parties) to get specific laws passed or _not_ passed.
               | That 's the big one that causes basically _all_ the major
               | problems in Western politics.
               | 
               | To a lesser extent there's also corruption involving
               | decision-making bureaucrats getting hired by the
               | industries they regulated after their time in office is
               | over (this should be illegal) and politicians with
               | insider information trading stocks. Taking direct bribes
               | also does happen but it's rare because it's too easy to
               | get caught and the consequences are high (high risk, low
               | reward most of the time).
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | If you look at the required operating range (temperature
               | and humidity) for most mudane item sold to the US
               | military... it is INSANE. Plus, the amount of "QA" done
               | on the final product ensures very low failure rates. All
               | of this costs a LOT of money. I see the same issue with
               | nuclear power plants built in highly industrialised
               | countries with strong environmental protection laws.
        
               | MikePlacid wrote:
               | > It's actually kind of disturbing how there are
               | basically only a handful of countries on the planet
               | without systematic corruption. Maybe there are none.
               | Perhaps it's a human trait.
               | 
               | More disturbing (to me) is how _easy_ it is to eliminate
               | corruption in any given area - without any brutality or
               | anything else extraordinary. Just setup the process
               | correctly, incentivize workforce - and _the same_ people
               | who were building roadblocks to milk money will switch to
               | earning money by helping you get your task done.
               | 
               | There was a "widely known in narrow circles" libertarian
               | setup in Troitsk, Russia - of all places. The setup was
               | related to the topic of the original post - registration
               | of businesses. The post-Soviet business registration law
               | was rather liberal. The amount of documents needed was
               | not zero, but doable. But there was a catch - businesses
               | should have been registered locally, and each locality
               | was allowed to add their own requirements on top of
               | federal ones.
               | 
               | You can imagine what followed. Our own city, the I was a
               | counsel member was: just prove to us ("us" in reality
               | means -a clerk) that your business will be useful to the
               | city - and we will register you. But there was a small
               | city named Troitsk, home to some physics scientific
               | institutions, which elected a libertarian mayor, Gennady
               | Lebedev. The city council decided _not_ to ask for any
               | additional documents and just register any business that
               | complied with federal guidelines.
               | 
               | But - any clerk has any good intention in his own hands,
               | right? Mayor said: register everyone? but I am too busy,
               | come tomorrow, and by the way go to... uhm police
               | station, do a background check on yourself for me, I feel
               | a sudden need to be extra cautious in your case. Why not?
               | Seen it everywhere, like you've said.
               | 
               | Here comes handy a proper construction of checks and
               | balances:
               | 
               | 1. Salary for registration office clerks was paid from a
               | percentage of the (federally fixed) registration fee,
               | nothing else, no safety cushion. If you delay an
               | application- your salary will be delayed too. In the
               | starving Russia that percentage created a - potentially -
               | extremely well paying job.
               | 
               | 2. The clerk will be fired if he asked - not just for any
               | unnecessary documents, but just for asking any legally
               | unnecessary _question_.
               | 
               | 3. The clerk will be also fired if he accepts a
               | registration that does not confirm to federal guidelines.
               | 
               | So clerks have the incentive to work fast, help people
               | correct their documents to comply with the federal law
               | and the opportunity for any additional "milking" was too
               | risky and simply not worth it. In short time - small
               | Troitsk had more businesses registered than any other
               | small city in Russia, and comparable to Moscow. Imagine a
               | tax base they've got?
               | 
               | First-hand account by Gennadi himself here (in Russian): 
               | http://www.sapov.ru/g_v_lebedev/texts/gvl1992_12_troitsk0
               | 1.h...
        
               | TremendousJudge wrote:
               | >2. The clerk will be fired if he asked - not just for
               | any unnecessary documents, but just for asking any
               | legally unnecessary question.
               | 
               | >3. The clerk will be also fired if he accepts a
               | registration that does not confirm to federal guidelines.
               | 
               | Fired by whom? Who is in charge of checking this? How do
               | you ensure that the clerk isn't just accepting false
               | businesses and giving a percentage to whoever's above? On
               | its face this system doesn't seem to cure a culture of
               | corruption to me
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | you can audit a small number and know. sure the clerk can
               | risk one, but statistically they are caught with enough.
        
               | TremendousJudge wrote:
               | By "you" you mean a regular Russian citizen? Who is in
               | charge of the clerks under this system, and what ensures
               | that they aren't as corrupt as before?
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | I mean the mayor. You can also hire independent auditors.
               | As a person just keep electing mayors unrelated to the
               | last and hope they expose each other.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | I agree. Look at the map on this page. Plenty of orange
               | and red!
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Inde
               | x
        
             | MrJohz wrote:
             | The podcast "The Rest Is Politics" did an interesting
             | interview with the Prime Minister of Albania recently,
             | where he made the argument that the best way to deal with
             | corruption is to get rid of the paperwork altogether, and
             | basically make government services so easy to access that
             | corruption and bribery wasn't necessary in the first place.
             | So he'd been putting a lot of work into digitising as much
             | as possible, making corruption effectively much more
             | difficult, but also much less necessary in the first place.
        
               | kwhitefoot wrote:
               | This sort of thinking also prevents some kinds of scams.
               | For instance there are web sites that masquerade as
               | British government sites for paying road tax/vehicle tax
               | and charge fees that the official site does not. Similar
               | sites scam people out of money for making ESTA visa
               | applications to visit the US
               | 
               | In Norway this road fund fee is collected automatically
               | by the insurance company. This is obviously easier for
               | the user (zero paperwork), less work for the state, and
               | prevents scam artists from duping people.
               | 
               | And back on the subject of registering a company: in
               | Norway this is done online and takes minutes.
        
           | Ironlikebike wrote:
           | Every new piece of paperwork that requires an additional
           | face-to-face hand off or brings in a new entity provides
           | another avenue for corruption to occur and a place for money
           | to disappear.
           | 
           | I've had employees (in Brazil) who don't ever claim
           | reimbursement on personal expenses because if their paycheck
           | varies too much their bank freezes their funds (in the name
           | of preventing money laundering) and then the employee has to
           | go to the bank and bribe someone to get the funds unfrozen.
           | Just showing the cause for the variation in payroll doesn't
           | cut it. As the employee puts it, every requirement to show up
           | in front of an official for anything requires a bribe.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | napier wrote:
           | Absolutely. Also, in paperwork superpowers, oftentimes the
           | only ways to get things done are by resorting to what global
           | consensus evaluative norms view as corruption, and a
           | significant form proportion of what goes on frankly is
           | corruption of corruption of the parasitical criminal kind...
           | but there's also a great deal of routing around dysfunctional
           | nodes in the system with legitimate intent on all sides.
           | 
           | Interpersonal networks and middlemen routers evolve over time
           | into parallel tracks of shared understanding about how to
           | achieve mundane process flows and solve problems when the
           | official channels are broken.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | jwr wrote:
         | > the "company stamps" that are required for everything you do
         | with your business
         | 
         | We had that craze in Poland, but somehow managed to slowly
         | crawl out of it over the last 20 years. It was a slow and
         | painful process: even when the laws were changed not to require
         | stamps, many places would ask for them and you would have to
         | explain that your company stamp doesn't exist, so you can't
         | place one on the form.
         | 
         | It's one of those bureaucratic viruses of the mind. We're lucky
         | to have gotten rid of it, but there are others! Examples are
         | "fill your forms with a BLUE pen" (supposedly because it looks
         | less "photocopied"?), "sign legibly" (I never know if I'm
         | supposed to use my signature or sign my name), "your national
         | ID card number" (it's idiotic to ask for one, as it changes if
         | you lose your ID and get a new one). There was also a period
         | where every company would photocopy your ID (for example when
         | signing up for a cellular plan), until the government stepped
         | in and declared it illegal.
         | 
         | Bureaucracy is like barnacles on a ship: you have to constantly
         | fight the growth.
        
           | spaceman_2020 wrote:
           | We had waived off the requirements for stamps and signs when
           | filing annual compliance documents during the pandemic.
           | Everything worked just as well.
           | 
           | Now they've brought them back again.
        
           | Kwpolska wrote:
           | > "sign legibly" (I never know if I'm supposed to use my
           | signature or sign my name)
           | 
           | I suppose they mean to say "don't make a squiggly line
           | (parafka) and call it a signature".
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | Reminds me of a surreal example[1] of Indian bureaucracy from
         | Jim Rogers' _Adventure Capitalist_ :                   Rogers
         | and his wife had left India's State of Manipur and were safely
         | across the border in Myanmar. But wait, here comes an Indian
         | official running after them, who says that they can't leave,
         | because, they didn't have permission to be in Manipur. "He was
         | telling us -- I am not making this up -- that we had to return
         | to Manipur, because we were not allowed to be in Manipur, and
         | thus we could not leave it," Rogers relates. The debate lasted
         | for two hours before, "someone made a phone call and took the
         | subinspector off the hook, and we were free to proceed."
         | 
         | 1: https://mises.org/library/book-review-adventure-capitalist
        
           | hef19898 wrote:
           | India is the only place I ever travelled to, that controlled
           | visas upon _leaving_ the country. Like what, you are at the
           | airport, behind security, with a ticket back to Germany in
           | hand, with a German passport, and _now_ they have doubts
           | about the visas you got from the Indian consulate? What are
           | they going to do, hold you up and send you back on a flight
           | paid for by the Indian government or what? Really crazy.
           | 
           | Overall, kind of logic so, because how can you _leave_ a
           | place you didn 't _enter_ in the first place because you had
           | no _permit_ to enter it? Mind blowing!
        
             | overstay wrote:
             | This is not that unusual. It happens to me every time I
             | forget to hand over my Dutch residence permit with my (non-
             | EU) passport when leaving the Schengen zone from Schiphol.
             | The border guards are absolutely meticulous about flipping
             | through the passport looking at the entry and exit dates in
             | the hopes of catching a potential overstayer. They're
             | almost always super disappointed when I realize what's
             | happening and hand over the card.
             | 
             | The threat isn't "we're going to keep you here because you
             | weren't allowed to be here," it's "we see you have
             | overstayed your visa and now we're going to make sure you
             | catch your flight out and ban you from ever coming back."
        
         | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
         | dude. unless you are doing some space age shit or something,
         | you don't need to set up a company in india to do business.
         | sure the whole "limited liability" and that but in reality that
         | is just a smokescreen.
         | 
         | just use your personal pan card to open a bank account, get a
         | GST registration, do income tax audit and you will be done. No
         | compliance, no nothing.
         | 
         | i do taxes and books for businesses with 250+ Crore turnover
         | and they are all sole proprietorships. Why? the simple answer
         | is why bother? you can have all the employees,all the corporate
         | hierarchy and still be a proprietorship...
         | 
         | One part of the problem is all the professionals milking
         | companies for "compliance management fees" but in the end of
         | the day, my suggestion to businesses is unless you REALLY
         | REALLY need a company, please don't bother
        
           | napier wrote:
           | You need limited liability at larger scale and an official
           | entity to get low interest loans, support and above the
           | counter investor funding. These systems need new company
           | centred reform and redesign to remove friction causing
           | elements like OP describes to enable Indian entrepreneurship
           | to realise its untapped potential in India as well as
           | overseas. The amount of bureaucracy left behind by the
           | British and the layer upon layer of mindless inefficiency
           | added since is stifling innovation, adaptation and growth
           | like nothing else.
        
             | spaceman_2020 wrote:
             | What makes me pessimistic is the place bureaucrats still
             | occupy in the social hierarchy. Even today, getting a
             | government job carries tremendous prestige, especially
             | outside urban areas. Becoming an IAS/IPS officer is the
             | most prestigious thing you can do as an individual.
             | 
             | Bureaucracy will remain obdurate as long as members of the
             | bureaucracy are feted by society. Ideally, bureaucrats
             | should be invisible. But in India, IAS/IPS officers make
             | headlines regularly.
             | 
             | I won't get even started about the sheer amount of man
             | hours wasted in preparing for administrative exams.
             | Statistically, less than 0.1% of the people preparing for
             | IAS exams will actually be selected. The remaining 99.9%
             | waste YEARS of their lives in this futile endeavor instead
             | of actually building and learning.
             | 
             | I remain bearish on India as long as the bureaucracy
             | remains paramount.
        
               | unmole wrote:
               | > Becoming an IAS/IPS officer is the most prestigious
               | thing you can do as an individual.
               | 
               | If you are in UP and Bihar. That's not true for the rest
               | of the country.
        
               | spaceman_2020 wrote:
               | True in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh as well (have lived
               | there for years).
               | 
               | Between these four states alone, we're talking about 40%
               | of the country's population.
               | 
               | If more than half of your country believes something, it
               | can be said to be the majority opinion.
        
               | throwaway2037 wrote:
               | You wrote: <<Between these four states alone, we're
               | talking about 40% of the country's population.>>
               | 
               | Google Sensei tells me:                   UP: 204.2M
               | Bihar: 99.02M         Rajasthan: 68.89M         Madhya
               | Pradesh: 73.34M
               | 
               | Not even close to 40%. Population of India is about 1.3B
               | to 1.4B.
        
               | spaceman_2020 wrote:
               | Those numbers are way too old. Even by the 2011 census,
               | UP was nearly 200M with a decadal growth rate of 20% in
               | the previous decade. Bihar was 104M with a 25% growth
               | rate.
               | 
               | Even with more muted growth, current population would be
               | 230M+ for UP and 125M+ for Bihar.
        
               | llampx wrote:
               | Is that because of their geographical proximity to New
               | Delhi, the capital?
        
               | unmole wrote:
               | No, it's because these states have fewer options.
        
           | roguesherlock wrote:
           | isn't the tax burden for sole proprietorship higher than for
           | say limited company? 30 vs 25 iirc?
        
             | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
             | you can claim as many expenses as you like, in companies
             | there are restrictions, there are deferred tax assets and
             | liabilities because of companies act and income tax act
             | depreciation difference. There is MAT applicable sooner
             | than sole proprietorship i think.
             | 
             | lets just say it is easier to "appropriate" the books as a
             | sole proprietorship.
             | 
             | you have to pay mca fees for your authorized capital, one
             | off but if you are doing serious business, it costs.
             | 
             | i know, 5% "might" sound a lot in taxes but by fudging some
             | numbers, by not paying complaince fees, by not being on the
             | hook for a "lot of compliance" and the penalties that come
             | up, it does not sound worth the risk....
             | 
             | Look, if you are doing big business, want to raise money
             | from the public, sure go ahead but not otherwise.
        
               | andsoitis wrote:
               | > but by fudging some numbers
               | 
               | And this is the corruption mentality right there.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _you don 't need to set up a company in india to do
           | business_
           | 
           | You do if you want outside investment. Or if you want
           | professional management. Or if you want to seriously engage
           | in international business.
           | 
           | What you say is true: most businesses are sole
           | proprietorships. But that's a significant and manufactured
           | barrier to growth.
        
           | spaceman_2020 wrote:
           | Unfortunately you need to incorporate if you want to raise
           | venture funding. You'll also struggle to get taken seriously
           | by good tech talent if you try to hire them as a
           | proprietorship.
        
             | _448 wrote:
             | Depends. The comment you replied to has a point. I have a
             | family business. From personal experience this is how it
             | works in practice for most entrepreneurs.
             | 
             | As for funding and business strategy, it will get bit
             | tricky because you will now have to think of different ways
             | of financing instead of VCs. But it is nothing different
             | than VC financing (and you get to keep 100% of your
             | company).
        
       | testemailfordg2 wrote:
       | Not sure if political parties in India provide assistance in
       | these cases, in return for electoral funding via completely legal
       | and annonymous electoral bonds. This would be similar to lobbying
       | in the west. But the question is for how much, they would be
       | willing to help.
        
       | 100069912261242 wrote:
       | Chiter
        
       | dopidopHN wrote:
       | as someone else said, it looks like rezoning and that might be
       | hard in many other place. For instance in France, you could be
       | per-empted until late in the process by the SAFER, the entities
       | managing agricultural land. They might buy it from the vendor at
       | market price when you try to buy the land, and sell it for
       | another price they see fit to a farmer of their choice.
       | 
       | Not as frustrating as what OP described. Still. Simple
       | Administrative formality can fuck up your plan badly.
       | 
       | CF a fine piece of self reflection on our own adminstration. ( I
       | love our admin, it's a fine piece of Napoleonic technology. But.
       | yah. ) https://youtu.be/JtEkUmYecnk?t=34
        
       | egorfine wrote:
       | Just like in my country, Ukraine.
       | 
       | However during the last years Ukraine is getting rid of
       | corruption at an escape velocity and hopefully at that speed we
       | will be able to be done with it within ten years or so.
        
         | triceratops wrote:
         | I'm pretty sure corruption in societies is a cultural thing.
         | It'll take at least a generation, maybe more, to truly go away.
         | Ten years is wildly optimistic.
        
         | aivisol wrote:
         | I like your optimism... I am writing from a country which
         | joined EU few decades ago and hoped to rid the corruption as
         | well. Now here we are: I have applied for permission to connect
         | a house to a water line in a small town - that was in early
         | June: and it still drags on. Despite all fancy online
         | application and project tracking tools the government has
         | built, the number of involved institutions is insane. And its a
         | bloody water pipe some 50m long at most... Cannot imagine
         | something larger...
        
           | orwin wrote:
           | Ukraine was really on a roll pre-war, regarding corruption,
           | at least low-level.
           | 
           | I had a friend who worked at Kyiv since 2014, first as a
           | nightclub owner, then as a security contractor
           | salesman/manager, and he told me that low-level corruption
           | there was divided by two overnight (during Covid).
           | 
           | I don't know what happened, but i guess it is easier to pass
           | harsher or society-changing laws during a pandemic.
        
             | nikanj wrote:
             | There's an image in Ukraine (and the EU) that Russians are
             | corrupted. Saying no to corruption is a form of saying "I'm
             | different from Russians"
        
             | throwaway738585 wrote:
             | I guess he meant the shift from government office offline
             | visits to full digitalization. At the moment a lot of
             | common operations and documents (e.g. register the company)
             | in Ukraine can be done exclusively using the Internet, and
             | if you try to visit a government office they will send you
             | back to fill the forms via the website.
        
           | egorfine wrote:
           | Well, we had two successful revolutions in the 21st century,
           | so no government here would want to fuck with people. Reforms
           | continue.
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | This could happen in Marin county too. Can't build a house
           | next to these other houses because there is no water or sewer
           | hookup, and catch22, can't hook up water and sewer because
           | some nesting owls in the area, which are apparently wholly
           | unaffected by all the existing development but would surely
           | be wiped out should you build another 40'x40' building in the
           | area.
        
       | jacknews wrote:
       | This seems like nothing to do with 'starting a business', but
       | simply obtaining planning permission for changing land use.
       | 
       | This is a notoriously difficult process in any developed nation,
       | and is often even impossible, because the state has decided that
       | a particular area should be dedicated to agriculture (the nation
       | has to feed itself, etc).
        
       | dr_dshiv wrote:
       | I liked this article... but... it's agricultural land. You can't
       | buy agricultural land unless you are a farmer and you can't build
       | non-ag buildings on ag land. This is a national food security
       | issue. This is common in many countries.
        
       | kumarvvr wrote:
       | I am not sure about a manufacturing company, but I could start a
       | "firm", in a matter of 1 week, to conduct business. Granted mine
       | is a software development one and I created the business
       | primarily for tax purposes.
       | 
       | Looks like the author wants to use land demarcated for
       | agricultural use to build a factory.
       | 
       | That is a whole new story. In many cities, there are industrial
       | development centers and you can buy land there and build a
       | manufacturing facility easily.(The very fact that the govt.
       | sold/leased you land in that zone means a lot of environmental
       | and industrial clearances are de-facto fulfilled)
        
       | zac23or wrote:
       | In Brazil we have a saying: The government makes it difficult to
       | sell facilities.
        
       | AntiRemoteWork wrote:
       | Do not engage in any relationships with people from the "Global
       | South" and Slavs. Simple rule for easy life.
        
       | 1024core wrote:
       | I would highly recommend this book by Hernando DeSoto, The
       | Mystery of Capital.
       | 
       | GBooks link:
       | https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Mystery_of_Capital/...
        
       | chronicsonic wrote:
       | Formula 1 was racing there but pulled out due to tax issues that
       | could not be resolved.
       | 
       | https://edtimes.in/why-was-formula-1-racing-forced-out-of-in...
        
       | amadeuspagel wrote:
       | > Yes, you need to obtain "permission" before you build any
       | manufacturing structure on your own land with your own money.
       | 
       | Are there any countries where this isn't true? Where you can just
       | build whatever you want on your own land with your own money?
        
       | instagraham wrote:
       | India's claims to remove red tape since this government took over
       | can best be summarised as "three red tapes in a trenchcoat"
        
       | twawaaay wrote:
       | You are doing it wrong. What they really wanted from you was a
       | bribe, not a stack of papers.
       | 
       | Nobody will ever openly admit they want a bribe. They will just
       | drown you in bureaucracy until you get the idea.
        
         | jefftk wrote:
         | My read is that the OP understands this but is ideologically
         | opposed to paying bribes. Ex: "Obviously, they are playing
         | 'hard to get' to get me to pay some bribe and initiate the
         | process" and "So the Gram Panchayat NOC is stuck because of non
         | payment of bribe".
        
           | twawaaay wrote:
           | You have a choice. Try to do business in India and pay bribes
           | or move your business elsewhere.
           | 
           | There are countries of which India is one of them where you
           | can't do any serious business without paying bribes. Serious
           | business is anything where a government official even
           | suspects you may have money to pay the bribe. So maybe not a
           | hairdresser, but if you have money to buy a piece of land you
           | are expected to have money to pay bribes.
           | 
           | There is a lot of examples of large companies that came to
           | the same conclusion. For example, Ikea tried to do business
           | in Russia without paying bribes and gave up. They also
           | decided they will not be supporting corruption but they
           | failed, faced the choice to pay bribes or get out and decided
           | to get out.
           | 
           | India is corrupt to the bone. Corruption is way of life. It
           | is a reason for people to get government jobs which otherwise
           | do not pay enough.
           | 
           | If government jobs do not pay enough and people self select
           | themselves to get these jobs anyway only because they plan on
           | getting bribes to supplement their salary, how prevalent
           | corruption would be?
           | 
           | This actually is the reason why fighting corruption is so
           | hard. Because people self select themselves and displace
           | those who do not accept corruption from those jobs. Then
           | these officials advance and take up high level jobs and
           | pretty soon you have entire structure corrupt to the bone at
           | every level.
        
             | jefftk wrote:
             | _> You have a choice. Try to do business in India and pay
             | bribes or move your business elsewhere._
             | 
             | This post and the OP's decisions seem to me to be part of
             | an attempt to decrease corruption in India.
        
               | twawaaay wrote:
               | IMO it is just wasted effort. I applaud the person for
               | trying to do right but unfortunately it will not achieve
               | anything. For corruption to decrease you need government
               | that is actively working to this end. Except Indian
               | government is corrupt, too.
               | 
               | It isn't even going to prove any point or make the
               | problem any more public. Because Indians are extremely
               | well aware of the problem and they all know a lot of
               | these stories from their own life.
               | 
               | Regular people will never get rid of corruption exactly
               | because of the effect I mentioned -- because people self
               | select themselves into government jobs. A government
               | position is way more lucrative to a person that plans on
               | being corrupt than to a person that plans to only live
               | from the official salary.
               | 
               | It is like trying to explain to extremists (say
               | Republican extremists, or nazi, or communist, etc.) why
               | what they are doing is bad. You can reach individuals and
               | even convince them to your point but then those
               | individuals leave their extremist circles leaving those
               | circles exactly as extremist as they were before.
        
               | jefftk wrote:
               | Maybe, but many people in India's government do want it
               | to be a place people come to do business, and publicly
               | embarrassing them with how hard it is to make progress
               | without bribes seems plausibly helpful.
        
         | moralestapia wrote:
         | "Oh, that's nice then" ... nope.
        
       | conductr wrote:
       | > Obviously, they are playing "hard to get" to get me to pay some
       | bribe and initiate the process. But after going through all this,
       | I am not going to pay any bribe to anyone.
       | 
       | Given "bribe" was mentioned 39 times in the article.. Good luck!
        
       | gw99 wrote:
       | Amazing you can apparently start a scam call centre with less
       | administrative effort ...
        
       | interdrift wrote:
       | What a pain man. Reminds me of setting up the visa for my spouse
       | in Bulgaria (she's from Canada). The amount of mental pain I've
       | experienced with administration should be illegal. This seems
       | much worse and I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy.
        
       | sam_goody wrote:
       | I do not understand the authors issue with paying bribes. You
       | want your factory, you are willing to pay lots of money for it,
       | and the system works with bribes.
       | 
       | Fine, so be it. Pay the bribes and get to work.
       | 
       | I once lived in such a country*. The unfairness is built in, but
       | if you have the money, you can get whatever you need relatively
       | quickly.
       | 
       | If you are trying to save money, fine. But you are willing to go
       | to court, which is even more expensive. And all that time wasted
       | you could have been earning revenue. So instead, pay the bribes,
       | start the company, get workers and build clout, and have the
       | power to make change!
       | 
       | * Said country has made huge strides to combat this and become
       | legit in the past 30 years, and that has made everyone more
       | wealthy - even those employees that can no longer collect bribes.
        
         | sooyoo wrote:
         | > Fine, so be it. Pay the bribes and get to work
         | 
         | Since most people think like that, things don't change and
         | everybody is miserable. Cudos to the author for not accepting
         | this rampant corruption.
         | 
         | > If you are trying to save money, fine
         | 
         | If that's really what you think the authors motivation is then
         | you may have missed the point of the article.
        
           | ltbarcly3 wrote:
           | The author doesn't get his permit stamped and obviously
           | currently has no influence. He'll probably give up, and now
           | the jobs he would have created and imports that would have
           | become local production won't happen. It's not an obvious
           | good vs bad situation here, a corrupt system that allows
           | bribes is gross, but pretending you can just act like you are
           | in a western country with rule of law is ignoring reality.
        
             | sooyoo wrote:
             | You got it upside down. Exactly _because_ too many people
             | think like that, this whole corrupt system works. Imagine
             | the whole country refusing to pay bribes. They would
             | disappear tomorrow.
             | 
             | This whole "but this single action won't change anything "
             | attitude may feel rational, and even be (selfishly)
             | rational, but the effect comes through the aggregate. Lots
             | of people in society behaving like that, and you get
             | emergent properties caused by the aggregate of those
             | individual choices. A dangerous (and pretty selfish) path
             | to go in societies.
        
               | asdff wrote:
               | At the end of the day you are only playing a game that
               | someone else has made. It can be corrupt, terrible,
               | whatever, but the fact is you can do nothing to stop it,
               | so if you want to get anything done you need to play the
               | game. Your little petty protest does not stop the game
               | from being played, the people who made the game as it is
               | just don't care about your opinions at all.
        
         | plaguepilled wrote:
         | >"I do not understand the authors issue with paying bribes."
         | Because... Its extremely unethical and facilitates corruption?
        
           | sam_goody wrote:
           | OK, accepted.
           | 
           | Like everything in life, there is always a trade off.
           | 
           | We have a see-saw. One side has indignation, encouraging
           | corruption at the level of one bribe, cost. The other side
           | has time, factory, jobs, and possibly more influence to
           | change the system.
           | 
           | And from my experience, the people getting the bribe don't
           | see it as unethical - it may even be their "salary". (Eg.
           | Counselors don't get paid in many summer camps, they just get
           | tips. Parents views the tips as extortion. Is it unethical to
           | tip? No, but the whole system is corrupt and should be
           | changed. /rant)
           | 
           | Assuming that system is built this way (so the risk of paying
           | the bribe is nominal), and you have the resources to pay it,
           | it is the cost of doing business. It is unfortunate, but I do
           | not understand why the cost is not worth it.
        
             | plaguepilled wrote:
             | This is an unfounded dichotomy. The implication that you
             | cannot have an industrious society without a level of
             | corruption is not supported by your argument (nor any I
             | have heard of).
             | 
             | Equitable working conditions make working more appealing to
             | a worker - and this is extended to the "fairness" of your
             | workplace. Tips are not "the cost of doing business", they
             | are similarly an expectation passed down from authority to
             | the workers to extract their wages opportunistically.
             | People being accustomed to it does not mean that the issue
             | is resolved, because it still leaves the financial risk in
             | the hands of the worker should the business' profitability
             | shift. And so bribes are similarly unethical.
             | 
             | Moving on from the issue of bribes to the bribe receiver,
             | they are also very obviously an imposition to the giver.
             | Not further, they make the "true cost" of a transaction
             | less clear to varying degrees, allowing a services cost to
             | vary very highly compared to what the public might think it
             | is.
             | 
             | There is no good argument for a bribe.
        
               | antonvs wrote:
               | > The implication that you cannot have an industrious
               | society without a level of corruption is not supported by
               | your argument (nor any I have heard of).
               | 
               | I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but
               | corruption does exist everywhere. It's just a question of
               | how pervasive it is, how much it's actually enshrined in
               | law, etc. (E.g. campaign finance laws in the US
               | essentially legalize corruption, which could perhaps be
               | argued to be like decriminalizing drugs in order to
               | better control them, although whether that's the actual
               | intent is debatable.)
               | 
               | The Corruption Perception Index and the Global Corruption
               | Index might help get a sense of this. As is typical with
               | such lists, the top performers (last corrupt) tend to be
               | countries with smaller populations. With bigger
               | populations, the risk and incidence of corruption
               | increases.
               | 
               | https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2021 https://risk-
               | indexes.com/global-corruption-index/
        
         | mijamo wrote:
         | Paying bride is a criminal offense. Paying bride abroad is also
         | a domestic criminal offense. I do not think encouraging
         | criminal behavior is a great idea, especially when it is also
         | unequivocally morally wrong.
        
           | bulbosaur123 wrote:
           | > Paying bride is a criminal offense.
           | 
           | Cringe.
        
         | Varriount wrote:
         | Regarding the country you formerly lived in, what efforts would
         | you say were most effective?
        
           | sam_goody wrote:
           | A minister of finance that took upon himself to break all the
           | (huge) monopolies [the country had one phone company, one bus
           | company, one electric provider, etc. These were broken apart
           | one at a time.], to reform the corruption, etc.
           | 
           | He made plenty of enemies along the way, but somehow managed
           | to keep on punching. And it truly is much better for
           | everyone.
        
         | dottedmag wrote:
         | India Penal code, Section 171E.
         | 
         | Up to 1 year in prison. Do you wish to be exposed to this?
        
         | JohnJamesRambo wrote:
         | Sometimes people just stand up for what is right and expect
         | officials to do their job?
        
       | rish1_2 wrote:
       | The right answer to most of this corruption is to create a system
       | of check and balances with complete blinded information exchange
       | between each check point so no one decision body is influenced by
       | another. This is impossible to create because of vested interests
       | and likely never happen.
        
         | rish1_2 wrote:
         | America is closest to this but is not blinded so corruption
         | still exists.
        
       | anshumankmr wrote:
       | Here's some interesting things that I believe are universally
       | true in India:
       | 
       | 1) People succeed here inspite of the government, not cause of
       | it.*
       | 
       | 2) Indians can be successful anywhere except India.
       | 
       | *Unless you are rich enough to bend the laws to your needs.
        
         | kwere wrote:
         | and still it seems a lot of india fetishes socialism/commando
         | economy USSR style. why?
        
           | dartharva wrote:
           | It's easier to move the masses with promises of freebies and
           | subsidies than with better economics that are difficult to
           | explain.
        
           | triceratops wrote:
           | Is there any reason to believe it would be less corrupt with
           | a different economic system? At least now there's plenty of
           | subsidies for the poor.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-28 23:02 UTC)