Whom is at fault

A high ranking Federal government offical is offered a bribe by a rich and powerful company. The offical takes the bribe and the wshes of that company are granted.

Whom is at fault?

Both of them, obviously.

One is bribing a public official

The other is abusing his position of trust.

Is this like. Which came first, Chicken or the Egg?

My advice: don't use the word "whom", it always leads to tears.

Considering the nature of man, and the nature of the "free enterprise system", mightent it be the system itself? yah think?

canndo said:

Considering the nature of man, and the nature of the "free enterprise system", mightent it be the system itself? yah think?

Click to expand...

The fact that PROFESSIONAL LOBBYISTS are some of the highest paid people in Washington - making millions yearly, from what is basically influence peddling, would support your idea of the system being corrupt and rotten to the core.
One man, one vote democracy....
One man earns a million plus a year, from having our elected representatives on speed dial.

And London, Berlin, Paris and Rome are no better.

Both are at fault but the briber was not elected to represent my best interests while the public servant is. The Public servant who promises to protect and serve should be held to a higher standard. The evil businessman makes no such illusions.

The system works on paper, it doesn't work in practice. That would lead me to believe the fault lies not in the system but in the hands of those implementing and participating in the system. If I steal from the bank while playing monopoly, and two of my opponents look the other way because I give them each 1/3rd of what I took, just so we can squash the 4th player, that isn't really parker brothers' fault. The rules were there we just didn't follow them and there was no objective arbiter to enforce them. The problem is that people rely too much on systems that were designed hundreds of years ago for a society that barely resembles what we have now. We are asked to follow laws that we are never taught (No one ever hands you a book of what is legal or illegal, you are just expected to figure it out), and that we never were allowed to vote on or participate in the enacting of. We are not educated on ways to affect political change, so we are forced to abide by the system as it chuggs along like an anachronistic train racing down the tracks with no brakes whatsoever. We live in a time in which no one is willing to take personal responsibility for anything, where practically no one is concerned with the welfare their own community. We live in a world that is populated by people who ever since birth were taught to do things for no other reason than that their parents told them to, and this blind obedience which is bred into us from infancy lays the groundwork for political and economic systems to dominate and subjugate us, for governments to control us while leaving us the faintest glimmer of hope that we can affect change, just enough leeway that we stay complacent, because government can be evil and manipulative but it isn't stupid enough to believe its self more powerful than a truly educated, motivated populace. Every time governments forget that and overstep their boundaries, push people a little bit too far, people push back and empires fall. And all that was before the internet, when the flow of information was far easier to restrict. Things are gonna get crazy, no matter who is to blame for the faults of the system

desert dude said:

My advice: don't use the word "whom", it always leads to tears.

Click to expand...

Yes it should be Who. Whom is used when talking about the object, but in this case it is the subject, so it should be who.

The federal official is at fault. The company is doing its duty to drive the bottom line and grow financially. The duty of the federal official is to uphold the law.

desert dude said:

My advice: don't use the word "whom", it always leads to tears.

Click to expand...

To whom do you speak of? =)

canndo said:

Considering the nature of man, and the nature of the "free enterprise system", mightent it be the system itself? yah think?

Click to expand...

The system of government yes, free enterprise, no.

beenthere said:

The system of government yes, free enterprise, no.

Click to expand...

It's hear no evil if you try to explain that crony-capitalism is NOT free enterprise. It hurts the agenda to admit this.

Theoretically You're at fault, or WE are.

The money is at fault, we should revert back to a barter based economy.

I will give you one cheeseburger for a handy!

A handy is worth at least two cheeseburgers

You're good at this bartering thing! Deal!

I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a handy done today.

kelly4 said:

I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a handy done today.

Click to expand...

That is how we got into this credit debacle! Sorry, no fronts...