Talking with my beach-going-gang, I realized there is so much more to this line from the 3 Idiots song than what I had recognized before (literal translation – “my dad himself taught me how to bribe” – Sorry dad, I do not mean it’s true for you! In fact far from it…). I’m sure this line rings a familiar bell to most people in their twenties, some of whom actually believe that they are doing a favor to the ‘poor’ hawaldaars / thullas who otherwise get a meager salary which is not enough for them to live a decent life.
While it is rather refreshing to see the underlying sympathy and altruism on their part to take some pressure from the public officer’s shoulders, it is clearly not the only reason why they bribe. They bribe so they could get away by paying less [to the government], but even more importantly, they bribe so they could get away by not having the hassle of going to the court to pay for the ticket! So in very simple terms, the total cost to the person includes an implicit cost- Price of the ticket + transaction cost of the time they would have to spend to pay it. And it is this latter cost that makes all the difference in deciding between a ticket or a bribe.
No doubt it is an opportunity cost none of us are willing to pay, and rather take the other ‘acceptable’ route. But there are underlying costs that the society pays in return. What we do not realize is that every time a person bribes, s/he pays less to the government, and the government then has lesser still to compensate the same ‘poor’ hawaldaar! Why not pay the ticket instead and let the government take care of the salary, than trying to fix the problem single-handedly?
But I am aware that the problem is not getting fixed by simply arousing idealism. Most don’t lack it in the first place. Real key is to solve this in real-time and space. Governments need to lower the transaction cost involved therein so that people are willing to pay the ticket instead of bribing.
Why not use technology that has reached far into everyday life of a common man? If let’s say, we make it possible to pay the ticket online, it will stop at least some people who have internet access and have higher value of time. Or let’s say if we could pay it over a phone considering who doesn’t have a mobile phone these days? The point is to lower the time spent and personal interaction, to make the transaction transparent and convenient.
Maybe by doing so, the government may actually be able to increase its income, which can then be used for other tangible and intangible purposes – increasing salaries of the people who work hard for it, giving them savvier instruments to catch even more perpetrators, and letting them have a greater pride to serve in the public sector!
In-spyral Café 
The vice of capitalism is what I would call this. The very fact that we as human beings need to find a ‘profitable’ means to justify everything we do, only comes to show that Marx was probably right- capitalism is what will bring this world to an end. The fact that the human sub-concious is not enough anymore to deter us from doing wrong – only shows how weak we have become (or perhaps always were).
Having said that, do I agree to the blog entry? Absolutely. Real-time and space solutions are the only tangible thing we can offer – but I feel it’s just chosing the lesser of two evils…
Capitalism hasn’t been doing too well lately, with the melt down and the wall street mishaps, but I doubt if it is the only reason that will “bring this world to an end”. I agree that it is certainly not the answer to most problems either but if it does seem to solve some of them, I’d rather have it do it. If this lesser devil can help us play our moral selves better, then why not choose it for some extra support. I’m wondering what would Mr. Pareto have to say for this…
I hate to throw in one of the most controversial topics of the millenium into this…but I can’t help it….religion also promised a more moral and ethical human race….look where that has brought us. My point basically being…are we perhaps blinded by the boons and conveniently overlook the vices, and have we just become too relaxed to look for a solution? Have we just become cynical zombies?
I’m sorry Kunal, I might be completely missing your point here, but from where I’m looking at it is that as long as anything leads to an improvement in some people’s lives WITHOUT making anyone else worse off, any set of moral/ethical/religious principals are acceptable. Yes, it is very utilitarian and solution oriented, no doubt, but saves us from being entirely cynical about these principals. I agree that none of these guidelines are perfect, but I’d say they have done enough good as well, which we must not ignore.
I do see your point, and I do agree to it, that some good done is better than no good at all. I am merely pointing out that we are too easily satisfied with the “some” good and don’t push for a “greater” good.
Like the whole “chalta hai” attitude which kind of circles back to the first point you made in your thread…that there is more to the line “rishwat dena tho khud papa ne sikhaya!!” than meets the eye…for me this line just means that yeah “my dad taught me…so what the hell do you expect me to do about it now…this is my reality”….maybe it’s my cynicism which is pouring out 😉
I do see your point. But I’d again say that let’s try to not just distribute the pie equally but also make the pie bigger so that everyone benefits more. “Some good” in my mind is not the same as “chalta hai”, because the latter is simply living with exactly the same conditions, while the former is all about improving them, even if it is a small change. And isn’t that what you can constantly strive for to finally achieve what is the “greater good”? (I was almost forgetting how we started out, but thank god it’s typed above so I could read again!)
And you really make a very interesting point there about how you would look at the same line differently. At least that’s not how I saw it till now 🙂 But once a person recognizes the issue, he should try and rectify it. But ya, I do not rely on the “should”s as much as I do on “could”s. So the question is could they be in a position to change their “reality” and do what is ideal? I guess I’m trying [hard] to use my optimism to direct your pouring cynicism 🙂