[crankylinuxuser]

Why does that idea repulse you? We see it regularly with countries high on the corruption scale. And given what we know about the tragedy of the commons, it makes sense to make money on a global tragedy (CFCs). I (a CFC producer) can make more than the loss everyone takes.

Transparency International tries to uncover "shady" countries. You can see the results here: https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_percept...

To be honest, a good chunk of Europe and North America aren't terrible. There's room to be better. I'll let the data determine your decision.

Edit: Boy, the groupthink is strong in here. -1 for actually questioning bad practices in corrupt governments, and providing data and a tie-in to a likely phenomenon why.. And I attract trolls. Sigh.

[evek]

Your logic and economic explanations are sensible. The term "shady countries" was the phrase I reacted upon, and only that. Shady government officials, businessmen, deals? Sure. Shady countries? It sounds extremely wide and viewed from a position of privilege.

[rdtsc]

It's in the context of regulating harmful CFCs, I think it's pretty clear "shady" means corrupt?

> It sounds extremely wide and viewed from a position of privilege.

Ah well. I am not the one who used the phrase. But I lived in a shady country, if I criticize it and call it corrupt and shady do I get pass of not being from position of privilege?