[karaterobot]

Just wanted to say that you're completely correct and making a very reasonable statement which is not controversial. I would love to hear about an economic system in which bribery did not exist or have influence, but I have not seen any examples of that yet, in the present day or in history.

I don't agree that bribes can't have unintended social consequences. They do have specific goals, yes. But some unintended consequences of bribery would be things like discouraging honest participants, or encouraging the most corrupt people (rather than the best, on merit) to place themselves in positions of authority, so as to get bribes. All of these are unintended in the sense that neither the person giving the bribe nor the person taking the bribe are trying to bring them about per se, they're only thinking about the immediate consequences (I get what I want).

[Arson9416]

I agree that they can have unintended consequences, but I wouldn't say any more or less than anything else. This is why I'm struggling with the "invisible hand" analogy, which focuses on a connection to unintended (positive) consequences.

[Der_Einzige]

Uhh, Singapore? Not everywhere is corrupt you know!

[karaterobot]

Singapore's not an economic system, but rather a country. In any case, it's still got corruption. Bribery is one form of corruption, and I have no doubt whatsoever that you can bribe someone in Singapore.

https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022/index/sgp

[staunton]

Illegally bribing someone is different from legally and secretly using money to influence the actions of institutions