bribery

Economic analysis of bribery is imbalance in the distribution of wealth. (Masami Mustaza, 2009). The rich family will become richer and the poor family will become poorer. The poor pay a higher share of their income on bribes than the rich. An IMF study shows that an increase of just 0.78 percent in corruption reduces the income growth of the poorest 20 percent of the people in a country by 7.8 percent a year. The poor will face tremendous difficulties in improving their lives since they have no relation, and not enough money to buy luxury goods even inferior goods. The net effect of corruption is felt most directly, and disproportionately, by the poor (G8 St. Petersburg Summit, 2006). Because of that, poorer are limited choice for their goods. They can purchase necessary goods only and no extra income to purchase extra goods or luxury goods such as car, house and so on. Besides that, bribery leads to a waste of resource. (LL.M, 2009) This is because the wealth which could have been channeled to achieve better things will be spent on trying to secure business advantages by paying bribes. It can also lead to a loss of business for the others country involved, as ongoing acts of bribery will scare business executives from doing business in that country. For example, government supplies resource for that pay money only and government not care about the quality objects. Bribery does not create a level playing ground for all business concerned which can be seen as unfair to other businesses unwilling to pay bribes just to secure contracts.
In this case will happen produce poor quality work and it will threaten safety and peace. (Masami Mustaza, 2009). A job award due to bribery exposes the public to danger due to low quality of work or construction and increase in management cost. For example, build a bridge in low quality will threat people life because if people walk over a bridge will break anytime and without inform. New entrepreneurs will face expansion