The UK and US have sunk to new lows in a global index of corruption, amid a “worrying trend” of democratic institutions being eroded by political donations, cash for access and state targeting of campaigners and journalists.
Experts and businesspeople rated 182 countries based on their perception of corruption levels in the public sector to compile a league table that was bookended by Denmark at the top with the lowest levels of corruption and South Sudan at the bottom.
The Corruption Perceptions Index, organised by the campaign group Transparency International, identified an overall global deterioration, as 31 countries improved their score, while 50 declined.
In particular, the report identified backsliding in established democracies, warning that events during Donald Trump’s presidency and the revelations contained in the Epstein files could fuel further deterioration.
Wait, are you effectively saying that Kier Starmer took the job of Prime Minister because he was too afraid to say “no”?
Surely it would take more of a spine to say “no” to the money being offered than to say nothing and accept it?
I’m sorry I’m not following your logic here at all. I still can’t see why refusing a salary makes someone spineless. I think the opposite is true.
I was just ignoring your attempt to goalpost shift.
Parent comment:
No mention of salary.
Your reply:
No mention of salary.
My reply:
No mention of salary. Your reply
No mention of salary, a bribe [see parent comment] is payment and corruption.
No mention of salary, eventually you shift the goal posts.
If you don’t want me repeating comments could you please read them? The original goalpost was having a corrupt leader over a simply spinless one, a false dichotomy. Now moving goal posts, be better.
Never mind. I can see a salary interpretation in this. Perhaps that’s what you were aiming for and I was wrong. If so I apologise and agree, his giving up a salary isn’t a spinless act. Bit of a nothingness in the face of his support of genocide though. But, I think the parent comment was making a double entendre of salary and bribe. Starmer is so spineless you don’t have to pay (salary/bribe) him.
I’ll leave having asserted Kier is spinless. Having shown some reasons for why I think he is spineless. And having justified why I think him being spineless is bad.
I’m not shifting anything!
Pay. His pay. Another way to describe that is his salary.
I see by pay you meant “taking a bribe”. You didn’t say that until just now. That’s where the confusion is coming from.
I’m not really appreciating the rudeness either. I can’t be arsed with this. Lets just leave it there.
Fair enough. It’s just crossed wires. Thanks for understanding. For what it’s worth I don’t think you’re wrong in many of your points on Starmer. I’m hopeful he’ll improve before he gets the chop but I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t.
Bruh, you might want to change your username to HamBrainedVegan - unless you’re just being intentionally obtuse…
What’s your point? Other than being insulting.
You guessed it one try, so I suppose you’re not quite as dim as expected.
If you’re just going to insult people without contributing to the discussion then go elsewhere.
I’m not going down to your level, just report your behaviour and let the mods deal with it.
There’s no need for it. I came here to talk about politics, not engage with whatever you’re doing.
And for your information there was a misunderstanding that me and the user amicably sorted out. Civil discussion. It’s a good thing. Try it.