Beberapa pemikiran tentang korupsi
May 30th 2011 20:32
Pada tahun 1968 Gary Becker menulis satu tulisan yang bernama ”Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach.” Menurut Becker, semua aktivitas kriminal akan terjadi bila keuntungan untuk pelakunya lebih daripada biayanya. Pemikiran Becker sudah termasuk di dalam ”rational choice theory” yang mencoba menjelaskan masalah korupsi dalam konteks individu. Menurut teorinya, kalau mau menurunkan masalah korupsi, harus menambahkan biaya atau menurunkan keuntungan untuk pelakunya. Biayanya merupakan kemungkinan dihukum dan ukuran hukuman.
Walaupun teori ini memang baik untuk mengerti masalah korupsi dari satu perspektif, teorinya kurang lengkap karena juga ada konteks lembaga, konteks ekonomi, konteks kebudayaan, dll. Siapapun bisa bertanya: ”bagaimana dengan moral, itu tidak penting?” Pasti bisa memasukan moral dalam biayanya sebagai satu kehilangan ketika kita ikut perilaku korupsi. Tapi, apa yang memengaruhi moralnya?
English if someone doesn't undestand what I want to say:
In the year of 1968, Gary Becker wrote an article called ”*”. According to Becker, all criminal activity will happen if the benefit for the agent is higher than the cost. Becker’s thoughts has been included in rational choice theory which tries to explain the problem of corruption in an individual context. According to the theory we would have to increase the cost or reduce the benefit for the agent if we want to reduce corruption. The cost consists of the opportunity of being punished and the size of the punishment.
Although this theory is actually quite good in order understand the problem from one perspective, The theory is not complete because there are other contexts like institutional context, economic context, cultural context, etc. Anyone can ask: ”what about moral, isnt it important?” Of course we can include moral in the cost as a loss when taking part in corrupt behaviour. But what influences our moral?
Walaupun teori ini memang baik untuk mengerti masalah korupsi dari satu perspektif, teorinya kurang lengkap karena juga ada konteks lembaga, konteks ekonomi, konteks kebudayaan, dll. Siapapun bisa bertanya: ”bagaimana dengan moral, itu tidak penting?” Pasti bisa memasukan moral dalam biayanya sebagai satu kehilangan ketika kita ikut perilaku korupsi. Tapi, apa yang memengaruhi moralnya?
English if someone doesn't undestand what I want to say:
In the year of 1968, Gary Becker wrote an article called ”*”. According to Becker, all criminal activity will happen if the benefit for the agent is higher than the cost. Becker’s thoughts has been included in rational choice theory which tries to explain the problem of corruption in an individual context. According to the theory we would have to increase the cost or reduce the benefit for the agent if we want to reduce corruption. The cost consists of the opportunity of being punished and the size of the punishment.
Although this theory is actually quite good in order understand the problem from one perspective, The theory is not complete because there are other contexts like institutional context, economic context, cultural context, etc. Anyone can ask: ”what about moral, isnt it important?” Of course we can include moral in the cost as a loss when taking part in corrupt behaviour. But what influences our moral?
- 19
- 11
- 2
Journals Statistics
| Total | 10 entries |
|---|---|
| This Month | 0 entries |
| This week | 0 enrties |
Latest entry
| Lagu-lagu Indonesia (4) |
| Beberapa pemikiran tentang korupsi (13) |
| Anak setan (6) |
| Thai - second entry (2) |
| First thai entry (8) |
Latest comments
| Jun 01st Manik |
| Jun 01st Ratih |
| Jun 01st Ratih |
| Jun 01st Ratih |
| Jun 01st Nindita |
Entries by Month
| 2011 |
|---|
| - June (1) |
| - May (4) |
| - January (1) |
| 2010 |
| - October (1) |
| - September (3) |
Pada tahun 1968 Gary Becker menulis satu tulisan yang bernamajudul ”Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach.” Menurut Becker, semua aktivitas kriminal akan terjadi bila keuntungan untuk pelakunya lebih besar daripada biayanya.(Nama is usually used to address people, animal, and things.. For something related with literatures like books poems, and articles, we usually use "judul")
Menurut teorinya, kalau mau menurunkan masalah korupsi, harus menambahkan memperbesar biaya atau menurunkan memperkecil keuntungan untuk pelakunya.(Actually the sentence is quite alright, I just tried to make it sounds natural to me)
Biayanya merupakan kemungkinan dihukum dan ukuran beratnya hukuman.
Walaupun teori ini memang baik untuk mengerti memahami masalah korupsi dari suatu perspektif, teorinya kurang lengkap karena juga ada juga konteks lembaga, konteks ekonomi, konteks kebudayaan, dll.
Siapapun bisa bertanya: ”bagaimana dengan moral, bukankah itu tidak penting?” Pasti bisa Tentu saja kita bisa memasukan moral ke dalam biayanya sebagai satu kehilangan kerugian ketika kita ikut mengambil bagian dalam perilaku korupsi.(The previous sentence: "Pasti bisa memasukkan moral.." sounds alright and understandable, but there is no Subject in the sentence. Also "ketika kita ikut perilaku korupsi" is alright too)
Tapi, apa yang mempengaruhi moralnya kita?
Pada tahun 1968, Gary Becker menulis suatu artikel yang berjudul ”Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach.” Menurut Becker, semua aktivitas kriminal akan terjadi ----your sentence is understandable, but a more natural way to say the next part of this sentence would be: ----jika ekspetasi keuntungan dari aktivitas kriminal melebihi keuntungan dari aktivitas legalnya. :)
Pemikiran Becker tersebut sudah termasuk ke dalam ”Rational Choice Theory” (Teori Pilihan Rasional) yang mencoba menjelaskan masalah korupsi dalam konteks individu.
Berdasarkan teori itu, untuk menurunkan tingkat korupsi, maka kita harus mengurangi keuntungan yang diharapkan oleh pelaku korupsi (koruptor) dari aktivitas kriminalnya, dengan cara menambah nilai tersebut ke aktivitas legalnya. ("Biaya" which has been translated from "the cost", doesn't really explain the whole meaning of this sentence correctly. I'm actually kind of confused of what does "the cost" actually refers to. The cost in legal or economic term? If it's the economic one, then you can use the first correction, but if it's in legal context then use this one: "Berdasarkan teori itu, untuk menurunkan tingkat korupsi, maka kita harus mengurangi keuntungan yang diharapkan oleh pelaku korupsi (koruptor) dari aktivitas kriminalnya, dan mempertegas hukuman yang akan diberikan terhadap pelaku.")
Walaupun teori ini cukup baik dalam memberikan pengertian tentang korupsi dari suatu perspektif, tapi teorinya kurang lengkap, karena tidak meliputi konteks lembaga, konteks ekonomi, konteks kebudayaan, dll.
Siapapun bisa bertanya: ”bagaimana dengan moral, bukankah itu penting?” Tentu saja kita bisa mengkatagorikan moral sebagai suatu kerugian ketika kita ikut mengambil bagian dalam perilaku korupsi.
Remember the article is "an economic approach". So cost is an economic term. What it means is that any gain or loss can be measured in a dollar-equivalent or given a value in a any currency. Sort of like a cost benefit analysis. A loss of moral for example can be estimated in dollars.
Anyways, I'll try to choose less technical texts later because this only makes me confused (I cant promise though). Thanks alot for the correction.
Umm, I just think that when we read something, our background will also affect our perception out of the text. I guess that somehow there was previous knowledge in Ratih's mind which affect the perception so that she assumed so. What I see there is tendency to do illegal action if the legal ones is troublesome. Err, perhaps quite like that, correct me if I am wrong. However, please keep correcting, Ratih ^^
By the way, Jorginho, how long have you been studying Indonesian and how? I wonder how to reach such an expertise, I wanted to do so with language I am studying, though it seems like long way to go.
I saw this great video that stated that you need around 10.000 hours to be excellent in any particular sport or subject. And then there is the Pareto principle which states that you can get 80% of the gain for 20% of the effort. So 2.000 hours for a language should then be what you need to do ok. So time is an important factor.
But then alot of activities are too hard and some are too easy, so you need to find the flow. So you should aim for high challenge, high skill activities. Else you will probably just stop because of boredom. But its difficult to know what is the right challenge for your skill level, so I just try and see what happens (learning by failing). So flow is the second thing I aim for.
Third is probably motivation. So you should have some good reason to study to convince yourself enough that it is wothwhile. I like to think that I want to work in Asia in the future, so that all this studying will be helpful in the future.
So what are your thoughs on this? I think you are right that it is a long way.
Compare to the language I wanted to study, I am still on the level of language infancy. I can't even arrange my thought in sentences using the language I wanted to study. I have ever spent 10 months in Japan and learning Japanese though. After that I just felt like I am on going nowhere by self study. Perhaps because I can't estimate how far I have been progressing. Somehow it less motivating.
I don't know about the video. But I know Pareto rule. However I guess it is right under the condition that the 20% effort which is done is the essential ones. That is I should know the essential effort to get the 80% gain. That is why I am asking you :D
Yes, you're right I need to challenge myself and then I could see how I progress. Sure, yeah, renew that long lost motivation.
Wow 10 months. You must have learned alot there. Sure. But then maybe languages which have a different script are probably harder. I used hours just to manage the basics of thai script and I'm nowhere near a fluent writer and reader in thai. There are probably also invisible steps (or thresholds) which you reach as you progress. Suddenly you understand much more. A word can be used in a thousand sentences. You learn a word and then you forget, you relearn it and then you forget it again, and then suddenly you can remember it by intention every time you need it. Kinda strange.
I will surely keep correcting! :) But after this, I'm just going to correct things I really understand. I don't want to make people confuse with my correction anymore. :)
えっ、わかんない～(笑）。Just kidding, yes, I just read that. That's great-^^.
Hehe,no, I think that you do understand.
The background I mean here isn't academic background. You and I know our country, lol. So that perhaps you read between the lines (which currently is not written on the line). Anyway, misuderstanding happens that is why I think we Should communicate to each other to explain the matters. I know learning Thai is so hard, not only the letters but also the same word is used for different meaning. It really needs hard work ^^