The question says that as per economists, bribes given by business hinders economic growth. However, the economic growth for corrupt and other (maybe less corrupt) nations is the same. Here, the author's logic is that because businesses lose money, it will negatively affect the business and, ultimately, the economy.
Any new information that will help us resolve the paradox.
Pre-thinking: Maybe there is something else benefit that the business gets because of the bribe, which helps them save money almost equal to what they lose on a bribe. Which essentially offset the negative of Bribe.
*(B) In the past decade, the proportion of business income spent on taxes has, on average, declined faster in nations with more corrupt governments than in other nations.*
Now if we see option B, We can see that paying less tax may be offsetting the negative of bribes, helping the economy grow at the same rate.
Any new information that will help us resolve the paradox.
Pre-thinking: Maybe there is something else benefit that the business gets because of the bribe, which helps them save money almost equal to what they lose on a bribe. Which essentially offset the negative of Bribe.
*(B) In the past decade, the proportion of business income spent on taxes has, on average, declined faster in nations with more corrupt governments than in other nations.*
Now if we see option B, We can see that paying less tax may be offsetting the negative of bribes, helping the economy grow at the same rate.
Statistics : Posted by Harish_IITB • on 12 Mar 2024, 16:53 • Replies 3 • Views 688
.jpg)
