Reminds me of the thing my mother sometimes said, when complaining that terms in democracies are too short, leading to each government not being able to finish anything before having it undone by the next one. She quoted some historical figure from old times (Ancient Rome, I think?) - that a politician will always want to line the pockets of his and his friends (in the past it involved oppressing local population with taxes), but the amount of wealth lost to it is limited, and after that the politician will not care for money that much - so it's better to keep the politician for longer than to replace him, because the new one will start the pocket-lining process anew.

I can't find the exact quote now, unfortunately.

Tony Blair?

> it very much does happen in all well-developed economies.

This type of statement is a logical fallacy (I'd like to know if it's formalized, and if so, what's the name), and I think it's one of the most common: "There is X in any country".

Of course there is X in any country, but can be a radically different quantity and quality of X between two countries.

Is-ought fallacy with a bit of whataboutism?