This. So, so, so many flavors of the "abuse of the public to make a few bucks" that is codified in the business models and job duties and KPIs of all sorts of organizations is only viable because people bend over and take it. If there was real risk that came with abusing the public employees would either a) not do that part of their jobs b) demand compensation, likely making the abuse not economically worthwhile c) seek other jobs. Any of these cases would force entities who are abusing the public as part of regular business to change their business or bleed out and die.

Or we could just bring back bribing....

"Or we could just bring back bribing.... "

Oh you sweet summer child...

What kind of "real risk" are you talking about? Risk of what?

Who are you to impose your opinion on the rest of us? Who are you to shoot me or my neighbor?

We're talking about people who sell insurance and then do their damnedest never to pay out.

You don't want to get shot? Don't try to cheat people out of their money, especially when it is about their healthcare. It isn't complicated.

Who decides that it's wrong, that I in particular am guilty, and that the punishment is murder? You?

To the extent there is anything that can be called "objective" morality, betraying social contract and causing other people to suffer for your own profit is going to be on the "wrong" side of that.

Going all philosophical here is, what, you making excuses for being a monster? Because what you're saying is that ruining other people's lives for your own profit is fine.

And yeah, violence is an extreme and distasteful solution, as I said. But if the only other option is to suck it up and let the exploiters win, then that's on them. You don't get to have a hypocritical morality system where it is ok for you to inflict harm on others for your own profit and not ok for them to inflict harm back in self defense.