Vous-êtes ici: AccueilOpinionsActualités2015 03 12Article 320647

Opinions of Thursday, 12 March 2015

Auteur: Kojo Yankson

One percent human

Yesterday, I had a call from a friend of mine. She had been duped by one of those "Goro Boys". He promised her a full driver's licence in seven days, without a driving test. She paid him GHC800, and the boy disappeared.

She had been trying to reach him for a month with no luck. She was obviously distraught, and wanted advice on what to do. I told her to report the matter, but first, I asked her one question: why was she so corrupt?

The truth is that con artists always target corrupt people, and so the more honest you are, the harder it is for someone to con you.

One of the most popular scams is the 419 scam. There are several variations, but the principle is the same: You are told of some big money sitting somewhere, which the conman has access to, but requires a smaller amount to go access it - whether for transportation, or to secure some documents. The idea is that you provide or contribute towards the smaller amount, and you then get paid an agreed portion of the large sum once the conman receives it. This is the kind of scam which will only work on a person who desires to get rich by taking shortcuts.

Have you ever heard of Victor Lustig? Probably not. Well, Google him. He is one of the world's cleverest conmen. He developed a scam where he would sell a machine that printed real 100 dollar bills. The catch was that the machine could only print one bill every six hours. He would demonstrate it to you, and then sell it to you. By the time you realised that the machine contains only two real hundred dollar bills and a load of paper, Lustig would be long gone, along with your 30,000 dollars cash.

But even Lustig pales in comparison to American con artist, Joseph Weil. This guy scammed people with all kinds of tricks, from selling them cheap "Indian Oil lands" the government had "no record of", to betting on fixed races and promising to double and triple people's investment with a "money printing chemical", Weil found a way of appealing to the innate corruption in everyone he met, and exploiting it for his personal gain. Over a lifetime, he made over 8 million dollars from people's greed.

Today, much is made of the Police recruitment scam which is rocking the nation. Many of the victims of this scam believed they were paying for the opportunity to join the Police service without going through the usual entry requirements. They wanted to achieve their goal without doing what was legally required to obtain it. If they didn't have this corrupt mindset, would the scam have worked on them?

We complain about corrupt officials, but we must also examine our national psyche and honestly assess our own attitude to corruption. How do we feel about those who obtain riches by cheating the system? Do we revile them? Or do we revere them?

I recently read Joseph Weil's autobiography, "Con Man", and was struck by something he wrote: "The desire to get something for nothing has been very costly to many people who have dealt with me and with other con men", Weil writes. "But I have found that this is the way it works. The average person, in my estimation, is ninety-nine per cent animal and one per cent human.

The ninety-nine per cent that is animal causes very little trouble. But the one per cent that is human causes all our woes. When people learn—as I doubt they will—that they can't get something for nothing, crime will diminish and we shall live in greater harmony."

My friends, it is human nature to want something for nothing. Unfortunately, the bad nuts among us are fully aware of this fact, and will exploit it always. My advice this morning is that we live our lives by the book. Rules are made to be followed. If you're a properly licensed driver in a properly insured car, with your triangle and fire extinguisher intact, and you follow all the road regulations, what reason would there ever be to bribe a policeman?

My name is Kojo Yankson, and they say you can't cheat an honest man. Do you agree?