“不给好处不办事,给了好处乱办事”,这句话在整顿机关工作作风中用得不少,批评得也对。但进一步思考,现实中固然存在“不给好处不办事”,但也不乏“给了好处就办事”的现象。 “不给好处不办事”该批,而“给了好处就办事”且办得巴巴实实,该不该批?答案恐怕就不那么一致了。 在我看来,“给了好处就办事”与“不给好处不办事”在本质上并无二致——都属腐败行为,都属该批该查之列。不同在于,一个是“不拿钱财不办事,拿了乱办事”,一个是“既收钱财又办事”;前者易使人愤愤然,而 “Doing no good does not work, which gives advantages to chaos.” This remark has been used a lot in criticizing the work style of the organs, and the criticisms are correct. However, thinking further, in reality, although there are “no benefits do not do things,” there is also no shortage of “giving benefits to do things” phenomenon. “Do not give benefits do not work,” the batch, and “give the benefits to do things” and behave in order, it should not criticism? I am afraid that the answer is not so consistent. In my opinion, there are essentially no differences between “giving benefits to doing things” and “giving no benefits to doing things” - all of which are corrupt acts. The difference is that one is “do not take money does not do things, took a chaotic work,” one is “both money and services”; the former easily annoying, and