If 'Lobbyist' is included, the United States could easily be near the top of the list.

Lobbying congressmen is not necessarily nefarious either and doesn't need to involve a bribe. I hear "lobbying" is illegal in Brazil though.

for example, $200,000 for a single speech, advocating something a corporate lobbyist is backing.

a non-profit health group, an eductational foundation, or simply a local business lobbying for a piece of federal contracts? "Lobby" has a bad rap as a word but it isn't necessarily a bad practice.

I think paying someone $200,000 for speech is more stupidity than criminal.

Let alone lobbyists that can afford to financially help the politician in any meaningful way? There is a difference between honest lobbying and paying to get what you want from politicians.

That $200,000 for a speech is in reality a bribe for the politician, under cover off being paid for giving the speech. Just because it can be defined as something other than a bribe to get around the law, does not mean it is not a bribe.

It sounds like you are talking more about campaign contribution or even direct bribes rather than just lobbying your congressperson which I agree is corrupt.

But back to the TI assessment, I believe they are not just talking about government officials in a much larger context whether that mean police officers, bureaucrats and such who demand bribes to NOT fine you, or demand to give you one for something you need or want like some sort of permit or officially required government document.

I bet there is a correlation to US involvement. Just saying.

than global politicals.

The U.S. government seems like the result of massive corporate bribery.
Actually, individuals paying bribes seems less corrupt than massive corporations just buying legislators and forcing thier aims on everyone.

s

I just think that singling out countries or continents on corruption is a bit flawed because IMO the only difference is opportunity and enough money and the size and scope of the bribe and the results. Not to mention the secrecy surrounding some bribery, or the re-classification of bribery as campaign contributions.

In some places its simply common and normal practice even if the bribe is just a couple of dollars.

I am just considering that at least that is a straightforward bribe, and not, for instance, finding out your water is poisoned by fracking chemicals and your home is worthless because someone in the government got a nice big campaign contribution (bribe, IMO).
"Corrupt" is a pretty broad brush.
Sort of the difference between a few dollars and millions of dollars - one bribe likely only affects one or two people, other bribes affect millions.
I think bribery, as campaign contributions, is very well entrenched into U.S. politics and that we may complain but realise complaining is useless. So we accept it and try to work around it.