The tendency to be corrupt does not correlate to the amount of financial wealth or security a politician or everyday person has. In fact, quite often it works in reverse. The politicians who have modest band accounts - and therefore have most likely lead a service oriented, and more humble life – may well have stronger ethical convictions than a rich fat cat, so to speak. The amount of wealth at one’s disposal does not dictate the level of ethics a person has, and this regularly holds doubly true in the political world. In fact this might also be an interesting area to revisit the old adage of how the “rich get richer”, as some of these increased treasures may well come via corrupt, otherwise unethical activities. Experience has shown me that often the rich just want to get richer, and this could certainly hold true in the political arena as well, so no, a wealthy politician would not be inclined to be less corrupt. In fact, they might have a tendency to be more so corruptible.
Most politicians are fairly wealthy, some more than others, but I don't know if it really correlates to how corrupt they are. I guess the richest ones might be more corruptible because they probably have friends that own large corporations so they may be more willing to cave in to lobbyists.
Being corrupt depends on the person and their personality. How much money they do or do not have might play a part in it, but a very small part. A good genuine person who does not like taking short cuts will remain uncorrupt no matter how much money they do or do not have.
No, I don't believe rich politicians are less corruptible. Any politician on any level has some sort of vulnerability to corruption. Their job puts them in that position to be corrupted. They have access to power and power can lead to major corruption. The amount of money they have doesn't necessarily matter.