Money is not really a big deal here if they bribe someone within the organization because the sky rocketing profits in return will not be comparable to what they bribed.
The perception that host nations make a profit from the world cup is not very true. Most nations don't make any profit and they even become indebted after the World Cup. We can argue that other benefits like publicity might be beneficial but direct profits are not realized in some cases. An example is the world cup in Brazil which cost about $13.4 billion but financial analyst reports showed that the country realized $13.4 billion through tourism, hospitality, and infrastructure.
I dont like to see so much countries making one World Cup, but also i dont like when the selected country is a non footb all one, or a non so good country to explore/travel. The last one on Qatar was an clear example, the World CUp was made in a very tiny country with not football tradition , and only backed by the power of money.
Every nation has the right to bid for world cup hosting. Each nation bidding for the world will have to prove that it can host the tournament. They have to also lobby to get the needed support. Such a nation might not be a well-known football nation to host the world cup but it must show its ability to finance and organize a hitch-free tournament. Regarding giving hosting rights to more than one nation, it was the US, Mexico, and Canada that came up with a shared bid. And they were fortunate to win the bid.