AI and Politics

If you ever wondered for what purposes one may use AI, I have an answer. Politics and more specifically the Law-Making part of it.

There are two aspects of Politics that would benefit from an AI intervention. Social need mapping and Law-Making Social impact analysis none of which has any known solutions today. Attempts to introduce AI to Politics in the form of an aggregator of the views of non-elective parties (see Synthetic Party of Denmark) fall short, in my opinion, of the true potential of the AIs.

The AIs, I am referring to, are not the ChatGPT-type generative ones but rather the Chaos Theory-based Predictive ones. These we use in Socio-Economics ( a meta version of Adam Smith’s Political Economy) whereby the unpredicted economic behaviour of a group of actors in question is influenced by the relative strength of the institutions they observe creating this way Chaotic Behaviour Maps (CBMs) that differ with any statistics/game theory based one.

Allow me to escape the jargon and explain briefly in simple terms the mechanism before I analyse each, in case you dislike or have no time to read lengthy papers.

The short version is this.

Provided we can identify the boundaries of any chaotic or complex system we can define the set of data we need to collect.

We can, subsequently, by analysing the data, identify the structural synthesis of the biggest sets that appear at least twice. These we can call in the absence of another word the “truth” of the specific system. We know, through the analysis, at this point the constituent elements of data of these large datasets.

And here is the beauty and the “simplicity” of the whole approach because in regards to:

· The social needs mapping all one (see an AI) needs to be doing is “translate” them (the needs) into sets using as input people’s economic behaviour.

· Lawmaking, do the same, “translate” the “letter of the Law” into the same type of sets.

And that is all.

Now we can leave it to the AI to:

· In regards to the first (social needs mapping) compare the new sets with the actual patterns of the system to see the degree of similarity or ideally of absolute correspondence and disregard the rest

· Perform a social impact analysis. One of the ways to achieve this is to allow the AI to predict all probable extensions of the largest in existence dataset of the chaotic system and compare these new sets with the ones expected to be created by the new Law.

It will be interesting to listen to parliamentary sessions where the Political Parties AIs voice the analysis made, trying to explain mathematically their versions of the “truth”, having an AI as a Political Party’s Speaker or even better the Political Party Leaders’ debates prior to an election. I personally look forward to the day they will happen.

Now the long version in case you are actually interested and you do want to know how this can become a reality.

Societies work through a complex set of intertwined unwritten rules. We call them social institutions.

Despite the definition of institutions as being the end result of Political choices, there is an abundance of Historical Institutionalism research showing that social institutions predate Politics, at least in the form we know them today. It is safe thus to say that the opposite is true and Political Choices are influenced by the underlying institutions and to a degree predictable!

Social institutions are the end result of our combined societal wisdom, the best practice of previous experiences of all of us developed through a cause/effect analysis into a set of unwritten rules.

Institutions were built gradually from the bottom up, starting from our genetics-driven instincts grouped into simple notional structures that became over time complex ones, similar to our DNA, with some modern ones comprising thousands of notionally interconnected elements.

Being unwritten makes them, though, prone to “conditional” interpretations. Our Democracy for example is one of them that is an institution interpreted “freely” by every Political Party. One can easily research the vast spectrum of Democracy manifestations around the globe.

The discrepancy of interpretation in the past, created the need of the Law, itself nothing else but a social institution. In its turn, Lawmaking became a common practice and was institutionalised as an idea.

The need for Lawmaking created the need for Law Makers and we ended up with the elected Politian Law Maker, with the all-known results and here lies today’s problem.

The maths that can assist any politician to

· map the actual social needs of the people he is supposed to represent or

· based on that and his “political beliefs” design new Laws that will work

do not exist!

The problem is even harder for any Politician or their Consultants/Experts than it appears as institutions are in constant flux. As Heraclitus said «Τα πάντα ρει» “everything changes”.

No Law-Maker can predict the future and progress is relentless. The “sandboxes” to test new emerging technologies and the constant change of existing Laws are evidence of the ever-happening failures.

Politics ended up being the art of persuading others that a predefined outcome is to be expected even if none can actually produce a robust societal impact analysis on socio-economic and institutional levels or calculate how this can be achieved when future external and internal influences are yet unknown.

On the other hand, can we really second guess the good intentions of all Politicians/lawmakers even if history has shown that the expected result of their policies is very rarely materialised when we know that the maths needed for them to do so has not been invented yet?

Well, I have good news for all. It appears there is a solution. Let me explain.

Societies are chaotic systems, consequently one is expecting to see patterns emerging within it time given. Some of them axiomatically will represent the basic constituent elements (sets) of all institutional forms.

Despite, though, the axiomatic nature of societal institutional patterns emerging, at this point one stands with one leg on the hypothesis fields and with the other on probabilistic ones, but the path is promising. To my knowledge the notion that societal chaotic patterns are the constituents of social institutions is new.

If one is to follow down this notional path the fact that the maths underline societal institutional change does not exist, is no more an obstacle. Think of it as solving maths problems using geometry. Using this approach, we can predict institutional evolutionary trajectories and create policies that can actually work (fit neatly within these trajectories).

But there is a catch…we will not need any more of the type of Politicians we know and possibly the Political Parties at least in their current formats. It will be fun…

Here is how the new probable form of Politics will work.

All complex systems have boundaries. The same stands true for Chaotic structures. We do not actually have one Chaos but many and they are constantly evolving and changing over time. Economic behaviour in macroeconomics is based nowadays mostly on assumptions made as the result of observed human behaviour interpreted through statistics.

The problem with assumptions is that the end result of a series of them is the multiplication of the probabilities of them coming true. If for example, you increase interest rates as a Central Bank you expect your inflation to be going down. But this is partly accurate if only all else remains stable for a predefined period of time for the policy change to take effect. If the expected effect on the economy is to happen within 10 weeks, do we really expect the world to stand still until this does? How about the personal circumstances of each one of us or the “non-allergic” internal reactions of the system that will counteract the policy?

If the first assumption is 90% accurate the second 60% and the third 30% then the probability of the success of the policy is 0.9×0.6×0.3=0.162!

Now that you realise the size of the problem let’s return to our Chaos.

I argue that if instead of using statistics and making assumptions we use the same data sets to “describe” and “bound” the chaotic then, we can actually identify its local “axiomatic” truths, the larger patterns structures that are, that have a least one identical copy of themselves (memeplexes).

Now we are in a good place.

We are capable now, of identifying the structural synthesis of these biggest sets on an elemental basis and learning how they evolved. These large sets we can call in the absence of another word the “truth” of the specific complex system/chaos.

Remember that we know as well at this point the constituent parts of data of these large structures, the elements (see smaller sets) that comprise them and by knowing that, the most probable ways they will evolve (grow or mutate). This can be achieved, for example, by identifying the probable order of interconnections (like chemical bonds) and the probable order they can occur and most significantly the improbable ones.

Still, we need statistics but we do not need any more to hypothesise to such a degree.

Subsequently now in regards to:

· The social needs mapping all our AIs need to be doing is “translate” them into datasets using people’s economic behaviour as the source. The added bonus of this approach is that these datasets already contain the external influences that created/influenced people’s behaviour and no additional work needs to be done in this direction. We can use any underlying model to do so with the easiest way is by using the existing sets we identified in the system.

· Law-making we do the same, “translate” it into the same type of sets. This is a complex proposition by “translation” I mean the creation of datasets that contain the socio-economic elements of the Law in question that have either similar or identical structures with those that already exist in the system long structures.

And that is all.

Now we can leave the AI to:

· In regards to the first (social needs mapping) to compare the new sets with the actual patterns of the system to see the degree of similarity or ideally of absolute correspondence. Then it needs to disregard all those that do not either correspond or have a high degree of similarity and for the qualified remaining to create a needs matrix for the next phase

· perform an impact analysis, by “seeing” if these substructures (that will be created by the Law) can be added to the largest existing in the system and the ones up to two levels below them without creating “allergic” systemic reactions. The two levels below are needed in order to see if they were applicable at an earlier stage as well and if compatible, determine if a previous state would be more beneficial than the one attempted now This is a form of Plan B in case the new attempt ends up being totally incompatible. About these “allergic” reactions, the dropping into a previous stage and they can affect these additional sets in the rest of the smaller structures, I intend to write another paper.

E Voila, the new way to AI-assisted Law-making, and a massive field of research for the new mathematicians to follow.

Will this be the end of hypothesis-based Politics? If nothing else I believe it is a step in the right direction, with a seriously positive social impact.

All type of comments is welcome.

On politics and political programs

All societies function based on the social institutions that they created. These institutions have as a purpose to simplify our decision-making process based on our past and present combined experiences. Institutions represent the society’s combined belief system. Those that affect us on a societal level and are significant to our existence and well-being we enforce with artifacts and we assign guardians to protect them.

While all of them constantly change the degree of change is invertedly analogous to their significance. Change in those is really slow as their guardians are, inevitably, change-averse.

Law-making and Democracy are two characteristic examples of such institutions.

For Democracy and Law to exist a Law-making body should be in place hence we opted to elect people’s representatives.

So, every jurisdiction is electing one to represent them in a “Democratic” way. How do we elect them?

Unfortunately based on the illusion of “knowing” what they “represent”, to what degree they complement our belief system (the institutions we believe in) and how they will act to safeguard our “interests”.

The problem is that every single person’s interests are unique and none of our elected champions of our interests has the “tools” to make all of them come true.

This inability to do so, starting from ancient times, created Politics.

Politics is the art of presenting the statistically improbable as possible.

The reason improbability is present is simple. We do not yet know the governing laws of institutional change in order to calculate the impact on a societal and more importantly on a personal level of every new Law.  Public consultations are a pseudo-democratic way for citizens to express their opinion but on a predefined set of articles, which mathematically cannot be all inclusive.

Have you ever seen a societal impact analysis accompanying any proposed Law? No. of course not. All you see is the previous Laws it will replace and a fuzzy reasoning to justify a wishful thinking of the Lawmaker.

This brings us to political “programs” and the historical failures of every single one of them even in the most advanced societies. Unfortunately, the degree of failure is proportional to the degree of interdependence of a state from all others.

So, if our institutions are failing us what is the solution?

Well, there is no single solution to the problem as change is inevitable, fuelled by the chaotic socioeconomic and technological environments.

But for any given moment and complexity (which is size dependent) we do actually have the maths to calculate the probability of the next moment’s best outcome, and for small periods we can predict based on the degree of influence from the global environment and the potential change of all other institutions, the upper and lower limits of the probable outcome.

This brings us to the following interesting “conclusion”.

If the size of the sample is the factor that introduces complexity resulting in deviation from the intended outcome, then the solution is to divide and concur.

Replace the doomed-to-failure state-wide political “programs” with local community-based ones and “safeguard” their outcome utilising AI in the decision-making process

With the upper and lower limits of the outcome of the community-based programs for a given period mathematically predictable, one can scale up the model (perceiving a community as a unit) into the Municipality level adding closed-loop economic principles and subsequently, into a State one using advance maths (i.e. Nash equilibriums) and AI which will constantly adjust the probability of undesired change and propose solutions.

And there you have it AI-managed Democracy. Anyone who would like to be its Godfather and give it a name?   

Music is a tourist magnet for London

It is impossible one to escape the complexity of individual desires and that holds true for tourism. People decide to travel, our inherited desires to explore put aside, for a myriad of reasons. You normally want to go where others are going to, where your youth memories is driving you due to the language you studied, the promise you made to yourself when browsing the internet or watching your view-master if you are old enough to remember such a gadget, maybe the promise you gave to your spouse or your children…the list is endless. To add to the complexity most of the times it is the financial situation of this individual or family that dictates priorities and silence your wants.

That said 15.000.000 of you end up in London every single year and wanted to know why. What is exactly that attracting this mythical average visitor to London?

Until recently to contact a global survey one would need the collaboration an institution like the UN an endless list of participating Universities and endless hours of research and analysis from thousand of people.

Thank God now, thanks to the internet there is a technique, that you may heard of, call crowdsourcing which can reduce the amount of effort needed by several thousands times and is as accurate as any if you analyse it using specific mathematical techniques which I will not get into in this instance.

Anyway we did that and for the first time to our knowledge we reveal what are the actual mental associations of that elusive individual the “average London visitor” when he thinks of London.

Studying the results you may be equal surprised with us or not but several point were of interest and I would like to raise them.

1. A staggering 30% of all tourists are attracted by the various concerts. That doesn’t mean they will go to one of them during their stay but is you were to ask them they would love to. Music is not just one of the biggest industries and exporting products from UK but a major reason people are coming to London.
2. For some peculiar reason beyond my comprehension to be honest, and I live in UK for the last 18 years, people associate in their minds London with food!
3. The third reason is one I was expecting to be the first Attractions and Landmarks with one in 10 coming to London with the hope to be visiting all of them if possible.
4. People love glamour the palaces and the Queen where associated in almost one in 10 individuals. Maybe the resent royal marriage has something to do with it and finally
5. We encountered here a significant and not easy to understand oxymoron which has to do with shopping and fashion. From one hand only one in every eleven people in our research associated their visit to London with either fashion or shopping on the other hand a recently published report (http://www.retailgazette.co.uk/articles/12104-tourist-spend-in-uk-shops-hits-45bn ) revealed that an unbelievable 81% of all visitors are actually going shopping during their visit in London.

But enough of me, use the chart we attach and draw your own conclusions and please let us know what you think.

The Gaianomy TT

2012 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 2,000 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 3 years to get that many views.

Click here to see the complete report.

The end of loneliness

The friends of this blog must be aware by now, on the type of research we normally undertake. The last eight months were no different. We concentrated on finding these elusive chaotic patterns within the institutional structures, to help us predict new developing institutional forms. See our blog http://bit.ly/s0Q4hK for an introduction to the concept. 

Between others we explored ancient institutions that seem to define attempts to change, at least until recently. Not surprisingly marriage was one of them as the it was family another ancient institution which contain the first. We were very careful with family as according to our research it is one of the fundamental societal bonds and a unit of measurement for social cohesion. Social cohesion that while present, supports Nationalism and in its absence Globalisation. 

To return back to marriage it initially, on the surface, appeared untouched until we start digging deeper. According to the market research firm Euromonitor International, the number of people living alone globally is skyrocketing, rising from about 153 million in 1996 to 277 million in 2011 – an increase of around 80% in 15 years. In the UK, 34% of households have one person living in them and in the US it’s 27%. That is by far higher than global population growth.

We were surprised. That indicated that Globalisation was in the rise, a fact that we actually observed anyway, and Nationalism in retreat which we did not. But what attracted our attention mostly was the fact that the phenomena of social isolation was in the rise (more research is needed on that) which is deeply worrying, as this phenomenon appears to be feeding extremism when occurs in periods of economic crisis. 

Is there a solution we thought? Was that phenomenon present in the past and if yes what societies did to counteract it? Are there any conclusion deriving from history. We went back. A lot of us are Greek anyway so, Plato appeared in the picture fairly soon describing a similar problem.

According to him, Aristophanes was often repeating a story whereby humans used to have four legs four hands and a double faced head. Zeus thought, who was afraid of their inner strength, separated them in two, condemning them in an endless search for their soul-mate. An interesting story nevertheless, a story that in our days may serve only as a metaphor to describe a social phenomenon.

The fact though remains one, people 2500 years ago were faced with the same phenomenon we experience today!

So what societies did to address it? We found new institutions all the way to the present day from arranged marriages to engagement. Institutions that are still present in the 21^st century!

What about the internet we thought? Did it offered a pressure release valve? Any institutional entrepreneurs in the social backbone? We found, once more, none to our surprise.

It appears that traditional matchmaking has just migrated (copy-paste) its 10000 years old practices into the internet. Companies saw loneliness as a profit making opportunity, a paid by the month service.

Dating overtook in 2011 porn, another loneliness fuelled industry, to become a multi-billion industry. New companies sprang every day, over the last decade, all promising anything an average person may have in its wish list. The average desperate single based on the latest research will spend $129 per year in subscription fees and another $2300 in dating or as we named it the Zeus tax. 

A critique of this dating industry Eli J. Finkel, PhD (www.news.health.com/2012/02/06/online-dating-pitfalls) highlight a few simple facts the major of which is that the industry wants you to stay single and dependent for as long as they can. The average person retains his subscription for more that 18 months!

Another interesting finding uncovers the second major pitfall of their process.

“Although most dating websites feature photos and detailed, searchable profiles covering everything from personality traits to likes and dislikes, this information (they know) isn’t necessarily useful in identifying a partner…That’s partly because daters don’t always know what they want in a mate—even though they generally think they do. Studies suggest that people often lack insight into what attracts them to others (and why), and therefore the characteristics they seek out in an online profile may be very different from those that will create a connection in person,” the review notes.

In other words there is no way, but by accident, that you may find a soul-mate using this approach or services! 

In Gaianomy we generally are not a bunch of idle observers (we are all working) and where ever we can we intervene (i.e. already the Greek Government started to implement some of recommendations even if that is only partly).

We know it takes time to change institutions but if you know their structure, the right triggers, then you’ve got a chance.

So, we debated a lot on how urgently social isolation needs to be addressed under the circumstances (see Global crisis) and we agreed that something needs to be done, as soon as possible, if the migration to a post capitalistic society is to be achieved sooner than later.

Easier said then done taking on as a mission to reverse social isolation phenomena, was quite an undertaking. We went back to our research and we hypothesised that if we managed to alter the way the dating and matchmaking industry, that already owns the 50% of the market, operates we had a chance. The problem was/is that this industry is not in the business of actually matching people, as it will loose its customer base. We needed something more innovative.

A member of our group happens to be the founder of a mobiles VAS (value added services) company. They were working on a product that basically connects human desires with market offers for the last 2 years.

When we put the two together it was a no-brainer. How about finding a way to connect two individuals with the same desires, instead of one with an business enterprise, we thought? In theory it seemed feasible.

There was of course the small matter of financing it and of course the rewards for the company involved, which is not a charity.

You can guess the rest. We found a formula for financing it internally and we agreed on the maximum price the product/service can be sold in order to have a chance reaching mass market proportions. We may well be the first Think Tank that, to our knowledge, has attempted something similar.

As we publish this, we are very near to the actual product that, we hope will revolutionise the way we interact as single humans. We took on the mission to reduce loneliness to its previous, if not better, normal standard within the next ten years (that is the time frame we consider the current form of capitalism will exist) in order to enhance social integration, reduce extremism phenomena and strengthen social coherence through the empowerment of the fundamental social units the family. 

If it sounds interesting and you want to help, let us know. It will cost you nothing.

We are only weeks away from starting B-testing of the product. Regarding the how you can participate and details of the product we will tell you in the next blog.

Until then, please, wish us good luck.

 

To the Greek goverment…and not only. Can you please listen?

We monitor, for over two years now, the situation in Greece, one of the the richest currently fields of institutional metamorphosis and the institutional changes as they happen.

Institutions are, by nature, modular entities not dissimilar to organic proteins and which societies combine together to create new complex institutions, while others acting like enzymes catalyse/forge change causing modifications in belief systems.

Based on the above definition Politics, being an institution, undergoes rapid changes across the Globe and even faster ones in Greece, Spain, Italy, Egypt, Libya etc.

We studied in detail all political manifestos in Greece as they evolve (based on the new developing belief system) and several of them appear to be following viable paths towards a stable meta-economic framework within an environment affected by global influences however each one in its own apospasmatic way.

So, with the hypothesis of political ethos and integrity after the last elections almost a given, we are writing to you in order to propose a very simple solution to some of the Greek problems, which can be implemented immediately.

The way we approached  the solution, coming from a non-economic bounded theoretical framework, but instead a sociological one, allowed us to identify the  institutional root causes of the current problems in Greece and their  supporting mechanisms. Thankfully they appear all to derive from the same one which means that altering the nature of this supporting mechanism one may introduce eventually the desired change.

We acknowledge that the proposition is both radical and unconventional. To counteract the  expected scepticism, we tested it as a hypothesis within the current economic theoretical framework and it proved to be a solid proposition with minimum (at a national scale) social disturbance.

We will not attempt to present the whole analysis in this text even if we are ready to demonstrate it if needed. Instead we will move straight to the point starting from the potential  benefits of the solution which are simply  extraordinary. A small selection of them is listed below.

• Eliminate the Greek government debt in less then 4.5 years after full implementation (based on current projections on the size of tax evasions)
• Combat in its totality tax evasion within 12 months from implementation and brings a minimum of 18bn and a maximum of 52bn per year (in subsequent years) of additional taxes without the need for any additional taxation on any sector of the economy.
• Refinance the Banks without the need for any additional loans within a maximum period of 18 months with at least 18bn (93% probability)
• Elimination of most of the  black markets (85% within a year from implementation)
• Eliminate corruption in the public sector (immediately)
• Decrease street crime, robberies etc.  by more then 70% within a year of implementation
• Eradicate within 12 months from implementation illegal migration towards Greece (not the transit one though)
• Eliminate money laundering to a significant extend
• Eradicate drugs trade within Greece within 36 months
• Eradicate people trafficking and with it, illegal working and prostitution

In addition secondary effects will cause:

• Capital repatriation
• Additional available capital in the Banks for loans
• Ability to accurately plan fiscal policies due to taxation revenue certainty
• Increase the GDP and the ability of the country to borrow (if ever this will be necessary)
• Provide the government with all arguments needed to modify the existing fiscal treaty
• Eradicate the hysterisis  in ΦΠΑ (VAT) returns bringing the revenue in real time
• Elimination of the need for tax and ΦΠΑ (VAT) returns from citizens and companies

So, what this solution consists of?

The total abandonment of all forms of paper money and coins across the country in favour of  a paperless e-currency in the form of contact-less debit (not credit) cards in conjunction with fingerprint recognition technologies or any other similar secure technologies.

We cannot emphasise enough the fact that partial implementation of the proposed solution will have no effect.

These (the debit cards) can be issued by any bank and should be free from monthly  or usage charges. Overdraft facilities should be at the discretion of every Bank to issue or the can be regulated by the central bank of Greece. Every adult citizen will be required to have a personal account (in his chosen bank) corresponding to his national insurance number (ΑΦΜ) from the age of 15 (?), while younger members can share their parents accounts and own debit cards in the name of their parents with a predefined upper limit.

The technology is mature and already in place at a minute cost  while mobile phones can play the role of tills. All recorded transactions either through the mobile phones or bank accounts will feed into a central IT tax backbone system. The Existing Greek one to our knowledge can accept this load with minor modifications.

It goes beyond saying that the transition needs to be managed robustly, however with given the successful transition from Drachma to Euro, in the past,  the expertise already exists within the country. The difference in this case will be in the additional amount of technology needed.

The whole approach do not violates to our understanding  any articles of the Greek constitution  or any personal freedom acts or European regulations for that reason (we went though all relevant one’s).

Tourist or businessman visiting the country will be required to use their own credit or debit cards, travellers checks and prepaid cards.

Policing against the influx of  illegal money from abroad will take some planning to be achieved and to our calculations based on previous research will be never eradicated completely. One should expect that anything from 0.3 to 3% of the current black markets will be able to retain funding. The best way to control these amounts is by offering incentives to  the citizens, traders and companies in the use of paperless money, by adjusting the taxation system.

Incentives should be offered as well in order to avoid citizens and groups holding onto paper currency for future illegal use. A possible solution will be in agreement with all European banks to destroy all Greek Euros within an agreed period.

The use of gold or other valuable metals is expected to increase initially, in order  to counteract the lack of cash by the black market, the illegal trade and the drugs traders. However based on global standards the amount of gold available for the Greek market, in private hands, cannot last more then 36 months being in decline from day one.

We anticipate as well an attempt from all types of outlaw operatives to try to utilise prepaid tourist debit cards, prepaid mobile cards or even stamps as alternative currency to avoid detection of their illegal transactions. All of the above can be counteracted by simple regulations (i.e. replacing stamps with bar codes that contain one’s ΑΦΜ.) and we expect the groups controlling the black market to migrate soon after in other countries, which will be easier  then  battling policing methods and the rising cost of money laundering.

We expect as well a rise in the creation of offshore companies and foreign accounts where transaction between them will evade monitoring . However the existing and new coming regulation within Greece and from the EU we believe are adequate to capture the majority of the initial attempts to bypass the enforced transparency in transactions while at a later stage and after the reactions have been studied thoroughly new regulations or bills can be introduced.

Overall we strongly believe that the benefits far outnumber the initial problems and in any case this proposition, despite its unusual nature and the possible reactions it will cause, is by far more realistic and just then everything proposed thus far.

One should think of the thief that cannot sell his illegally acquired goods, the public servant that cannot ask for a bribe, the illegal immigrant that cannot be paid an days work, the businessman that cannot evade the national insurance contributions towards  his employees, the elder that is not afraid to go out in case he is mugged, the abandonment of the idea for additional salary reductions, the money influx into the economy or the ability to have a debt free Greece within 5 years, in order to dismiss any initial “discomfort” this solution may cause to one’s belief system.

Institutional change is a complex undertaking so we analysed it using similar studied institutional actors’ reactions that appeared on very similar in nature issues. The type of arguments that will/may  be used against the proposition by those that consciously or subconsciously (involuntary resistance to change) will try to oppose it are listed below. These arguments we expect to mainly instigated by the following institutions:

• The church
• The street markets
• Hospitality and
• The black markets

and they will be based on these generic arguments:

1. Difficulty to implement
2. Difficulty to police
3. Will create unemployment due to the closure as unnecessary of all tax offices but the central governance and IT services
4. Will leave unemployed all private accounting firms and sole accountants
5. It will increase poverty levels to the very poor, beggars who depend on the black economy for survival
6. It will be extremely hard to the drug addicts and will increase the cost to the Health System
7. It will be a shock to the market which is used to be subsidised by the black economy
8. The European Union may not approve
9. The elderly will have problem to adjust
10. The technology to support it will cost a lot
11. It will affect tourism
12. It is a “capitalist” trick to control money flow
13. The market is not ready for it
14. The “Banks” are behind it

Counterarguments for the above are:

1. Implementation can be as short as nine (9) months only (mainly dependant on the mechanisms the government will put in place to collect all currencies currently in the market)
2. We where doing it in the past when there was a need to manage foreign currency in the country. In addition technology now is at its best to counter any attempt to illegal circulation
3. There are already plan in place for the transition of civil servants to other parts of government
4. Additional jobs will be created within the banks and the public sector which at last will have capital to expand
5. Barter will be able to substitute immediate needs in conjunction with an improved social provision that the country will be able to afford
6. This is a benefit and not a negative argument and actually the cost to the Health System long term will drop to near zero
7. That is true but it will take less than 18 months and then the market will adjust. (see at the implementation of the tills)
8. That is equally true but it up to us to sell the arguments. We anticipate that if it will proposed as a reversible if fail  situation or an experiment towards a paperless money economy in the EU it will be accepted. In any case  we believe that they do not have to offer a better solution.
9. That is not true contact-less technology in conjunction with fingerprint identification will be easier then the transition from Drachma to Euro (see Korean studies on e-currency)
10. It will cost less the $12 per unit, provided a mobile phone exists and in any case that cost can be taken on by the Banking system
11. Tourists in Greece will be able to use their own credit or debit cards as well as prepaid debit cards issue at all ports or entry points or their countries provided that they are e-linked to their National Insurance Number and their passport or their ID.
12. An educated person can distinguish easily between fiat money and e-currency
13. One needs to look at the trends in the use of e-currency to counteract this
14. The exact opposite is true. Despite the fact that they will welcome the measure they know that will never again be able to control money supply as they used to returning this way the control to the Central Bank

We have seen the reaction of others (control groups) when the idea was introduced/tested initially and we are aware of the people’s tendency to dismiss ideas that do not “connect” with their belief system. Human nature  favours stability by resisting change. However we believe that you will give the idea due consideration and discuss its practicality and possible impact with other intellectuals you trust.

If nothing else there is no other proposition on the table currently, and believe us we monitor the situation in Greece very carefully, to offer equal benefits. Utilisation of fiscal/monetary solutions within the existing economic framework failed us so far and they will keep doing so, due to the nature of the Greek economy and the expected duration needed to return to growth,  as they ignore the needed management of institutional change.

Finally, in case the government or your party lack institutional analysts to perform any institutional impact analysis ,you may wish to undertake, until such a proposition was put forward, we would like to offer our assistance.

We are happy as well to disclose our findings as well as the methodology used to calculate the amounts and the time needed for any of the suggested effects to materialise, even if we believe that it would be better to be tested by people you trust. We have very many excellent scientists in Greece that can perform these type of economic simulation.

On Behalf of the Gaianomy Think Tank

Sotiris Melioumis Organisational Architect

“Democratic” bacteria

I was reading the other day an article in an old New Scientist (1.10.11) referring to group behaviour that I found intriguing.

The study was around bacteria (Pseudomonas) that are antibiotic resistant, but the interesting part was about the fact that a. they have the ability to work together as a super-organism and b. that while they are capable of overwhelming any human organism defences they cause pneumonia only to 15% of their “victims”!

Both events are extraordinary but not surprising, I would dare saying.  The surprising part was what the scientist s discovered, being the reason for that.

And I copy …“It turns out that the armies of Pseudomonas are often greatly weakened by indiscipline in the ranks.  They come to be dominated by cheaters and layabouts, who feast on the spoils of victory but ignore all orders to attack. These selfish bacteria multiply faster then the obedient ones, resulting in a less aggressive infection. The discovery opens up the possibility of radical new ways to tackle superbug infections… (by) deliberately encouraging the growth of  cheater strains and injecting them into  people”!

I do not exactly know why, but I immediately associated the bacteria behaviour with politicians from several democratic countries currently under “stress”. Not all of them of course, there are indeed those they methodically, in the name of an ideology, try to destroy the last defences of Democracy, and they are currently winning the battle I am afraid, but those cheaters, those that have never fought a battle but have just enjoy the benefits ….

Ending 1

You probably understand where I am heading with this… Should we encourage the people in the next election to “inject” more of them into the “system” in order to save these countries…?

Or Ending 2

You probably understand where I am heading with this… The instinct of the people in the last election was right and that is my explanation why these specific countries still exist!

Have your pick. As usual, comments of all kinds welcomed. SM

Paperless currency, is there a case for implementation?

We wrote already two relevant articles on the subject. In every case, when the articles published, in news sites or linked through general interest sites, the shock of the “radical” change needed appeared to overwhelm a part of the non-familiar with the subject readers, resulting in an avalanche of queries regarding its implementation challenges. The trend was dissimilar with the one we encountered from our regular readers.

It became apparent that the degree of analysis required on a subject is equivalent to its expected benefits.

We write this blog in compliance with this otherwise profound conclusion.

Our regular readers will be aware of why one the major propositions within the Gaianomy framework is the introduction of paperless currencies. For those that the concept is unknown, as a parenthesis, we present briefly some of the potential socioeconomic benefits of a paperless currency system.

• Eliminates tax evasion (Only in Europe it can ease the taxpayers burden by €1.96 T yearly!)
• Eliminate practically overnight government corruption and officials’ briberies (current corruption statistics suggest that more then 90% of transactions are made in cash)
• Reduce drastically money driven street crime (if all money is digital only objects can be stolen which again cannot be exchange for cash)
• Regulate syndicate managed prostitution and illegal gambling, which primarily operates with cash
• Reduce within 5 years from its introduction the drug trade by at least 80%. 5 years is the maximum time before the privately owned in any country gold stock, that is practically the only other means of exchange beyond hard currency for drugs, will be depleted. Simultaneously with drugs becoming less on the street by the day, all drug related anti-social behaviour would diminish rapidly (see global statistics on drugs related crime) with the effect reaching some of the route causes of civil wars (see Mexico, Afghanistan etc.)
• Eliminate the fear of counterfeit money
• Eliminates all the black markets (at least the 93%)
• Impact positively on gang cultures as the loss of their operational capital will reduce their attractiveness as alternative to work options
• Create the conditions to stop illegal economic migration between countries (barter in kind is not enough to sustain illegal migration and no trafficker will accept barter as his remuneration)
• Eliminate bank robberies
• Reduce the jails population by at least 35%
• Reduce reoffending ratios in relation to non-violence crime that are primarily of financial nature
• Interrupt terrorist group financing channels
• Stop poaching (Black markets will find it very hard to operate by reverting to other then cash)
• Last but not least, the links between enterprises, organisations, political parties, public servants and individuals with vested interest in the continuation of the existence of black markets, illegal trade, human trafficking, drug trade, weapons trade, It will immediately be unveiled. It will be easy after that to know whom not to vote in the next election.

You will have to agree, that it is an impressive catalogue of benefits, which societies may ignore to their peril. We see no apparent reason why any government will refuse to implement it. Especially if one considers all the additional positive side effects, the application might have, like: reduction in policing needs, money production and distribution, reuse of the cash handling human resources to more productive economic sectors, the inevitable reintroduction into the economy the proceeds of previous illegal activities, the long term health benefits of the country’s population, the reduction in health spending etc.

Of course as every change in societal level, one must manage such an undertaking carefully and in a socially sensitive way. Based on the feedback we received the major of the challenges identified were:

• If one country only, implements the paperless currency how can they stop other currencies from “over-spilling” through its borders?
• Will the cost of policing, the implementation, will exceed the benefits?
• What will happen with the tourists?
• How technophobic and elderly will adjust?
• How the less educated will avoid overspending?
• How one may address fraud in its usual forms?
• How the banks will react to the additional stress on their systems and services from the additional amount of transactions?
• In case of the county’s communications networks going down, how transactions can continue?
• What the implementation cost will be?
• How a country should avoid phenomenon of people hiding their currency during the transition period, which will feed later on the black markets once more?
• Does it need constitutional changes?
• In case of a country, like Greece that is a part of the EU does it need EU approval?

Lets take them one a at a time.

“Over spilling”: The ways to, illegally, import currency are known and involve mainly smuggling either through the customs or through the borders. In the case of the European Union where boarders do not really exist and people can transfer with them any amount of money without any checks.

To counter the risks a country ought to: (a) introduce a comprehensive law where all risks are addressed and for all possible bridging attempts, the law enforcement units have a “weapon” (b) transfer all fiscal benefits from the implementation of the system to the people in order to transform them into guardians of the institution (c) introduce punishments severe enough to be respected (d) offer sufficient rewards for compliance and uncovering illegal transactions (e) offer at the points of entry an easy to use and effective system of transferring currencies into paperless forms either by prepaid debit cards or by links to direct debit facilities or mobile solutions without additional cost to the bearer.

We calculated that a period of 5 years would be enough to reach a compliance level exceeding 93%.

Cost of policing the implementation: As already mentioned above, one should design the system in a way that society owns responsibility for its diachronic success. No level of policing can substitute that. Hence, our proposition seeks the people’s endorsement primarily and its government bodies secondary. In support to the societal “neighbourhood watch” one should add, of course, intelligent controls into people’s transactions whereby “broken” trails, amounts they cannot be justified, within the country and outside of it, are flagged.

 

What will happen with the tourists:  We covered this in the two previous replies

How technophobic and elderly will adjust: Technophobia is one of the manifestations of resistance to change. As Habermas would put it interest drives actions. What we are proposing as a resolution, and feel free to add to it, is to counteract resistance through benefits and ease of use. We know for example that the fear of being mugged is higher than the fear of pressing a button on your mobile or typing a pin or placing your finger on a sensor. There are so many user-friendly technologies today that the probability of a nation finding no solution to cover the need of this niche group is remote

How the less educated will avoid overspending: Well this one is simple. In every transaction, the system can give them the remaining available credit similarly, to what today the cash dispensers are able to do.

How one may address fraud in its usual forms: Well this is a very large subject. Fraud will always exist but this time it has just one option to be electronic. This however is a backdrop for the fraudsters as every transaction will be recorded and traceable. We analysed all of the “usual suspects” and in every case we found a way to counteract it. We look forward to suggestions from you for cases where someone may get hold of your money without leaving a trail.

How the banks will react: We believe extremely positively. You see, for the banks collecting the taxes, on behalf of the state, and paid for it, is not something we see them objecting to. The states on the other hand have more then enough benefit from the reduction of personnel needed, the immediate collection of the VAT and the benefits deriving from the counteracting of systematic tax evasion that willingly will pay enough to compensate the banks. Finally, the potential stress on their systems and services from the additional amount of transactions is not even an issue for modern technology.

If the county’s communications networks going down: The probability of this happening to a wider region due to the inherited redundancy of today’s communication networks is negligible and in any case one will be equally able to utilise the mobile network infrastructure or any other wireless network for that reason. Al technologies for this to happen are both existing and mature.

What the implementation cost will be:  According to our calculations, anything between $35 to $350 per transaction point, which is negligible and can be, possibly, financed by the participating banks and the mobile operators.

People hiding their currency during the transition period: We expect phenomena of this type to appear, however diachronically as all research in the field of institutions suggests will disappear. We see as being part of the 3 to 7% inefficiency we predict in the system, but definitely more research may be needed. Bottom line is we do not really see this as an issue if all measures described above are in place.

Does it need constitutional changes: None in the team is a constitutional-law expert. As a matter of interest, we tested the proposition’s compliance against the Greek constitution and we found no evidence of the opposite

In case of a country, like Greece that is a part of the EU does it need EU approval? There is no prior experience, due to the novel nature of the idea, but knowing the way EU operates we think that the answer should be yes. Will they oppose? We very much doubt it. Will they delay an implementation attempt, most probably? Nevertheless, we definitely believe they will succumb to the propositions strong arguments eventually.

The 12 Olympian Gods and the Hierarchy of Societal Needs

Mythological stories always fascinated me.  Listening about the gods and the heroes was my favourite hour, in the elementary school, in antithesis with history. Not that initially I was able to distinguish between myth and history. To history’s credit, it had battles heroes and kings and the Greeks were always the winners, but something was lacking. Myths appear to be always so much better as stories, then the “boring” history.

I will return home every afternoon, with my mind full of new stories to tell to my poor mother, who patiently will sit next to me and listen. I thought she could never distinguish the actual story from my “additions”.

I never became the hero I always wanted to and the nearest I came to these gods was be climbing mount Olympus and allowing my fantasy to act as augmented reality, there is no app for that yet.

The study of Christianity that followed in consequent years (compulsory back then) took away all the Olympian glamour and forged into my mind a new belief, that one god is better then twelve. There were no more stories for my relieved mother. There was no glamour anymore just suffering, a very different perspective of life.

It took me another 30 years or so, to realise that there was no so much difference after all between monotheism and polytheism. Both of them were there to cover human existential needs, both of them represented a different but not dissimilar philosophy of life and both of them, theology aside, were social institutions designed subconsciously (primarily) and as such build to order, to serve specific societal needs.

At last I had the answer that was lurking at the back of my mind for so many years, “why one is better the twelve” and I realised that based at least on the third perspective the institutional one, that the Greeks and the rest of the monotheism-bounded humanity got it wrong!

I realised as well how difficult the transition must have been and why even now these old religions still have proponents. Beliefs and spirituality aside, it is the social institutions and what they represent what keeps them alive.

I came across yesterday, while cleaning my folders, an image of the twelve gods and exactly next to it, the jpg file with the Hierarchy of Societal Needs. It did not took long before curiosity overwhelmed rational and “in the name of science”  I started to explore the needs, institutionally wise, the twelve gods were designed to cover if mapped against the Hierarchy of Societal Needs (HoSN).

It was a bizarre, to say the least exercise, but then again something that to my knowledge none attempted before which by itself, as every scientist will tell you, was justification enough.

It did not take long after that to find what every one of the twelve gods was representing to my ancestors and map it against the HoSN.

Having read so, far I bet you will be wondering what was different back then. Well it depends upon your expectations.

For one their gods were there, primarily, to cover for all their uncertainties, all their fears and everything else their science could not explain. (See highlighted in yellow the institutions covered from the 12 Olympians).

The socioeconomic framework was there in all its glory, so it was nationalism. All four basic-needs levels namely survival, coherence, progress and prosperity where to a degree represented.

The interest though, some to my surprise, was that:

• They did not fear about having work or not, they all had!
• They did not care (fear) that much, about money and currencies and the most important was that they show no need for “wealth as a mean” so, no prayer was spared to gods for gold and riches. Harvest yes, “prosperity” yes but riches was not in demand.
• Diplomacy and Politics were totally absent from their fears list
• Banks as well, were absent (as expected?) and so were “Services”
• Immigration was not an issue nor was Social Integration… slavery was doing an excellent job
• They did not have any type of complex civil services so they did not have to create a god to protect them from bureaucracy… lucky people!
•  …
• And the most important they were at ease with war as an integral part of life!

That last one, to be honest, spoiled the whole image because, I have to admit, until then I was tempted to, triumphantly, declare that my ancestors were wiser then us.

As usual, I leave enough for you to conclude on your own.

SM

To get the “truth” in UK you will need at least three news channels. …and the power of mental associations

Association is a synapse-like mental sub-structure, connecting two, recorded (sensed) or pre-existing (genetically imprinted), informational units into one, on a conscious or subconscious level. There are strong indications that associations operate as a membership function of a fuzzy set http://bit.ly/qhKzcQ  varying its strength overtime. It is a fundamental tool within the new synthetic institutionalism proposition but to the average reader means absolutely nothing… until now. You see so far, all research was based on questionnaires and small relatively samples ignoring (due to methodological mainly shortcomings) the subconscious level http://bit.ly/Ibin0. If I ask you to give me your opinion, you employ your rational to do so suppressing subconsciously all information institutionally bounded. It is human nature. If, on the other hand, I never ask you the question but instead I dig through your writings where conscious and subconscious operate in unison your opinion would be crystal clear. What ever you believe for whatever reason will surface. If in addition I combine ALL associations made in writing so far, by all of you, then the probability of accuracy will exceed 97%!  http://bit.ly/19iKDS This is the power of association and that is how we analyse institutions (in case you were curious). As usual, we would leave to your discretion to make any conclusions from the graph, from our part we would make just one. To get the “truth” in UK you will need at least three news channels. Please send us your conclusions and we promise to publish the best.

The Gaianomy T-T