Day 148: Policy Initiation and the Role of Administrators in an Equal Money System

Within the following blogs we'll be replying to a comment made in relation to 'Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System'.

How would new policy ideas be brought up? For example, if it came to be that the systems in place to provide for everyone's basic necessities became so efficient (many years down the road) that it was no longer necessary to have every human contribute 4 years to maintain it, how would it work to propose reducing the conscription period to, say 3 years and 3 months? Could individuals propose new policy changes or would they only be proposed by policy-makers as experts?

Within the stage of identifying policy-issues, everyone is able to participate, regardless of qualification or expertise. Each one will have a 'Life Profile', which is an online profile, like we are familiar with from networking sites such as 'Facebook'. This profile will be your main interaction portal with the political decision-making process, through which you can signal policy issues that require direction or alignment, as well as make your own suggestions as to how to correct the point. Therefore, the stage of the identification of policy issues is available to all, regardless of qualifications. Once policy issues have been identified and suggestions have been made by the general population, the next stage is initiated, which involves the policy formulation by experts.

It might be helpful to provide specifics on how these committees of law-makers will be assembled.

To answer this question we require to distinguish between the various participants within the law-making or policy-making process - which are:
- The general population
- Scientific experts
- The administration

In terms of the content of the policies to be decided on, only the general population and the scientific experts are relevant.

The role of the general population mainly pertains to the identification of policy-issues as well as the cross-referencing point in terms of voting on whether or not the proposed policies indeed adhere to the Constitutional Principles of Equality and What is best for All.

The role of the scientific experts pertains to the formulation of policy in adherence with the scientific and mathematical methodologies as laid out by the Constitution.

So - what role is left then for the administrators? The role of the administrators is a purely managerial function. They have in fact no more influence on policy-making than anyone else does. The type of functions administrators are to perform are for instance the convening of all identified policy issues by the population as well as their suggestions, the directing of all organizational aspects involved with bringing together a qualified committee of scientists with the relevant expertise in terms of the particular policy that requires to be formulated, the publishing of each step within the policy-making process, and so on. Their role is thus to ensure that the Rule of Law as laid out by the Constitution is followed without influencing the content of the policies themselves.

Members of the administration require to have a minimum set of qualifications and will be voted into office for 1 term. Ideally, each person will only be able to take office once in their lifetime to give each one who so desires, the opportunity to experience what is involved within taking in a position of responsibility in the world.

I'm assuming they will be payed beyond the basic income everyone is to receive in an Equal Money System- so does that mean they receive the same hourly wage as everyone else choosing to take part in work beyond the 4-year conscription period? 

Your question shows that you're coming from an understanding of the Equal Money System based on old information. The Equal Money System proposal is one that goes through change and adjustment according to feedback and comments we receive (like yours). So, I suggest reading the Labor section on the EMS Wiki to understand that there will be no relationship between labor and the resources available to you. In other words, there will be no hourly, daily, weekly, monthly or any other type of wages paid out in an Equal Money System. Each one fulfills their 4-year internship, which forms part of each one's educational curriculum, after that - for those who wish to in some way continue to contribute to society, labor is voluntary. Everyone is equal within this point and Administrators will therefore not receive any type of special treatment in terms of receiving additional resources or support while they are in office.

The point of resources allocation will further be clarified within the next blog.

Related articles

• Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System
• Day 142: Presidents under Fire
• Day 141: Even the Rain: Water Politics - Catastroika

Day 130: Market or Government Failure? No - Human Failure

One of the most prominent discussions in Economics and Politics is about who does better: the Free Market or the Government?

The neo-classical economic textbooks will say that the free market is generally the most efficient in allocating resources - but that there are instances where the market fails (See 'Day 81: The Role of Government in the Economy'), and then the government has to step in to correct these mistakes.

Public Choice Theory argues that it is incorrect to just assume that because the market fails to be effective under certain conditions, that the government will therefore, automatically be able to correct the imperfections of the market. The objection relates specifically to the assumption that in the market, everyone acts according to their own self-interest and that public officials, on the other hand, take everyone's interests into account.

To them that is a big inconsistency - because you cannot argue that human beings always act in self-interest, yet, on the other hand say that public officials always act in the interest of the whole. According to public choice theory, politicians and bureaucrats as much as any participant in the free market always acts in their own self-interest (See 'Day 82: Government Failure').

So - the whole discussion on who fails the most: The Government or the Market - is really mis-directed. The simplicity of the situation is that: It's not the market or the government that fails - it's the human.

When considering economic problems, we cannot simply distance ourselves from the simple truth that all economic interactions - whether instigated from within the market or from government - is always determined by human beings. And human beings are seriously flawed beings in that they believe that they MUST be self-interested and that this is the only rational way to exist and behave.

If we ever hope to get some real solutions in terms of an an economic system that always provides the best results - we cannot ignore 'The Human Factor' - as this is the starting point that will determine the outcome the economic system will bring about.

So - the question is not: How does the balance/emphasis need to change between the Market and the Government's role - the question is: How does the human have to change?

This is a question that in the current economic and political discours is conveniently ignored. It is simply accepted and assumed that the human is a fucked up creature and we just 'have to find ways to control the thing' so that its behaviour and actions don't cause 'too much' damage.

If we really care about 'market imperfections' and 'government failures' - we won't just sit around talking about what's the least of two evils. Instead - we'll make a commitment to redesign ourselves as human beings so that we can look at the economic system with fresh eyes and not create an economic system that merely re-inforces unwanted selfish and spiteful behaviour - but instead encourages support and cooperation within the understanding of what we are responsible for as this world and our reality.

This is the primary focus of Desteni - and all who claim to want to create a better world or claim to be committed towards solving the economic and political conundrum should sign up for the free DIP Lite course to take the first steps at finding out the possibilities we have as a species of re-inventing ourselves into an optimum version and a manifestation of Life instead of Evil. See - EVIL is simply the word LIVE spelled backwards - that should tell us something... We've never lived as a species, we've merely tried to outlive and outsmart others in evil ways - which is really not what life is about, come on.

And economists and political scientists have competent enough brains to see that this problem is not going to be solved unless we address the problem of human failure. You simply have no excuse to not want to take responsibility - you have the skills and the ability to be an example in this world - and so you have a responsibility to. Swallow your academic pride and start over - start where you haven't been before - start with yourself. 

http://lite.desteniiprocess.com

Related articles

• Dag 126: Turning a Blind Eye to Corruption
• Day 89: There ain't no Such thing as a Free Lunch
• Day 101: True Care Knows no Compromise
• Day 88: Capitalism vs Socialism?
• Day 97: An Economic Life Support System

Day 88: Capitalism vs Socialism?

This blog-post is a continuation to: Day 82: Government Failure, Day 83: Nationalisation and Privatisation and Day 86: Who Really Pays the Taxes?

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to believe that politicians actually represent the population that elected them, without considering that the population only has a say when they cast their votes, and afterwards don't require - and thus, don't - consult with the population on matters of public policy - and thus, any representative democracy is really a fraud as voting is just done to make people feel like they are part of the decision-making - when, in the end, it is those with power and money who get to decide.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that bureaucrats are in quite powerful positions, able to influence the situation to suit their own needs, while they are not held accountable to/by the population in any way whatsoever.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that in a country/society where some have more money than others, it will always be those with the most money who actually run the country, despite elections, executive governments, parliaments and judiciary systems - because each official in government can be seduced and influenced by greed and thus, act in a way that benefits the few in spite of the many.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that, unless our monetary system is based within and operates according to the principle of equality, the public nor the private sector is suited to distribute goods and services - because, in the end, the distribution of resources is handled by individuals, who due to inequality, feel they have the right to abuse their position to distribute resoruces in a way that suits their personal desires.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that a monetary system of inequality and competition is directly responsible for the creation of crime - as all crime is an act of inequality, which is justified in the mind of the criminal by the acceptance and allowance of inequality by society as a whole.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that, unless all individuals are taken care of with the resources required to live a life of excellence in an equal way - no one can be trusted with the task of distributing resources - neither the government, nor private companies - because within inquality, the human is corrupted and acts accordingly in corrupt ways - therefore, only an equal money system can ensure efficient and equitable distribution of resources.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that taxes are not an effective way to redistribute resources among the population - by 'taking from the rich' and 'giving to the poor' - because the government is only able to specify who hands over the tax, but does not specify where it gets the money to be able to pay the tax - and thus, it is often customers who bear the real tax burden and not the owners or shareholders of the company, as companies, faced with having to pay higher taxes, simply raise their prices and, thus collect the money to pay their taxes from the customers who still require/want the goods or services they provide.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that any attempt to 'correct' market failure in terms of unequal distribution of resources will be negated by the market itself, as the whole economic system moves according to the principal of inequality, and thus ways will always be found to manifest unequal results that benefit some at the expense of others.

Day 82: Government Failure

Previous blog-posts would have made it clear by now that the market is not perfect and never will be - and this is something many economists are willing to admit. However, they believe that governments are able to 'adjust' the market when necessary through acts of intervention. Within this blog-post we're having a look at the problems related to government intervention, or otherwise: 'government failure'.

In terms of government failure, let's discuss three major weaknesses of governments and how they attempt to manipulate the economy, namely:
- Politicians
- Bureaucrats
- Rent-seeking by interest groups

Politicians

Politicians are those who are elected by a population to represent their interests in government. However, in most democracies, people only get to voice what they want politicians to do on their behalf at the moment of election. After that, politicians can pretend to represent the people, but they can pretty much make decisions that suit their personal interests. Due to the desire for power and wealth, they wish to remain in their current position or progress their careers for more influential positions and do this, they need people/more people to vote for them. Therefore, politicians will have a tendency to take the limited time they are elected for to satisfy their voters in the short-term in order to 'prove' that they are the right choice - without considering long-term consequences. They'll implement programs and organise interventions that have clear benefits to particular people, of which the costs and disadvantages are vague or ignored. Another tendency is to make decisions that will give a small group a whole lot of benefit, while a large amount of people accrue relatively small costs.

Bureaucrats

Bureaucrats are not even elected by the population. They are 'civil servants' and are responsible for the supply of goods and services by the government. They, thus, have quite a lot of power and, just like politicians, often use this power to pursue personal gain. They'll attempt to maximise their salaries, power or prestige. For instance, the defense  establishment often exaggerates the military threat so that a lot of money is allocated to this department and this, obviously, allows them to increase their salaries.

It is claimed that bureaucracies are often inefficient because there is no competition to keep each other in check. In terms of simply overseeing the efficiency of bureaucrats, it is claimed that this is mostly impossible and for some reason it is very difficult to fire inefficient bureaucrats.

Rent-seeking by interest groups

Due to politicians' sensitivity towards buying votes, they are easily manipulated. Interest groups will attempt to pressure/persuade/seduce governments to use their ability to intervene in economics in a way that benefits them - and these attempts are often successful.

Day 4: The Logic of Political Corruption in Africa

For context, see the article by Diana Cammack – “The Logic of African Neopatrimonialism: What Role for Donors?” http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/sv/statsvitenskap/STV4347B/v10/Cammack%202007.pdf

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to blame African governments for wasting precious resources through friends-politics where their followers are rewarded through favours.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to judge corrupt governments as bad governments and place the bulk of why their countries cannot find their way out of poverty, on corrupt leaders and officials.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that from an African historic and cultural perspective, neopatrimonialism – where a patron takes care of its clients through sharing ‘his’ wealth – is socially accepted, because a leader is expected to use his/her access to resources to support his/her followers.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that African leaders will do anything to remain in power, including using public resources to award favours to significant and influential individuals of the population in order to retain support – because government positions are the easiest way to attain some degree of wealth in those countries, where, if they don’t remain in power, they are very likely to go back to a life of absolute poverty.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that if I were in the same position, where the only way to escape absolute poverty was to buy support from the population in order to remain in power, I would probably do just that.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to expect that simply by implementing Western institutional models in a country that has not walked the same path as the actual Western countries, the attitudes of the African population would simply adjust and that these same governing models would work in the exact same way in Africa.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to delude myself into thinking that African leaders are capable of concerning themselves with the ‘public good’ when they are in a constant state of fear of loss and where the threat of having to go back to a life of poverty inhibits them from seeing past their individual interests.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that corruption and greed are merely an outflow and manifestation of fear of loss and therefore, if I have any form of fear of loss existent within me, I cannot say that I am better than corrupt African officials and I cannot be trusted more with such power than them.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself of expect of African countries that they undergo political reforms to limit the size of the government in order to eradicate or at least limit corruption opportunities, without realising that corruption is the only thing that allows them to maintains a form of social and political stability in those countries – and that to take away this tool of African leaders means to send the country into internal chaos and conflict.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that if I demand of African countries to reduce the size of their government, it will mean that many government-owned enterprises will be privatised and hundreds of thousands of people will lose their job.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that unless everyone has a secure income, corruption will always exist.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise that rich nations are responsible for the state in which African countries are struggling since they, through exploiting them in colonisation and continuing to take advantage of them through the current economic power-relations, have completely incapacitated them, left them with nothing but crumbs with which to make meets end.

I forgive myself for not accepting and allowing myself to realise the hypocrisy and disgrace in demanding lower-developed countries to open up their markets to the world and extensively limit their government intervention – while Western countries protect their vital industries from cheaper competition with vigour.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to demand of African countries that they focus their efforts on exports to increase the country’s wealth and living standards, while obviously, if all lower-developed countries start increasing their exports of primary goods, the price of primary goods will drop on the world market and any increase of income generated from such exports will be insignificant – leaving on the rich nations better off, who can now buy primary goods for a real good price.

I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to criticise African countries for utilising corrupt methods for personal interests, without making mention of how the United States has continuously used foreign aid as a strategy to influence the international political scene in order to preserve and protect itself – not realising that the successive shifts in emphasis in terms of providing aid from South Asia to Southeast Asia, to Latin America to the Middle East and back to Southeast Asia, to then go toward Africa and the Persian Gulf, the Caribbean and Central America and after that, the Russian Federation, Bosnia, Ukraine, Asia and the Middle East reflect changes in US strategic, political and economic interests, more than changing evaluations of economic need – using the exact same ‘friends politics’ as corrupt officials and leaders do in order to avert conflict and the undermining of power.

 I commit myself to expose the unequal power relations in the global economy that condemn billions of people to absolute poverty.

I commit myself to investigating the motives of politicians within corrupt behaviour to see and understand the fundamental problems that perpetuate this behaviour in order to correct these fundamental problems in such a way that allows all to live as equals with equal consideration for all.

I commit myself to stop fear of loss within myself and find practical solutions so that none have to live with fear of loss and fear of death – but can instead share themselves and their world unconditionally.

I commit myself to eradicate poverty through the designing and implementing of an Equal Money System where dignified life is the ultimate value.