Democratic Enslavement – They Voted for it.....Eew bought it!

Prasad Rao, MSc, MTech(IIT KGP), MS, (PhD PennState)

Energy, Environmental and Mineral Economist

Evernote: gprao 

For centuries immemorial, Religion held a vice-like grip on masses. Families led a sedate life, growing children and corn, interrupted either by pestilence, or the curse of religious and territorial wars. Then came the Industrial Revolution, followed in the centuries after by, on one hand, Democracy, and on the other, the Nominal economic paradigm. The rule of Democracy found a ready and willing partner in the Nominal paradigm that extended the Industrial Revolution in to a technologically-progressive society. Technology alleviated the living standards of the masses as Productivity and Income gains permitted the Society to enlarge sustainably. All seemed well between the hullabaloo of Elections, and Bulls on the Market street – Religion incantations notwithstanding! 

Then came the Technology Overdrive, and the feverish migration of the technologically-skilled to advanced nations spearheading the technological revolution. Migration is almost synonymous with entry of Minorities -  Linguistic, Cultural, and Nominal Economic. In fact, Minorities constitute even the enlarging frontier of societies globally. But just as a bountiful crop attracts locust, so does the exploding Nominal its detractors – whether in the Majority, or worse, in the very Rich it buttresses or expands. No, they don’t forage on Minority Matzos. Instead, they pull the Carpet on something as essential as breath – their Freedom. Freedom that permitted Minorities to migrate in to other societies and nations, freedom that fostered assurance they could grow a family, assurance that they’d be recompensed should they be robbed of their deservings and earnings. Freedom to engage in simple pleasures of life – wake up at one’s free will on a weekend, converse in their tongue even in public, sing aloud oblivious of any neighbour on a Sunday morning, .............and watch a movie of their tongue no matter where or when. 

But whither that Freedom? 

Notwithstanding a participatory democracy, and a public capital market, and despite the norm members of the Precinct Majority should ‘deposit’ their public Prerogatives and private Privileges in to the Ballot Box to obtain a fiduciary-supplemented right to govern, there is flagrant violation of that code in practice, no matter whether the ostensibly developed, or the developing world. For Social and Economic and Technological reasons, the Minorities, and particularly so the Technology (Minority) Migrants are significantly more adaptable and flexible than members of the Majority who, as long-term settlees, must be incentivized significantly more to desert their socially-networked and nominally-convenienced lifestyle. As it happens, the Pandemic has dovetailed and reinforced IT-advances to shrink Technology Migration, perhaps to the point it has turned moot since. Even so, Technology Minorities have gained an upper hand in well-paying Technology firms and have migrated upward in the societal pyramid much to the chagrin of the permanent society. The fact local or foreign Minorities enter the society with little cognizance of societal disruptions they might cause does not excuse Majority envy when emergent Technology sectors import foreign technical talent to fuel their expansion. Thankfully, most emergent Technology firms are sited in multi-cultural cities that have adopted a nominally-attuned ‘Bullion Pareto Society’. The ‘Bullion Pareto Society’ accommodates both the Dividend Yield-served Permanent (Majority) settlees and the Frontier-economy-attached Technology Minorities. 

One often hears the insinuation the Minority leans on the Majority. Contrary to this presumption, the Minority are essential to the expansion of the Technological society. Societies that opened their arms to Minority immigration have forged ahead in the economic race fostered by technological innovation. Minority Businesses bring diversity, democratize the society and turn the society more open and receptive to Tourists. In certain societies, Minorities are known to issue egalitarian Monetizations even if they happen verily to be the last penny in them. In other words, they underwrite the Precinct Budget, at times even the Landlord Monetization of Social Prerogatives. Such being the case, Minorities would be sought toward both social reconstitution and economic progress. Instead, and due the David-Goliath numerical, proportions, they turn victims to risk distribution/assignment, and are interrupted and robbed of social offers and economic opportunities. 

A particular fallacy in these days of Lockdowns is the presumption one’s experiences are universally the experience elsewhere. And so it is that when I face a particular facet of Minority discrimination, I mis-presume it is universally the fact. Pardon me, it must be so else, am I the only victimized in these pandemic times? More to the point, surely, I am not the only one victimized with a ‘you cannot enjoy’ admonition - an admonition heard day in, day out, even by the hour and the passing of a two-wheeler – no matter up or down? And why’d members of the Majority (or, is it those paid Open Cycle Enslaver stooges) insist you do not sleep, and enforce the same with shocks and jerks should you fall asleep? Surely, it ain’t Black Magic? 

I fail to understand what remains of Life and freedom between the Neighbor-enforced ‘You cannot sleep’ and Majority-risk hastened ‘You cannot enjoy’. Does this happen for real? In a Democracy? That you voted for? Yes, and I am personally both the witness and the tortured. In a Majority-infested society that bought the Open Cycle ‘Nix the Green’ deal, it is convenient to gang up on Minorities, obstruct their day-to-day life, interrupt their work, and harangue them until they prefer to either comply with the Majority, or exit to where they themselves are the Majority. And if Religion is more a Majority Convenience than a divinely-administered restraint on their behavior, and Politics too strategic a channel to even take cognizance of the issue, far less address it, imagine then the plight of Minorities caught between their pride, duties to the family and the hostility around. 

Why’d the Majority, no matter where, accept an egalitarian Constitution that guaranteed equal rights, and then subvert the same leaning on Religion, and its own Numerosity? Didn’t they, at the Ballot Box, agree to deposit your Real prerogatives and Majority Privileges in return for a Government with powers to promulgate rules convenient to the Majority, even issue Passport and Currency? Didn’t the Minorities shore up the sale value of your Townhouses that didn’t sell prior the Visa relaxation? And was it not Minority nurses who returned your sick relative back to health? Why then would the Majority, despite its own Power, Authority and Numerosity, grudge the rapid rise of Minorities with the Nominal paradigm. And why....pardon, what are Gods that plead helplessness in policing their ilk? What could they be seeking for their Majority minions?

A Minority Exodus from the ‘Bullion Pareto Society’? 

Legalize Electoral, Governance & Political Corruption?

Legalize Electoral, Governance & Political Corruption?

Prasad Rao

gprasadrao@hotmail.com;

gprasadrao.blogspot.com; gprao64.blogspot.com

Evernote: gprao

Click here for a pdf

The Context

Elections are not just in the news, the media is thick with it, and the soundwaves are jamming our 4G-hot, rock’n roll ‘Play’ videos! India is once again host to the grand show – bigger than the Kumbh or the IPL TV audience, and rivalling any other mass gathering, even globally. But this column is not about how, or why these elections are portrayed as ‘Vote-now-for-your-Diwali-tomorrow’ event. It’s about the financial ethics behind this constitutional requirement that empowers citizens of this country to elect their Political Government for another term. Running a successful pan-India campaign to elect 545 representatives to the Lower House is not an everyday task, even if that event is administered and financed in part by the purportedly independent Election Commission of India. The stakes are significant and substantial. The winning Party, or a Coalition, that takes over the Federal government, governs over its 36 odd Precincts (States), interacts with the IMF and the World Bank to facilitate flow of funds to coordinate its social programs and economic growth, oversees defences of the nation, and directs its political economy – all with a Ministerial Council and high Bureaucracy, appointments to which are coveted in political circles. Surely, a Government that administers a combined Rs28 lakh Crores in Civilian and Defence budgets would find many Ministerial Wannabees eager, even desperate to win elections and disburse contracts to their favored? The mad rush for political support and funds is all too evident in within-party deals and races for electoral seats, in pre-poll Coalition bargaining, post-poll ministerial and bureaucratic horse-trading, and indeed Corruption over the entire political term. Whom then do we blame for political corruption – whether ministerial, bureaucratic, in political appointments to various diplomatic and other high profile posts, even in the drafting of various regulatory policy reforms¹? True, the EC implemented Electoral Bonds toward incrementing transparency in Politics. But did it solve any of the various shades of grey political deals? Rafale and Nuclear submarines? Land Acquisition? 5G? PSU Divestment? Investments in TAPI and through OVL India, MSP & Farm Loan Waivers? Even Campaign Financing? Alas not. Truthfully, nobody, but for a few Consulting Houses, Ministry Bureaucrats, top-rung Defence and Political leaders, the CAG, and those bravehearted Investigative Journalists, are at all aware of the scale of corruption that the Indian Polity accommodates. What over-arching strategy could we adopt that targets these various kinds of political (and Bureaucratic) corruption?

If indeed, we have taken a half-circle toward cleansing political corruption with the successful introduction of (Private) Electoral Bonds, should we not close that circle by issuing (Public) Shares of Political Parties that capitalize on both, Private monetary and Public electoral support? Political Parties do not operate to earn profits, but they do exist to fulfill a political objective – an objective that involves taking cognizance of public opinion, saliences, and preferences simultaneously with the leveraging of economic opportunities presented by advances in domestic and foreign technology, open markets and an expanding population under a politically-controlled, endogenous agenda. If Political Parties operate under the public eye, should there not be an instrument that permits societal entities, broadly-defined and whether of the Left or the Right, to express their hopes, satisfaction, dis-satisfaction, dis-illusionment, or play their private political strategies with like-minded, or competing interests? This column proposes a simple extension of the EC-implemented Electoral Bonds Scheme to a broader strategy involving market-capitalization and trading of their Private and Public political support. The proposal has the potential to monetize political opportunities, legalize extraction of political, diplomatic and economic policy rents, and thus serve as a deterrent to political Corruption.

.

.

.

It takes two to Tango... So Lets!

Political corruption has always been at the center-stage of contemporary society. What was an occasional opportunistic lottery has, with an exacerbation of the polar Nominal economic paradigm, come to roost as a routine event camouflaged in Government secrecy and Fiduciary confidentiality. The prospect of corruption in higher magnitudes associated ministerial and bureacratic appointments has heightened the shadow values of holding political offices, and spread the virus of political greed deep in to our polarized society. Though the introduction of Electoral Bonds has brought in increased transparency in political and campaign funding, that transparency does not extend to underground deals that might occur before, during and after the elected term of office, or in various non-official political contexts. Much like Drugs, Political Corruption cannot be rooted out entirely; it could however be turned legal, monitored, hedged against, and therefore be attenuated and managed. The strategy suggested here is entirely in line with such philosophy. By combining and issuing Private monetary support and Public votes of democracy as an Egg Endowment FV to political parties, and which they may trade at the ECPX for PV, this proposal offers Political Parties a defensible start-lumpsum to their campaigning and governance efforts. The facility, thereafter, to monetize political statements, appointments, moves, stances, strategies, and leverage public perceptions in to changes in the price of traded instruments of political capital & popularity, offers a ready mechanism to monetize social, political and economic opportunities, albeit in competition with other political parties. On a tangent, one could note that a quasi-formal means of political monetization ensures political parties do not find themselves inferior in negotiating with business interests at home, or entities with foreign affiliations.

EPS trades at the ECPX would serve many functions – from diplomatic, political and economic signalling by the Party, the elicitation of ancilliary, non-monetary aphysical streams, to gauging Public reactions to its various political stances, statements and strategies. Volatility in traded EPS prices, whether sourced externally, or self-triggered in the form of Leadership appointments and shake-ups, announcement of populist policies, even the annual Sovereign Budget (that is now tracked at the stock market) would cause an immediate reaction in the bi-denominational prices of various parties, and offer monetizing opportunities. Trends in prices of bi-denominational EPS issued by the Ruling Party, would de facto, be interpreted as a gauge of its popularity in the Private and the Public. Since Popularity counts are critical to continued public support, the ECPX would serve as a reign on corruption, and incentivize parties to be correct in the conduct of their political and governance duties.

Trading in Political Capital attenuates Corruption two ways: it permits a means to extract rents attached political cognizance of various military, diplomatic, and economic issues through trades, and simultaneously enforces a deterrent in the form of publicly-reported, potentially adverse reactions in traded EPS prices. Political parties, ever cognizant of preserving political capital, would therefore strike a judicious balance between monetizing opportunities and averting undue political risk.

Much as fleecing, poisoning and violence is attenuated by legalizing drugs, so too legalizing the monetization of political rents, stances, statements and strategies sanitizes Politics. Much like snake-venom is an antidote to potentially fatal snake bites, so too is the trading of EPS at the EC Political Excange a necessary evil to augment the efficiency associated with democratic governance, and to strengthen our democratic fundamentals.

........................

1http://gprasadrao.blogspot.com/2015/02/regulatory-reform-orwreck-you-sooner_20.html

2That Political Exchange could be co-ordinated online by the EC, and could co-opt the domestic and foreign Press as Observers.

3Unlike Electoral Bonds that require citizenship and incorporation within the nation, Electoral Party Shares could be traded, free of such restrictions, to any qualifying entity that has pre-registered with the EC. It might however, be necessary to take cognizance of affiliations and so modify disclosure norms under RTI. Interestingly, both the high-denomination Private EPS and the low-denomination Public EPS traded by Political parties at the ECPX, could be held as Political Capital by firms listed at the Nominal exchanges. Such Political Capital, representing the intents and objectives of the Private and Public, would then inform and guide the firm in leveraging them toward maximizing its profits.

4All beneficiary Political Parties would have the right to trade Private and Public Electoral Political Shares at the ECPX anonymous of who had voted where, who had contributed how much in donations, or to whom they’d be traded to.

5This rather simplistic strategy might favor those Parties whose Private Donations lag Public Votes relative other parties. Such parties would be issued more Private Shares than they deserve. One could seek better answers, or leave it to the trading parties at the ECPX to solve it in ‘Trade aphysicals’ (ie, non-monetary favors, issuals or adjustments).

6An alternate allocation obtains when n is calibrated with values greater than 1. The calibrated value of n, whether greater than, or lesser than 1, determines the allocation made Parties with small Vote shares relative allocation to major Parties with significant Vote Share.

7The EC would set only the initial face value of the EPS, and thereafter not intervene to modify either price or quantity.

8Political Donors, anonymous to political parties in the scheme of Electoral Bonds devised by the EC, could, conceivably pre-register as trading members also. Opening Trading membership to foreign nationals and entities permits the political evaluation of various bilateral, multi-lateral and geopolitical, electoral and governance strategies.

9These trades would be quasi-confidential. Details concerning identity, prices and quantities regarding EPS trades, though held back in real time, would be available as appropriately averaged, or aggregated on a weekly or fortnightly basis, and in more detail when requested through the RTI channel post a longer, mandatory delay from the EC.

10This is not unlike a ‘Public Sustainability-Pol.Party Group ZS Justice-Personal Interests’ criterion employed by member of society to negotiate Status and Opportunities with other members and entities. Political Parties forge an understanding with the broader society that permits them the leverage to administer Group ZS Justice pareto to themselves and voting members of Society.

11These aspirations would be negotiated against the return of Political Currency, PC$, issued to the Voting Public by the relevant Aadhar entity at the Polls (Read https://gprao64.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-politics-and-economics-of.html). Since PC$ denote political intent to monetize, Voters who seek social justice and fulfillment of their private aspirations, would negotiate them against the voluntary return of their PC$ to the Political Party they voted for. High-Denomination EPS represent a negotiating instrument toward the same.

12Since a House is spread across many families, members of the House stake a future compatible with their skills and niche in the House.

13This is merely a statement to the effect the Reich Group to which the Private belongs would issue ZS-shared political control with the House.

14This is merely the PV issued Political parties contingent upon securing a ‘Personal AO Pareto’ with the House.

15The various futures and roles that a Private could conceivably claim beyond the House within one’s own Precinct could be issued (in disgust) to a worthy Political Significant.

16The irregularities from securing a Private Pareto with the Political could be egalitarian distributed through a ‘Pareto ZS Mirror’ beyond one’s immediate Precinct, perhaps with some opportunity.

17A Political Party might co-opt Social Significants in asserting Social control of its Citizens, along with the opportunistic (Private) issue of various RoW keys such as Wilderness FV, Sustainability FV, Frontier Technology FV, RoW Sovereign Havala FV, etc.

18A Political Party might cede Social control of its Citizens along with the opportunistic (Private) issue of various other (local egalitarian) keys such as Linguistic keys, Regional Resource Keys, and Egalitarian Bequeath FVs issued Local/Regional Political Leaders, etc.

19Those who buy EPS early in term, could trade them anytime in between, including end-of-term, when certain political parties or hopefuls within, seek assorted, but politically-meaningful wrongs cumulated in those shares that they may leverage toward their political pursuits. These wrongs cumulate in the ‘Now ZS Wrongs Repository’ of the traded EPS.

20These could include the Alternate Constituency, Local and foreign NGOs, Embassies of foreign Governments, Business Houses who may, or may not have supported political parties privately, Landlords, etc.

21Individual Party members would not be issued EPS from the Party Political Egg Endowment. They may however, participate at the ECPX and trade in EPS along with Party functionaries, or Party-constituted Committees.

Ooty, the Paradise Lost.....Not yet !

Prasad Rao


'Twas a cold, windy and snowy 4th Saturday of December....No, not quite. In fact it was a hot and humid summer afternoon in Chennai that had turned 10'F warmer indoors due urban warming snake-twined with global warming. The 'Feels Like' Index on the Weather Channel was running out of Colour codes to depict the Weather Torture! Drained of all energy from years and months of commuting in congested buses on congested roads, and wishing we had an AC in every room of the house, Sandhya suggested we consider a holiday in the mountains - Ooty-Coonoor to be precise. Not one to let go of the rare occasions when we agreed on any matter at all, no matter how trivial, I jumped at the suggestion. As is familiar practice amongst the middle class in the Billion-plus India, I immediately dashed for the IRCTC app, and booked tickets online, even those waitlisted, albeit with a reasonable chance of confirmation. Indeed, the upwardly-immobile in the Indian society are occasionally thankful to those other upwardly-mobile Joneses for taking to the Public skies or the Private roads - and anxiously (or excitedly) await the evening hours every day when the Railways churns its lists of hopefuls through their berth choices, even if it means being assigned the infamous end-of-compartment seats, or the 'you-are-not-quite-as-tall-as-you-think' side-berths! (Factoid: The IRCTC PNR Confirmation web page competes ever so closely with the Weather Channel 6-hr Satellite Radar video!)

The hunt now turned to landing a suitable place to holiday at. With hindsight from our Kodaikanal trip, I presumed, rightly, that Ooty too would be a jumble of cramped buildings in the vicinity of the commercial district. Preferring a more serene place (after peeking at my PV balances), I scanned the various directions and contours that make Ooty a must-visit. Searches are that much easier these days on the internet, though it's hard to reconcile the owner's description of their properties with the reviews of those who lease them. Eventually, I spotted one, not too close, not too far - almost the distance at which we stay from Georgetown, Chennai. But what clinched the deal in favour of Wild Horizons, was its Manager, Shazia, who was inviting with amenities, yet firm with her pricing. She promised it'd be quiet and enjoyable holiday and, I, tired of comparing latitude, longitude, distance from the road, amenities, prices and availability, was all too willing when Sandhya suggested I buy in to Wild Horizons.

Destinations in the mountains are hazardous for any number of reasons - wild animals, landslides and rock fall, boulders on the rail tracks, fog and diminished visibility, even errant drivers on the snaky ghats, not to mention under-maintained vehicles. And Chennai is not unknown for Cyclones that force a public standstill, and cause train cancellations at their origin. So we put on our brave faces and took the mighty gauntlet of weather and travel risk that stood between us in sweltering Chennai, and the supposedly salubrious Ooty. The Weather Gods smiled though, and we reached Mettupalayam nestled in the foothills of the Nilgiris for our 2nd leg of the train journey.

The Nilgiris Mountain train is no mystery, and yet it is a sight to behold the small steam engine lined up to push the quaint blue coaches up the winding mountains. Cramped as they were, the lack of coach amenities were soon a distraction with the sight of the grand mountains, valleys, mountain streams, and the 'choo choo' train winding its way on the geared third rail, through tunnels adjacent deep gorges, streams and rivulets. The TTE volunteered us into her 'Ooty Mix' of Malayalam, Tamil and Hindi songs, and we soon reached Kallar. The sight and sound of a gurgling stream underneath a rail bridge immediately beside the station was mesmerizing to the weary urban eyes accustomed to switching gazes between the tail lights ahead and the road signal. The train driver was accommodating of our dalliance with nature, and every passenger filled his/her senses (and image storage) to the hilt. 

Then came a no-name, no-stop place, Udderly. Udderly is nature at its resplendent best, and we might just have camped right there for the rest of our holiday! Soon after, we came across, albeit between stations, an enthralling mountain face with water plunging down in a narrow fall - a vertical Rock face that all us 'Nature fledglings' craned our necks to get a fill of! And so we got to Hill Grove, and then to Coonoor. Tea estates announce the arrival of this famous Rich town. The Coonoor station is a sight in the contrast of the green carpet of Tea shrubs all around. The train emptied in half before it chugged again, and we got to Ooty.

Our Driver, Raja Mohammad, obliged us with the Toyota Etios we sought, and we soon extricated ourselves from the town traffic, crossed the Police check point, and negotiated so many hairpins that the 9th hairpin landmark seemed almost a misnomer. As we entered Wild Horizons, we didn't at all mind its aloofness, its quasi old-fashioned construction with rough-cut stone blocks, the broad green lawn that reminded me of our Wheaton, MD, residence, or the view from our Verandah upstairs. We soon turned friends with Shehab, the resident Manager. On his advice we covered the Sholur View point after a breathtaking few minutes at a lake before the Tree Park. Distance is Time in these parts, and the Sholur View point put us back a few hours. We headed back to town and lurched at the opportunity to munch at Nahar Sidewalk Cafe (munch away!), and shop spices along the streets of the Town centre.

Post breakfast, Day 2, served by Joseph at Wild Horizons, we headed to all the traditional sights : Bison Valley - an outstanding Tourist pit stop on way to which you could stock up with fresh estate-packed tea and condiments; Pykara Falls and Pykara Lake; the Tall Eucalyptus at Tree park, the Balding Shooting Point View Point, and the Ooty Botanical Garden, to name a few.

Doddabetta, on Day 3, was a disappoint for the bad roads (a repeat of Pykara roads that your Car Insurance would rather you not hazard) but the windy mist made up for the lost sights. Our drive to Coonoor from the 'betta reminded me of how, two decades ago, I leaned on Sandhya to keep to my driving lane in West Virginia's hilly roads. Despite our 'nature misses' on the Ooty-Coonoor stretch (call it a 'Test of the locals'), Raja tried to get us to Dolphin's Nose in time, but in vain. Instead, we interrupted ourselves, encroached on the Tea estates of Coonoor, drowned ourselves in the misty cold rain, sipped chai, and stuffed our bags with Coonoor Tea, peeped in to Sims Park, and scampered out ever so soon. And not a minute earlier, for the Blue Mountain Train rolled in as we put our bags down Coonoor station.

As we left, I remembered my Dad recounting his years at Aravankadu and Coonoor in the pre- and post-independence years, and how he was surprised by a Big Cat lurking in the hinter of the House....

Until the next Vacation and more hairy tales.....

Season's greetings from the 'What-if' Martian Robot-Economist ! !

Beware the 2-edged Infra Knife !

Beware the 2-edged Infra Knife !

Ganga Prasad Rao

Energy, Environmental and Mineral Economist

gprao64.blogspot.com

gprasadrao.blogspot.com

gprasadrao@hotmail.com

Disclaimer: As always, the author absolves himself from the many reasons that might cause the proposed solution to fall short of intended outcomes. All errors, particularly language, grammar and diction, are indeed mine !

Not one election passes without reference to the ‘Development’ agenda espoused by political parties – no matter which leaning. Public Infrastructure is high on the agenda of political parties for obvious reasons: they are immediately GDP-and Employment positive; they stoke the Resources and Manufacturing sector, beyond opening aggrandizing opportunities in the Realty sector. Central Banks, and local banks are all too willing to sponsor, support and manage public infrastructure projects.... last, but not least, politicians, in the immediate precinct and beyond, reap political capital from such projects. With so many positives about it, why’d Public Infrastructure be a cause for concern?

Economists and Policy-makers, more truthfully, the conscientious, sagacious and far-sighted among them, realize that Public Infrastructure is just that – Infrastructure for the public that is funded publicly through politicians given a mandate by Voters at large. Politicians face strong political pressures and economic incentives to fast-forward grandiose public infrastructure projects that are immediately aggrandizing to businesses. Consequently, the Political Government – comprised of the Ruling party and the Opposition - finds it expedient to open the Public taps, and fast-forward approval of these projects with little regard for the environmental and social consequences of unbridled Real-reducing Nominal expansion¹. If it were not for the fears of inflation that large Public Infrastructure projects stoke, or the delays and compensations associated with acquiring private land around project sites, Public Infrastructure would have gobbled a much larger share of the Nominal Liquidity pumped in by the Central Banks.

Public Infrastructure is a decidedly 2-edged animal when it comes to its environmental efficiency. Many public projects, in particular, mass transportation projects, are proposed expressly to contain the growth of private transportation and the consequent enlargement of environmentally-injurious fossil fuel consumption – whether from resources at home, or worse, imported. However, and in practice, these projects, whether implicitly, or explicitly, are tied to an FV-expansion of Private Lifestyle, such that when finally realized after years, even decades, the Public Infrastructure has arguably achieved its surreptitious goal of expanding the Private agenda – whether in Private Transportation, or land deals around compensations and appreciation. Worse, and whereas the raw materials procured for construction toward the public infrastructure project engender a substantial release of emissions, the promised reductions in emissions in post-construction years, turn evanescent in reality for reasons an expanding per-capital economy, thus bringing in to question a fundamental justification for such projects. Surely, Public Infrastructure is not a ‘Beggar the Public to Aggrandize the Private and Reduce the Commons’ joke for the Voters to suffer as the price for voting in a Political Government, and await the Nominal Private Aggrandization juggernaut to roll over them?

The natural question to ask, then, is whether policy-makers have a tool to sift the ‘environmentally good’ infra projects from those ‘bad’? And a mechanism to incentivize the former, and dissuade, even offer an alternative to the latter? Ask Academics, and they’d, perhaps, suggest internalizing project-associated externalities through Carbon taxes. One of strongest positive attributes of Public Infrastructure – that it is a GDP-multiplicative activity locally and regionally – is also a significant problem. Pecuniary emissions associated with incremental regional activity are not taken cognizance of in the accounting of project externalities. More insiduously, when Public coffers are open to Voter-endorsed Politicians to fund Public Infrastructure with, when accounting of Public Infrastructure projects span multiple Governments and turn it a veritable blind-man’s elephant, carbon taxes, even if paid on the immediate infrastructural activity, do little justice to the scale of externalities engendered by the project in its wake and aftermath. In such context, carbon taxes per se, could be environmentally limiting and ineffective; they offer, if purchased in bulk at discounted prices in recessions, a loophole large enough to pass a white elephant through; a white elephant that is swept under the carpet as Voters prepare to vote in a fresh cycle of public infrastructure projects with the next ballot. But all this begs the question, do we have a credible alternative?

There is......more correctly, there would be. Consider, an Environmental Cause Bond serving the role of a Super Regulator to the Political Government. On its Cause side, it has members who lien their Bond holdings toward the long-run goal of the Bond: Carbon Sustainability. Businesses that intend to conduct their activities within conformance of the long-run goals of the Cause Bond, are permitted or ‘licensed’ by the Cause Bond to operate as OC-Participants. Those businesses that reject environmental sustainability, or the concept of a Super Regulator issuing licences, and permits, would be categorized OB-Recalcitrants – whether physically a part of the Bond, or as represented by Deemed Proxies. The Cause Bond operates with a Gold PV-FV Collateral that covers the Bond from default for many reasons, including continued failure to achieve the intended path to final ETV. To cover Cause Long-liened members, whose goal it is to ensure the eventual success of the Bond, the Collateral-Administrator issues Long Gold Futures that cover significant decrements in Cause Bond ETV, extending to Bond Default. These Collateral Long Gold Futures would be available for trading between Cause members, OC-Participants, and members of the Bullion². The Collateral Administrator permits trade in Collateral Gold Long Futures³ between Cause-focussed, Long-Cause members, OC-Participants-Volatility players, and short, Nominally-attuned Bullion Traders⁴. As would be expected, nominal activities, here sub-aural Public Infrastructure projects, that hasten emissions from the indeterminate future to the present and increment them in the short, intermediate, and long-run, would induce NAV and ETV of the Environmental Cause Bond to decrement. In turn, disadvantaged Long-liened Cause members would seek to their hedge their losses in Collateral Long Gold futures, which would increment to reflect enlarging environmental/nominal externalities associated with those specific sub-aural Public infrastructure projects. Such ‘irrational’ increments in Gold Long Futures (Shadow) prices would be shorted by OC-Participants, and traders at the Bullion, albeit for the price of triggering a ‘Collateral ZS De-monetize’, a key that expresses as M2dot PV contractions that must be paid as Penalty Lumpsums⁵ by the environmentally-subaural Project⁶, or, and equivalently, as ‘Collateral-ZS-Monetized’ in to ‘Aural Green K2dot-Nominal AO ZS’ liquidity and distributed in the regional socio-economic circle relevant to the project⁷. Conversely, a truly environment-friendly Public infrastructure project, that, albeit incrementing emissions in short-run, attenuates it in the longer run, would induce Cause Bond NAV and ETV to increment, and Long Gold Futures prices to abate. The Bond would process, or sponsor such compatible projects for conventional M2dot monetization, and possibly, issue a Lumpsum to kickstart them.

Between lumpsum strictures, and rewards issued Public Infrastructure Projects, and accompanying Bond-sponsored K2dot-M2dot expansions and contractions executed by the Central Banker, the Environmental Cause Bond obtains a critical separation of environmentally-friendly, and unfriendly public infrastructure projects. Such identification and differential treatment incentivizes the environmentally-friendly, and delays, denies, or metamorphoses the less-friendly among public infrastructure projects. The proposed mechanism offers the Political Government an invaluable tool to critically sift between genuine public-benefiting projects worthy of opening the public coffers for, and those that are publicly-injurious in the long, but nominally aggrandizing to various constituences and capital market investors in the immediate.

Care for the pdf? Try this link: Beware the 2-edged Infra Knife !

..........

ps:

Would we, as the Public aware of this critical issue, and a possible answer to it, yet be as lazy and careless as to continue with ‘Nominally-frothy’ laissez faire? Want to line-up for the Ballot box, and monetize a Burj-beating Tower to skydive from?

..........

1Stretching the logic a bit, public infrastructure projects stimulate employment, family formation, and thus induce population migration and expansion in to the neighborhoods served or impacted by it.

2OB-Recalcitrants would be excluded from trading in Collateral Gold Long Futures for reasons obvious conflict of interest.

3Issued for the same period as Cause Bonds

4Whereas PV Gold prices must equalize ‘publicly’ across the Bullion and (Bond) Collaterals, ‘private’ FV Gold Futures prices would pertain to specific objectives hedged by specific Cause Bonds (or, their Collateral Administrators); that is, Cause Bond Collateral Administrators would issue unique ‘private’ Gold Long Futures specific to their Cause, OC, and the Bullion. Thus, and when participants buy or sell ‘private’ Long Gold Futures, they would, in effect, be operating in the limited context of a specific ‘private’ Futures price responding to changes in Cause Bond ETV brought about by activity that is in the immediate cognizance of the Bond. An increment in the price of these Long Gold futures would imply an expansion of the Nominal due activities sub-par and inimical to the Cause. Long-liened Cause members would prefer those inimical activities are excluded from the future, while Bullion traders, predictably, would be less averse to them.

5These Lumpsums would be nixed by the Bond in arrangements with the Central Banker. For example, the Lumpsum would be netted out and nixed in the next Liquidity issue of full face value (ie, a ‘penalty’ of $10 Million would be netted out of a fresh liquidity issue of face value a Billion dollars, but for which only $990 Million would actually be issued.

6in magnitudes proportional degree of deviation from the Aural environmental threshold adopted by the Cause Bond.

7This latter strategy is effectively a balancing distribution of ‘Nominal AO ZS’ monies in the neighborhood impacted by the project – whether pecuniary or non-pecuniary.   

A Solid-Waste Solution to Climate Change? A Macro-Financial Strategy around Sovereign Gold and ESH Bonds

A Solid-Waste Solution to Climate Change? A Macro-Financial Strategy around Sovereign Gold and ESH Bonds

GangaPrasad Rao

Energy, Environmental and Mineral Economist

gpra64@gmail.com

gprasadrao@hotmail.com

Disclaimer: This manuscript explores an industrial policy from a wider, Social-Finance perspective, for which reason, it is necessary to examine the matter without the horseblinds imposed by PV-Finance. The author makes no claim about reliability of the proposed design, or the assuredness of indicated outcomes.

Introduction

Plastics have turned an ubiquitous raw-material, intermediate- and consumer ‘product’ in our society. Its quality, diversity, and niches have expanded the breadth of applications, but engendered a large and exacerbating solid waste externality. Concomitantly, iron and steel-making, a primary resource and infrastructure sector across the world, continues to be a pollution-intensive industry despite significant gains in recycling of iron scrap. The significance of the environmental footprint from these sectors cannot be over-stated as societies around the world pursue an infrastructure-intensive, LQ-maximizing, nominal economic paradigm.

In recent decades, many technologies have sprung up that have, on one hand, increased the feed-flexibility of blast-furnace based iron making, and on the other, enhanced the recycle, and re-use of processed and composited plastic waste a technical feasibility. Together, these technical developments present a hitherto unrecognized opportunity for policy makers to devise financial and economic strategies that ‘hatch’ these technical developments in to the market by defensibly manipulating lumpsums, lines, rents and prices through an appropriate macro-mechanism. This paper broaches one such design centered around a resource-prudential, macro-societal and micro-pricing strategy. The strategy exploits a 3-way, induced strategic pareto between iron-makers, plastic recyclers, (tyre recyclers) and coal interests to put together a Sovereign Gold and Bond-centered strategy that leverages market forces to re-align incentives and secure multiple goals concomitantly and efficiently.

The Challenge

Many recent innovations and technologies – from nano-science and IT, to robotization, are indiscriminate in bestowing their benefits between the Closed-cycle and the Open Cycle. The Open Cycle economy, characterized by production inefficiency, use of fossil fuels, and hence environmental externalities, is, paradoxically, benefited more than is the Closed-cycle by such technologies that enhance its efficiency, reduce costs, turn it more competitive, and hence extend the longevity of constituent firms and industries¹, albeit at the cost of exacerbating externalities. Thus, Steel-making, or rather its intermediate product, iron-making with Pulverized Coal/Coke as fuel/reductant – one of the more environmentally-injurious processes, has turned more production-efficient for the myriad technological innovations and reliability-enhancements, and consequently, has leveraged its status as a crucial infrastructure sector within and across nations. Similarly, Coal mining has expanded scale and lowered costs with new technologies, and successfully countered, both, its environmental and economic disadvantage relative other fuels. Reductions in costs of iron-making and coke manufacture due the new wave of innovative technologies, would, logically, enhance profitability, and extend, if not enlarge externalities associated with these processes.

The above context presents a challenge, even an opportunity. The opportunity lies in devising a strategy that leverages societal values for Closed-Cycle and Climate Sustainability by ‘closing’ the iron-making production cycle, that simultaneously resolves the exploding solid-waste externality due plastics, and which also compensates Coal interests for the de-classification of their proved, economic reserves. The challenge involves the design of a macro-strategy that turns iron-making 3-way sustainable - a) by enhancing the economics of recycling plastics and its composting in to coal- and coke substitutes, b) by offering financial incentives to iron-makers to adopt these substitutes, even if it means varying operational and quality parameters, or adding to costs, and c) ensuring further, that Coking Coal interests are compensated for the consequent loss of economic reserves. Such design, if successful, would incentivize sustainable recycling of Plastic solid-waste globally, and abate externalities associated with mining of metallurgical coal, and its processing in to Coke. But how’d one placate Coal for the loss of production and its not inconsiderable reserves, incentivize recyclers to recycle plastics in to composites, and persuade iron-makers to substitute coal fines and coke with plastic composites, while taking on the risk of cost increments and product quality variations? This manuscript outlines a strategy that anticipates the financial and economic stumbling blocks that might confront policy-makers, and offers a defensible, ESH-prudent, sovereign, macro-financial strategy that obtains desired outcomes efficiently through market-based instruments.

.

.

Interested in more than just the Intro and the Conclusions? Here's the pdf: GP Social Macro Finance

.

To Conclude.....

The Nominal Paradigm, coupled to a per-capita economy administered by a populist government comprised of Political parties in nexus with stock market capitalists and purveyors of open-cycle technologies, causes environmental and social externalities to explode and threaten societal sustainability¹. Post producer- and post-consumer Plastics waste is a very obvious and enlarging externality of modern times. Concomitantly, Coal mining and Coke production, is beset with its own externalities in production, processing, and in use. This manuscript perceives an emerging pareto opportunity around, on one hand, developments in Plastics Recycling and Compositing, and on the other, in the use of re-processed Plastics waste as Reductants in Blast Furnace Iron-making. Though demonstrated technically, these innovations remain largely in the realm of niche, government-supported programs. This proposal offers a financially-defensible, economically-robust, market-based design to incentivize CC-technologies at multiple points in the economy, and thus brings about a quantum jump in the recycling and re-use of plastics beyond furthering Closed-Cycle goals.

References

1. Plastics convert iron-ore to Steel: Feedstock recycling in blast furnaces, Plastics Europe.

2. Recycled Mixed Plastics as Reductant in Iron-making, Dankwah, Amoah, Dankwah and Fosu.

3. Recycling of Waste Plastic Packaging in Blast Furnace System, Yojiogaki, Koichi Tomioka, Watanabe, Koji Arita, Kuriyama and Tetsuro Sugayosh, NKK Technical Review No. 84 (2001).

4. McKenna, Phil. ‘New Life for Old Tires’. MIT Technology Review.

Electoral Bonds with a 2wist !

Electoral Bonds with a 2wist !

GangaPrasad Rao

Energy, Environmental and Mineral Economist
gprao64@gmail.com

Every Budget has its surprise, its climaxes and disappointments. This Jaitley Budget is no different. The Press says it is a good, fiscally-prudent budget, and so it must be, for the Press doesn’t ever lie. But this column is no diatribe over the Press’s freedom and its inclinations. Rather, its about an opportunity to leverage and further enhance a certain proposal in the Budget – the proposal to fund electoral campaigns by issuing Electoral Bonds. My read on the issue is that the RBI would issue Electoral (Bearer) Bonds through designated Banks to various entities – Individuals, Businesses, Foreign Institutions, who may then donate these Bonds anonymously to (a) Political Party/Parties of their choice. Parties may redeem these Bonds immediately through their registered Bank accounts. The proposal is, ostensibly or otherwise, meant to cleanse Electoral financing of black money, and bring about ‘transparent democracy’.

Now, the democracy that Indians vote for, is constituted of a ‘Political Government’ - a Government comprised of major political parties that runs the nation in a conclave with Bankers, Technology-providers, Domestic Capitalists and Foreign Institutions. The Government obtains the collective preferences of the Voter Group, manages the monetary and the fisc to engender an expansionary Real-Nominal economy. This Real Society-Nominal economy offers returns to Capitalists and Investors, while ensuring livelihood, security and lifestyle-quality to families, even as it expands its power base. Voters, Businesses and Foreign Entities could be deemed to seek a Compact with the Political within this socio-politico-economic context – a Compact that more clearly defines the exchanges between themselves and the Political Government. Whereas Voters seek Livelihood security and a safe, nurturing society (and by implication, reasonable returns to Parenting, Gold and Realty – their Wealth Repositories), domestic Businesses support the political in expectations of a Keynesian Nominal Cycle that is pareto with the Political Government and the Nominal Society. Foreign entities could be grouped together so they maximize a polar ‘ Millenial Development Goals-CC Principles-Nominal Profits’ objective. Given this context, Politicians juggle their options – Sovereign relations, Money supply, temporally and regionally-defined technological Opportunities, and FX compromises, to pursue a Real-Nominal economy that addresses the concerns and wishes of all sections of the society.

The proposed Electoral Bonds could be strategized within this contextual Compact. How’d one structure a strategy around the issue of Electoral Bonds that addressed the multi-party Compact? If Electoral Bonds, essentially non-enforceable Debt instruments issued by Political parties, are issued by the RBI, the same could be ‘supply-optimized’ by Political Parties at times, and in numbers consistent with their political situation, and prospective plans. Thus, and should elections be impending, prospective technological and economic opportunities abundant, businesses friendly, and public interest in the Political Government healthy, Political Parties might signal RBI issue Electoral Bonds incrementally. Conversely, they might suggest RBI delay issuing Bonds, or otherwise issue a limited number of Bonds if their ‘private’ finances are in good shape, Business confidence in the Political Government waning, technological and economic opportunities evanescent, or if GO ascendant in the masses. Upon indications from the Political Circle, the RBI, offers at its Political Bond Annexe, a variable number of Bonds at the ‘ordered auctions’. These auctions offer all Bonds available for the day/week to Voters first, domestic Businesses and Capitalists next, with the residual on offer to FIIs. Voters, offered a means to donate politically, seek to assure their livelihood security through donations of Electoral Bonds. Despite the absence of a formal compact with the favored party, they’d, rationally expect, at all times within the Political cycle, either, continued employment, alternative employment opportunities, or, salary-insurance for a length of time proportional the magnitude of their donations. Hopeful of livelihood security, Citizens, particularly those in the middle class, who must invest early in education and indenture themselves for a home loan, donate Electoral Bonds in return for informal livelihood/salary insurance within the (next) Political Cycle. Those who seek such insurance at higher salaries might have to contend with exponentially-increasing investment in Electoral Bonds. Between the imperative to assure the family a future, and an exponentially increasing ‘premium’ price to pay, the middle-class households find an optimum amount of Political Bonds to buy and donate. Post buying such assurance, middle-class householders, would exhibit an increasing propensity to consume as a group, ie, they’d be willing to save less and spend more. Infused with ‘Consumerist animal spirits’, households would spend more of their disposable income, stoke a consumer-centered economy, and assure the society a Keynesian plenty.

Domestic Businesses Houses, which plan to secure and expand their businesses across political cycles within a ‘Social Real-Keynesian Nominal’ framework, donate strategically and anonymously to the Political Circle. Their donations are in the form of AO Expectations around Subsidies, FX and Interest Rates in the short-run, and Competition and Capital Investments in the long. Parties receiving such donations would then be sympathetic to business concerns and accommodate them between the niche-oriented Political Compact and uncertainty-hedged Capital markets. Simultaneously, Businesses, fearing parties with full coffers which might yet yield to populist pressures, would limit their donations to ensure Political parties do not splurge in political returns and turn against them in a subsequent cycle. Between buying a Keynesian stimulus, and protecting their profits and rents, Domestic businesses find an optimum amount of Electoral Bonds to buy and commit to the Political.

A similar argument applies to the polar objectives of FIIs. Whereas they seek political sympathy with their client’s MDG agenda, and Global CC Conformance beyond returns to political foresight, entrepreneurship and alacrity-based arbitrage, they fear donations made with these objectives might tilt the scales in regional political spheres, and hence limit their participation to an equilibrium that balances the incentives and fears. The aggregation of (sequential) demands for Electoral bonds from Individuals, Businesses and FIIs, when faced with a supply of Bonds from the Political Circle, obtains an equilibrium in the Electoral Bond Annexe market, thus establishing a marginal price for the Bonds.

Now consider a public market for Bonds that trades beyond Electoral Bonds, Sovereign Bonds of various tenures, as well select Sovereign Bonds of neighbouring nations and major Trade partners. Electoral Bonds redeemed by Political parties end up in this market, and are traded alongside as yet ‘undonated’ Electoral Bonds against Sovereign Bonds of various affiliations. (One wouldn’t, normally, expect Political parties to buy Electoral Bonds in this market; however, they might do so on rare occasions for diplomatic and strategic political reasons). These trades reveal the political mood of the nation, the trade-offs between, on one hand, domestic politics and political expectations, and on the other, sovereign and trade relations with neighbouring countries. Trading reveals political, electoral, sovereign as well as trade opportunities, and threats that could be gainfully interpreted by psephologists, diplomats and policy makers. For example, trades in the Political Annexe of the Bond market might reveal how Businesses favoring a Right-wing party might quantitatively impact, post-elections, relations with neigbouring sovereigns, and relations with major trade partners. (Donations may be timed to coincide with, or any time after, upon ensuring social and political compatibility. Bond-holders may hold on to the Bonds and time their donations to political receptiveness. Political parties, funded by 3 significant economic constituencies, choose to accept donations such that they are, on one hand compatible with the Political Compact, and on the other, consistent with the donor aspirations).

This proposal has much to commend. First and by far, the most significant, the strategy of leveraging Electoral Bonds to serve as Livelihood Insurance is likely to induce a marked reduction in marginal propensity to save among the middle class, and thus engender an incrementally Consumerist society within a pareto political context. It is also conformable with Business incentives and fears, and offers a credible means to signal intentions to the Political. Third, the strategy provides foreign entities – whether multi-lateral institutions, or Capitalists, a public means to interact politically with a future Government whose agenda they’d like to influence to advantage. The facility to intervene in the Political Annexe of the Bond market permits the RBI - a proxy for the Sovereign Fiduciary, a hold upon Electoral/Campaign liquidity, and signal unacceptable threats to the Sovereign, or to the Trade economy.

The first step toward cleaner electoral politics has been taken by Jaitley. The proposal above could modestly, be deemed a second. The ball now lies in the public court to ensure these bonds serve the larger purpose of a sustainable society and a democratic politic..

Damage-Collateral-Compensation Bonds

Damage-Collateral-Compensation Bonds

GangaPrasad Rao
gangaprasad.rao@gmail.com
gprasadrao@hotmail.com


The Nominal per-capita economic paradigm that many societies have adopted to raise their standard of living is not without its pitfalls. Nominal societies hasten a desired future by accommodating some ’real redux-nominal ZS’, and permitting some ‘hastening risk’ upon members of society. The damages and compensation claims resulting from such risks translating into real events in an inequitable nominal economy are shared by Insurance firms who insure Privates, and implicitly by the society/Government that covers or comes to the aid of the uninsured Public at large. Thus, if Privates enjoyed the benefits of anticipatory insurance post-fact the occurrence of the Risk event, the Public settles for as much EO-compensation as the Government deems expedient. This nominal dichotomy permits consumption-externalities by the Rich, and transfers them to the Poor who are victimized at the receiving end of externality-engendered risks, but at the short end of any compensation.

Consider then, a pseudo-market mechanism to offer a diversity of compensation alternatives to the Public post externality-triggered risk events. Imagine a coterie of Insurance firms joining hands to institute a ‘Damage-Collateral-Compensation’ DCC Bond. The DCC Bond serves as a Collateral for policy-holding Private Insurees. Its units, though exclusively assignable to the insured Privates as guarantee of Insurance payouts, are ’voluntarily’ shared/traded with the Government which acts to protect the Privates in times of public unrest post the occurrence of Risk events. The Bond, with an yield proportional expected appreciation in policy premium, (itself a function of Insurance costs and market returns) and with a sufficiently long, albeit variable term, may safely be assumed to offer a 100% FV (Appreciation+Volatility) Total Return over its lifetime (Thus, firms covering exacerbating risks would cover them for shorter periods mirrored in a shorter Bond term, and vice versa). The Government, in its role as a protector of the public, and toward its responsibilities to the Bond for usurping/sharing/buying Private bond units that it holds untraded, issues dichotomous ’Mirror ZS Coins’: Risk-PV Half-Coins and Gain-FV Half-Coins to the Public Uninsured and the Compensation Suppliers, respectively, as the monetization of the 100% FV return in the opposite of, and in aggregate numbers equal untraded Bond units. These Half-Coins are FV-PV polarized equivalents of untraded bonds. Whereas Risk-PV Half coins, due hastening, attract more of the Volatility/Bond failure Risk and less of the Sustainability-Appreciation-Gain FV, Gain FV-Coins, with more Appreciation and less Volatility, imbue a Sustainability upgrade. Further, and whereas Gain-FV Coins are auctioned to Compensation Suppliers - those who would supply compensatory-, mitigatory- and averting goods and services,- at prices that reflect potential gain at the margin (ie, depending on their assessment of the probability of the risk event occurring, their costs, demand, supply and margins), Risk-PV Coins are distributed equally, but reassigned within the uninsured Risk-group. EO-Compensation Suppliers could trade Gain-FV Coins amongst themselves and thus anticipate demand for EO-compensation goods and services. Risk-PV coins, distributed equally in the Victim group would be reallocated optimally within group members depending on their diligences, individual-specific risk perceptions, and PV lifestyle expectations. Those potential victims with poor diligences and locational risks, would sacrifice current income to buy Risk-PV coins from group members (is, buy ’Public-EO insurance’ incrementally), whereas those others with expectations of higher lifestyle, better diligences and lower risks would sell their Public-EO insurance for current income.Post negotiations within and across groups, the transfer of the averting/mitigating/compensation goods or services would be effected specific to the negotiating parties, ie, their personal valuation of the half coins, it's price within the seller/buyer group and the opportunity costs and prices of the averting/mitigating/compensatory goods/services in the nominal economy. Post the transaction, the Seller would then combine the Risk PV-Coins with Gain-FV Full coins to obtain ’Sustainability Full Coins’ and submit them to the DCC Bond Administrator. The Administrator, upon receipt of Full Coins, would then invalidate them against as many bond units surrendered by the Government on demand to compensate the Seller with nominal monetary units, thus bringing about market-determined efficiency in the distribution of EO-compensation.

In normal times, bonds would be traded in the ’Private’ Bond market, while Half-Coins, issued against the untraded portion of bonds held by Government, would be traded within respective groups. In normal times, private insurees would trade their DCC bonds to the Government if optimistic of the Insurer’s finances and their payouts should an event trigger. The Government's demand for DCC bonds would reflect the state of the Publiuninspired and its plans for them. In normal times, suppliers would buy Gain-FV Coins and produce/construct low cost averting, mitigating and compensatory goods. In such times, the diligent, but at-risk among uninsured would accumulate Risk-PV coins and even make anticipatory deals with owners of Gain PV-Coins - their choice reflecting both, their constrained holdings of Risk-PV Coins and their valuation of alternative averting/mitigating goods and services. Prior to an event, and in times of increasing risk, DCC bonds would trade at a premium, thus inducing Insurance firms to issue ’keys’ that sponsor averting/mitigating action in the society which reduce their future payout obligations. Should an insured risk trigger as an event, the Public Uninsured would seek out Compensation Suppliers, and negotiate the nature and price of mitigating and compensating goods and services they might find useful in the emergency. Post negotiations and compromise - whether in normal times or emergencies, the transfer would be effected specific to the negotiating parties. The Seller would then combine the Risk PV-Coins obtained from the Uninsured, with his own Gain-FV Full coins to obtain ’Sustainability Full Coins’ and submit them to the Bond Administrator. The Administrator, upon receipt of Full Coins, would them invalidate them against as many bond units held by the Government to compensate the Seller with nominal monetary units, thus bringing about market-determined efficiency in the distribution of EO-compensation.

One could list the advantages of such design. First, issuing DCC Bonds reassures policy holders unsure of Insurance payouts in emergencies. Second, it helps avoid immediate monetary and FX impacts on government finances, and thus permits larger compensation to the Public. Third, those with compensatory goods to offer obtain Gain FV Coins at a substantial discount to their FV (Bond ETV ), and are rewarded with a premium post a quick trade with an Uninsured/Risk victim. The Coins permit, even induce anticipatory repositioning, relocation and investments appropriate to each entity’s stake, risks, diligences and plans. The Uninsured may choose the time and nature of compensation - whether anticipatory, or in emergency, and whether averting, mitigatory, or compensatory, and in a location of their choice. Fourth, the creation of an anticipatory market in the provision of averting/mitigatory or compensatory goods also generates a demand from the EO-section of the society that balances private (ZS) demand. Fifth, invalidated bonds reduce supply and thus buttress returns to bond holders. Sixth, the higher yield on DCC Bonds obtained by the Government/Insurees with a rise in insurance premiums, serves as a natural deterrent to, both, exploitation of market power by the coterie/firm, and moral hazard among Private Insurees. All parties - the Private Insurer, the Private Insured, Government as the proxy bondholder, the group of compensation goods suppliers, and indeed, the Public Uninsured, are all benefited. The design possesses properties that are conducive to anticipatory market signaling, and the consequent triggering of market incentives. It boasts of efficiency in anticipating and averting risk, and in anticipatory supply of mitigatory and abating goods and services. Since, both, a Private and a Public insurance market are already in operation, it'd be easy to extend the market to formally implement the above design.

Such designs could be particularly apt, for example, in nominal, per-capita economies characterized by large, widespread public damages from sea-level rise and flooding due unprecedented climate change.

Majority-Minority Ire: A Lesson in Group Sociology

You know what they say? "You better not...... Else I take a key on you". Apparently, a very common threat in an over-populous society with rampant injustice that induces people to grimace at each other for merely being around, and sue if they rub shoulders. Almost, except that they sue for balancing damages - not a lump sum, but for all future time..... and not in Courts, but socially, leaning on their Status within a social hierarchy. Yeah, the same hierarchy that tells me in so many different ways that I fell short of royalty, albeit as a Minority - something I'd gladly accept but for what was ingrained into me by parents!

But this is no biography. I seek to highlight the frictions from diversity within a competitive society. Excusing a modicum of vice and slavery that seems necessary to grasp the future of a large group, even control and '3D-print it' it (don't tell me it's a balancing resolution against the PV-Monetization of future profits in the Nominal capital markets), 'we the people', euphemism for the Majority, exploit their Social dominance and hierarchy to proactively seek out pareto opportunities in various dimensions: personal- life and family-, commercial, academic, professional, residential, opportunities abroad... you name it. Think of it.... the opportunity and the power to exploit the 'key'- the yet nebulous group future, 'populate' it as privately-or group-optimal with the rest of the society; the facility to hedge and arrange events cooperatively within a large Majority group so you know when to act, what to seek where, associate with whom and keep distance from whom others! In other words, plan ahead with the rest of the society, and things fall into place. No surprises! Very, very powerful paradigm. Pervasive too, but not all that evident - whether in print, online or as they would they, enligne! So..... Why this blog?

Well, Several thoughts. First, if this system had been in place for ages, how come its not talked about in formal media and contexts? If socially beneficial, why not adopted by students, not just the Majority, who are trained at schools to optimize as a cohort? Second, shouldn't it be more public and widespread in this age of globalization, globalised workforce, internet and global IT-connectivity and socialization? But most significantly from my perspective, what does the paradigm imply for the Minority? Minority, whether by history, by economic immigration, inter-jurisdictional transfers and assignments by the employer-whether government - federal or foreign, or Business, or those seeking their futures through the academia. Those who, no matter where, what language, or origins, in a society riven by economic inequalities of opportunity and which glamorizes social tensions over the media, must play second fiddle to the Majority so as not to raise the ire of the less-understanding crowd prone to political, religious and social provocations. Those who, and despite reservations, must settle what is left of political-, academic and business- opportunities - the Minority political niches, the anything-but-frontier science and technology opportunities if tomorrow, and the dirty and the informal 'bijnez' that stereotypes them across generations as the environmental Satans. What could be the implications when 95 of the society apply a Group pareto that operates in zero-sum against the Minority 5? Like what? Like Gods who are Majority enforcers even when it comes to matters health-slough, sexual, and private beyond sexual. Like when you can't walk in and out of a library having, unintentionally, got the better of a local majority library user! Like not having the privacy to talk, even underground, matters property, business strategy, or intergenerational family decisions. Like shouldn't those in our digits, be as meek to voluntarily accept an ignominious Majority Announce so we may ride roughshod over them into glorious Status? Like... Like...End Like E!

But isn't there a way out? A credible alternative that permits minorities and immigrants to live honorably as neighbors, if not 'conjugally' as members of the same society? Ask around, and they'll tell you there is even a Majority-Minority pareto. Pareto? But the only pareto that I came across forced us into a small hole -- the 'Majority Local ZS', de facto enforced on the Minority - aka fratricide! My point is, that when the 95 write a pareto future for themselves... and execute it with Majority privileges, the other 5 are left with no choice. No choice in matters as important as School, Hospital services, 'sustainable' far less the coveted frontier Career opportunities. And less than do..., err.....dignified customer service when it comes to certain utility, property-related and essential services.

And while on the matter, the 'Insignificant 5' do not deserve a 'Majority-Enforce' on their sphere of activities and opportunities? Or monitoring and supervision that extends all the way from their office to the toilet back home - almost as if the oppressor were an enemy resident within? And surely, the Majority has its acclaimed Philosophers, Gurus, Academics, Executives, Political and Social Leaders to not rely on such tactics as heaping dirt on the few to shine bright opposite them? In the globalised world of the present and the multi-cultural society that we all seek, surely we could adopt a more rational strategy? A strategy that breaks the ZS-jinx, by buffering a Rest-of-the-World, RoW, in betwixt the Majority and the Minority, an RoW that participates actively, if with a local Complement Group Presence, to resolve differences of Status, of niches, of alternative futures within polarized societies around the world, and ports differences away through - thanks the global reach of Social media - to distant land as Opportunity in anonymous or assigned pareto deals? On the bright side though, we Minorities have a lot to learn from the Group Pareto strategies of the Majority, and unlearn some of our internal squabbles and enmities.......

....Like 'minority-enforcing' on one their own, and -a foreign-returned, a marriage with 3 daughters in a society divided between orthodox Majority Oppression and Minority social pressures!