Recently there is a crime that aired on the news, the suspects were caught and interrogated and it was found that the main motivation is for money.
There are many crimes that are done for the sake of money and I want to focus on that.
It brings me to an old conversation that I have with a British friend, we were talking the pros and cons between living in London and Singapore, in which he has spent decades living in London. He told me that 'Singapore feels like a mothership you know? Things feel so in order and there are so many rules here and there, I mean I agree to some but for example, no drinking in the MRT? Phew, I mean I am no law breaker but drinking on an MRT? Give me a break... Though you know it just feels nice sometimes to be able to answer a telephone call without the feeling that there could a muggery happened in the streets. I have seen way too many times with my own eyes that people just stole phones from the side of the London streets. While such things probably never happened in Singapore.'
We discussed about the phenomena of these petty thefts and I also explained that I heared from my friends in Europe that the suspects are mainly children well below the legal age so they probably are just going to go to juvenille hall from some months, with a point that the perpetrator will have literally the minimum amount of consequences/jail-time especialy in countries that are very advanced on 'welfare' that they will react to these vindicators and handle them pretty 'leniently'. So it's pretty hard to stop these crimes from happening because it's pretty much orchestrated and distributed that the plannings to the executions are actually very thought out. He cut out the explanation and say "You know... I never understand those... Petty thefts... I just don't understand the mindset."
Well for me it's somewhat pretty simple or at least I can break it down very simply. For some people it just has very low risk to reward ratio, means that the reward of suceeding in the crime far outweights the consequences. And more interestingly enough, when people are cornered in a sense--financially to resort to thefts, they will do it almost as if it's the last thing they will ever do.
I have read stories on the news of petty thefts/crimes being done out of the sake of fulfilling substantial/primary needs of their household. They are (pardon my use of language), like a cornered rats, when rats are cornered and its survival its threatened, it will do things that they don't normally thought of doing.
There are also 'Hedonic needs', in which the primary is fulfilled, yet somehow the self asks beyond its primary. We have stories that multi billion hedge fund managers completely blown out billions worth of asset just for the sake of another billion. Of course, when all dusts are settled (deeds are finished), the 'rationale' came back and see 'how dumb it was to blow out billions'.
But coming back to petty theft, I want to show a clearer demonstration of how barbaric turns of event can be seen normalized when it's a mean to fulfill primary needs.
I have this very demonstartive chart from Queensland Economy Watch
While researching for this article, I have find an intersting find from a Nobel Laurette, Gary Becker states that 'a criminal act is preferred and chosen if the expected benefits from committing a crime exceed the expected costs, including the costs of any foregone legal alternatives. The economic theory of crime is regarded as a special case of the general theory of rational behavior under uncertainty.' The Economics of Crime and Punishment
Which resonates to my initial statement that it is about risk-reward ratio.
The funny thing is that there's a resonating phenomena that humans and bees have in common: the tendency to do 'irrational behavior under uncertainty.' The direct correlation of it, the more uncertainty it has, the higher tendency for it to do 'irrational behavior' and in this world, the uncertainty could be framed as 'uncertainty of income.' Then comes the crazy sayings 'No one is crazy, but people can do crazy things with/for money.'
Above is attached countries with its GPI. Explanation of GPI is below:
"The Global Peace Index (GPI) ranks the safest and most peaceful countries in the world. This report is published annually by the Institute for Economics and Peace, which defines itself as "an independent, non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to shifting the world's focus to peace as a positive, achievable and tangible measure of human wellbeing and progress." The report researches countries to determine which are the safest and which are the most dangerous.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/safest-countries-in-the-world
It's particularly interesting because the answer to it, it's not JUST about wealth inequality. To tell this, this is a chart that represents wealth inequality.
The Gini index, or Gini coefficient, is a statistical measure of wealth distribution developed by the Italian statistician Corrado Gini. The Gini index is used to gauge economic inequality by measuring income distribution, also called wealth distribution. The Gini coefficient ranges from 0 to 1. A coefficient of 0 represents perfect equality, a country (or other people group) in which everyone had the same income. The closer to 1 the coefficient is, the greater the wealth inequality. Gini coefficient is also expressed as a percentage in which 0% is perfect equality and 100% would be the maximum possible inequality.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/wealth-inequality-by-country
The US GINI index is 39.7 and Russia is 36. While US GPi is 2.448 and Russia is 3.412.
This is where my theory starts.
We have came far enough that to measure wealth we use 'money', in which money then determines/enables the people's standard of living; to buy house, foods, and such.
To fulfill the populace demands of such primary needs, we have became undetachable with international trades to satisfy from the imports/exports of conretes, cements, to wide variety of foods. This soon later become the red blood cells of civilization as it always are. Money is just a tool to exchange these goods through in a form of 'employment' or 'proof of value' of a human, for without money it became increasingly hard to survive.
The government's job is to maintain the 'value' of its currency is still adequate and 'useable' for its people. If we come back to the GDI chart, we also come to see that the countries that has the high 'crime' index is the countries that have unstable inflation of their country's currency, Turkish Lira is an infamous example, might as well, venezuela and colombia as well. A lot of middle eastern countries also has a high crime rate while I debate it's mostly because of nation's instability induced by war, but that just proves the point that when a country become so unstable out of war, jobs no longer held it's meaning, outside of personal fulfillment, it also need to carry the meaning of fulfilling financial income needs.
When a country has unstable/high inflation, it is bound to have unstable/high employment rate, in context that jobs no longer held its meaning to fulfill primary needs, people TEND to resort to crime and petty theft.
This can get more interesting, I have friends who are from Sweden and Germany, it recently has immigration problems and crime rate sky rocketed ever since. This is where the condition of the root of the problem becomes more painstakingly apparent to me. In a country with limited number of employment suddenly increased in number of population, employment rate PER population obviously increased BUT those people as human beings must still need to fulfill their primary needs as in housing and meals. The rest is history.
Spread of gang violence wrecks Sweden's peaceful image, BBC, 2023
Sweden now has the highest crime rate in Northern Europe, according to a new study that notes the country's particular problems with gang violence and other crimes relating to gang activity
https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/swedens-crime-rate-now-highest-in-northern-europe/
Over the past decades, the number of reported crimes in Sweden generally increased, which can be explained by several factors: a significant increase in the Swedish population, which naturally results in more crime and convicted criminals, as well as a new culture of reporting crimes to the authorities.
Moreover, a report published by the Swedish national council for crime prevention in 2021 found that Sweden was the only European country in which the number of fatal shootings per 100,000 inhabitant increased since 2000.
https://www.statista.com/topics/7088/crime-in-sweden/#topicOverview
Is it the government's job to monitor, secure, and guarantee employment? This is all very multidimensional but it is obviously very much so.
Proof of Value
This all somehow connects back to the letter that I sent to my friend and also Boss in my previous consulting company:
The symbolism in how you treat your clients. From my perspective, there's a profound value that manifests when you express 'When you're happy, then I'm happy.' It indicates a genuine intent, suggesting that our actions are not solely driven by payment but also ensuring our clients are satisfied with the work we deliver. This creates a perpetual cycle of value exchange between two individuals representing their respective companies.
This ultimate act of selflessness, where 'The Self' is defined in relation to others, mirrors the human condition. Just as one person can't define themselves in isolation, a consultant company too, can't establish its identity without acknowledging the existence of other companies. The innate desire for 'Self Actualization' drives individuals to prove their signifiacnce, not only for personal fulfillment but also for the benefit of others. Standing alone, the self struggles to survive, as it's identity is intrically woven into the fabric of interactions with others.
As much as the governmental role of a president and their political parties is to guarantee that their people lives their best lifes in which in most cases are enabled by employment, it has become more evidential that in this globalized and industrialized world. A population can't just grow by doing nothing, somehow to live means not to suffer, but to live means to have a "Proof of Value" not for himself but also for other people, especially for those who are around him.
I'm going to explain it once more in a simpler manner.
Imagine a country with staggering population increase, how can it ensure the stability of its civilization in a world with limited amount of resources? And we clearly live in a world with finite resource, a proof of value is a true rule and I couldn't believe that I just solved a direct proof of this theory through this essay.