You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Members of Congress are taking serious steps toward good-government reforms that would eliminate some of the more egregious taxpayer-funded perks they enjoy. The House of Representatives is poised to eliminate the lavish supports granted to former speakers of the House upon retirement, which include expensive office space and staff for five whole years after their departure from Congress.

Before the Memorial Day recess, the House Appropriations Committee unanimously approved an amendment by Rep. Kevin Yoder, R-Kan., to the 2019 legislative branch spending bill with language to cut off the benefit that has been on the books since 1970. The bill is expected to be considered by the House later in June.

The perk provides former speakers with office space, furnishings, franked mail privileges , and funds for office expenses and three staffers. It was first established for Speaker John W. McCormack, D-Mass., who retired in 1971 after serving in the House for 42 years. According to the Congressional Research Service, supporters of the perks argued that it was appropriate to “provide him the means to finish any Speaker-related business he felt necessary upon leaving Congress.” At first, these benefits were available for only two years, were later expanded in perpetuity, before being capped at five years in 1994.

The location of the office had been limited to the member’s district, until a 1985 law allowed it to be anywhere in the U.S. Otherwise, there were no other restrictions on the office or its rent except that it cannot be used for political purposes and is unavailable to any former speaker who takes a federally appointed or elective office .

The most recent beneficiary was former Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who kept his office open for one year in the House Longworth Office Building at a cost of $211,000 . Because Boehner stepped down midsession, the primary function of his office was to assist with the transition to incoming Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis. Since the inception of the benefit, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., has been the only speaker who declined it. He expressed concern that it “would get too cluttered with what’s private and what’s public.”

This was a problem with previous speakers. For example, the Associated Press noted that Carl Albert, D-Okla., (speaker from 1971 to 1977) used his office to “prepare speeches and help a friend on a book about the speakership.” An assistant in former Speaker Jim Wright’s office was quoted saying that the Texas Democrat “spends most of his time writing speeches for the former speaker and helping him work on a book.” Books about the speakership may be interesting, but there’s no reason taxpayers should be expected to fund their preparation.

In addition to curtailing these speaker office privileges, this bill would freeze congressional salaries for another year. Under law, members of Congress receive automatic annual cost-of-living allowance adjustments unless they vote to block them. Salaries have been frozen since 2009 at $174,000 for rank-and-file members, $193,400 for the House majority and minority leaders and the president pro tem of the Senate, and $223,500 for the speaker of the House.

The reform package is supported by the two people in the House who would stand to benefit from the perk: Ryan, who will retire at the end of the congressional session, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., a former speaker herself.

This effort comes on the heels of a bill introduced by Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., which would cut off taxpayer-funded pensions for any member of Congress convicted of a felony. Whereas current law lets congressional felons collect taxpayer money until years of appeals are exhausted , Tenney’s bill would end pensions upon conviction and only restore them in the event of a successful appeal.

Neither of these efforts will, by themselves, save enough money to make a serious dent in our $21 trillion national debt. But, they are signs that Congress is at least getting serious about trimming some of the more lavish and indefensible taxpayer-funded perks they have enjoyed for too long.

Demian Brady is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog. He is director of research at the National Taxpayers Union.