@FantomasRitorna Io non voglio pagare per tenerli in galera con tre pasti assicurati al giorno e tv. Gambizzati, e riportati nel loro paese in una sedia a rotelle con solo metà degli arti e una castrazione per evitare che si riproducano. Punto.
Un professore di economia di una scuola superiore aveva dichiarato che nessuno degli studenti del suo corso era mai stato bocciato, ma si è recentemente ritrovato a far bocciare un'intera classe.
Tutta la classe aveva insistito nel dire che il socialismo funziona e che, di conseguenza, nessuno sarebbe stato né povero né ricco. Un mezzo egualitario eccezionale.
Allora il profesoore annunciò: "OK, faremo allora un piccolo esperimento di classe. Al prossimo compito in classe, farò la media di tutti i vostri voti e ve lo assegnerò. Avrete tutti lo stesso voto, nessuno riceverà un'insufficienza né prenderà un dieci".
Dopo il primo scritto fu fatta la media dei voti e tutti ottennero un 7. Quelli che avevano studiato molto erano delusi, quelli che avevano studiato poco erano contenti.
Nel secondo compito in classe, quelli che avevano studiato poco studiarono meno e quelli che avevano studiato tanto decisero di seguire la strada dei loro compagni furbetti studiando poco. La media del secondo esame fu un 4. Nessuno era contento.
Al terzo compito in classe, la media fu 2. Nel corso dei successivi esami i voti non migliorarono mai. Cominciò a crescere il nervosismo e gli scambi di accuse, gli insulti colorivano le conversazioni e tutti vissero male quella situazione. Nessuno volle studiare a beneficio degli altri. A grande sorpresa di tuta l'intera classe fu bocciata.
Fu allora che il professore affermò che il socialismo era il viatico del fallimento, poiché quando la ricompensa è grande, l'impegno nel riuscire è altrettanto grande. Ma quando lo Stato elimina ogni possibilità di premio, nessuno offrirà il proprio impegno né vorrà ottenere successo. Non potrebbe essere più semplice.
Italo Palesse, paratrooper of the X MAS Flotilla, with a bold smile and a cigarette in his mouth in front of the firing squad of the British army, his last words were "Viva L'Italia"
The Rich understand this while,
Middle class is still collecting tickets.
The Stadium Scam.
Imagine a cricket stadium with exactly 50,000 seats. The management issues 50,000 tickets.
One ticket = One seat. Guaranteed.
For decades, this system was honest.
The ticket was just a receipt.
The seat was the value.
You held the paper because you couldn't carry the chair home.
Then, the management noticed something interesting. People outside were trading tickets like currency. "I'll give you two tickets for your watch." "I'll give you five tickets for your bike."
They realized that people trusted the paper more than they checked the stadium.
So, the management got greedy.
They started printing extra tickets for seats that didn't exist.
They sold 100,000 tickets.
Then 500,000 tickets.
Then 1,000,000 tickets.
They became billionaires selling claims to a game that was already sold out.
Then, one day, it happened.
Foreign ticket holders rushed the gates. They wanted their seats.
The management didn't have them.
So they did something historic.
They locked the turnstiles.
They announced on the loudspeakers:
"We are no longer exchanging tickets for seats. The ticket is the value now."
This actually happened.
The Stadium is the Bank.
The Seat is Gold.
The Ticket is the US Dollar.
For years, $35 was a guaranteed receipt for 1 ounce of Gold.
The paper was just a claim check.
But the US government printed more Dollars than they had Gold.
When other countries (like France) got suspicious and asked for their Gold back?
President Nixon locked the turnstiles.
In 1971, he "closed the Gold window."
He told the world: The Dollar is no longer a claim on Gold. It is the money.
Today, there are trillions of "tickets" floating around. But the amount of Gold hasn't changed.
That is why the price of everything keeps going up. It’s not that the seats are getting more expensive.
It’s that your ticket is worth less.
You are saving in paper tickets.
While the rich are buying the stadium.
Activist: "You're killing innocent animals."
Farmer: "I am."
Activist: "That's cruel."
Farmer: "Is it? They live outside, eat fresh grass, never know a predator, receive veterinary care, and die instantly without seeing it coming."
Activist: "But you kill them."
Farmer: "Once. After 18 months of comfortable life."
Activist: "They deserve to live."
Farmer: "They do live. Better than their wild ancestors who died of starvation, disease, or being eaten alive by wolves."
Activist: "At least that's natural."
Farmer: "Natural death is being disemboweled while conscious. My cattle get a bolt gun they never see. Which would you choose?"
Activist: "That's not the point."
Farmer: "That's entirely the point. You're romanticizing brutal deaths while condemning quick ones."
Activist: "We need to reduce meat consumption by 90%."
Farmer: "Then what do we eat?"
Activist: "More plants."
Farmer: "Grown where?"
Activist: "On the land you're using for cattle."
Farmer: "This is a 40-degree slope covered in rocks."
Activist: "Use technology."
Farmer: "To make tractors climb mountains?"
Activist: "Terracing."
Farmer: "At what cost? Economic and environmental?"
Activist: "It's worth it to save the planet."
Farmer: "From the grass growing here naturally that cattle eat?"
Activist: "From the emissions."
Farmer: "That were always part of this ecosystem."
Inoltre, in questo contesto, chi giudica è collega in tutto e per tutto di chi accusa, e il cittadino sottoposto a processo non può godere di un dibattimento neutrale perché deve difendersi dalle accuse di chi è collega di chi lo giudica. Fine della questione.