Faustino Monteiro

I´m not the special one, but i´m special too.

[GBC @GBC_Press]

🚨 BREAKING:

Pablo Reports: "Ted Cruz called you a parasite and criticized your work as a waitress."

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: "It's no secret that Ted Cruz looks down on working-class people. It's no secret how he views waitresses and cooks—he thinks we're beneath him. He thinks that just because he has a Harvard degree and has never cleaned a table, he's better than anyone who actually had to work to make a living.

I think it's hilarious that he's been on a government salary for 23 years, yet has the nerve to criticize someone from a family that had to work its way up and earn its place here."

[non aesthetic things @PicturesFoIder]

Trump led a crowd at the GOP midterm convention in a pledge to vote, then told them, "You know what happens if you don't vote? You go to hell."

Seems like a pretty harsh way to convince people to vote for you

[Faustino Monteiro @faustmonte]

Enredo para um filme

[Peter Girnus 🦅 @gothburz]

I REGRET TO INFORM MY FAMILY THAT $5,000 IS NOW BENEATH ME.

I owe my wife an apology.

When the Trump Dividend was announced, I told her we were getting five thousand dollars.

That was irresponsible.

I had not yet completed my research.

There was also the earlier tariff dividend of at least two thousand dollars.

At least.

I circled those words so hard I cracked my phone protector.

My wife said the two announcements did not necessarily mean we were getting separate payments.

I asked why she was negotiating against this family.

Five plus two is seven. That is basic math. The phrase “at least” takes us into advanced wealth.

She asked how much I thought we were getting.

I told her I didn’t want to put artificial limits on the president.

Then I remembered the five-thousand-dollar DOGE dividend idea.

Twelve thousand.

Three announcements. One household visionary.

My wife said I couldn’t just add every number a politician mentioned.

I asked her to stop interrupting compound interest.

By lunch, I had created a spreadsheet.

The first column was called “Confirmed in My Heart.”

The second was “Pending Because of Democrats.”

There was no third column. You don’t build an economy by giving doubt somewhere to sit.

I showed it to my accountant.

He asked where the money was.

I pointed to cell B4.

He said that was a number I had typed.

I said all numbers are typed by someone, and frankly, I was disappointed to hear an accountant attack the foundations of his profession.

Then I began studying tariffs.

My understanding was that imported goods could generate tariff revenue, which the president had discussed using for dividends.

This is where most people stop thinking.

I kept going.

If imports generate revenue, and revenue could fund my check, then surely buying more imported things would help the process along.

My wife said that did not mean my purchases would come back to me dollar for dollar.

Of course not.

There would be the success on top.

I ordered a television.

Then a second television to stimulate the first television’s return.

By Thursday, I was standing in our kitchen explaining why an imported espresso machine was part of my retirement plan.

“We don’t drink espresso,” she said.

“We don’t have to work forever either, if you’ll let me finish.”

She asked how much I had spent.

I told her that was the wrong side of the ledger.

Then she asked why there were six tracking numbers.

“Diversification.”

One package was delayed in customs.

I told the family our assets were undergoing federal processing.

My brother-in-law said I had discovered a way to pay taxes and shipping simultaneously.

I removed him from the investment group.

He was the only other member, so the remaining shareholders approved unanimously.

Now, I know what people are thinking.

What about the $1,776 military payment?

I did not add that to my total.

I never served.

I have standards.

However, I did read that those real payments were funded through money Congress approved for military housing supplements.

That gave me an idea.

I took money from our joint account, paid part of the mortgage, and announced that I had personally delivered a historic housing dividend to my wife.

She said, “You moved our money.”

I said, “And you loved it.”

She said, “I haven’t said that.”

I told her the announcement was already drafted.

Things deteriorated when I contacted our mortgage company.

I explained that this month’s payment would come from Economic Development, Investment, and Pure SUCCESS.

They asked whether that was my employer.

“In a sense.”

They asked for proof of income.

I sent the screenshot.

They asked for a bank statement.

I sent the screenshot again, this time with the amount underlined.

Apparently, their system cannot process certainty.

Fine.

I wrote them a formal letter promising payment because they deserved it.

To establish credibility, I pointed out that I had successfully paid a different bill last year.

Nobody thought I could do it.

My wife says nobody was consulted.

That is precisely how overwhelming the victory was.

The mortgage company remained unmoved.

At this point, I became concerned that I might be dealing with Dumocrats.

Not because of their political beliefs.

Because they kept asking when the money would actually arrive.

I tried to explain that “will happen” was stronger than a date.

Dates get missed.

“Will happen” has never technically expired.

But the real breakthrough came that evening.

I was looking at the words at least $2,000 when I realized I had been approaching this like a poor person.

Why was I waiting to be told the upper amount?

Where was my initiative?

I entered forty thousand dollars in the spreadsheet.

My wife asked where that came from.

“Same place the twelve thousand came from.”

For the first time all week, she had no immediate rebuttal.

Then she asked me to close the laptop.

I refused on fiduciary grounds.

Unfortunately, my new wealth created a complication: the earlier tariff proposal excluded high-income people.

I stared at the screen.

Had I become too successful to qualify for the money that was making me successful?

I reduced my projected payout to $39,000.

Then I transferred ten thousand imaginary dollars to my wife.

She told me to transfer the actual laundry to the dryer.

I explained that we were discussing estate planning.

She explained that I was holding a sock.

That was yesterday.

Today, the espresso machine arrived.

We cannot afford to keep it, but returning it feels economically disloyal.

For now, it sits unopened beside the kitchen table while I refresh my bank account.

My wife has asked me to apologize to everyone I called financially illiterate.

I will.

But first, I need her to understand something.

If these payments don’t arrive, I haven’t lost forty thousand dollars.

I have lost the much larger amount I would have turned it into.

I’m calculating that now.

Please give our family space during this period of unprecedented growth.

[Music transcends @ngoclinh62w1]

You know Sultans of Swing… but have you heard the part that comes after it’s “over”? In the 1996 A Night in London performance, Mark Knopfler turns the ending into something extraordinary. 🎸🔥

[Hugo Reynoso @hreynosod]

Conoces a alguien así...?

[Hernan Grecco @GreccoHernan]

Buen momento para recordar este comic

[Belfort @boersenbelfort]

Ist euch mal aufgefallen, dass

Schöne Menschen immer Komplimente machen

Glückliche Menschen sich für andere freuen

Menschen die mehrere Sprachen sprechen sich nicht über deinen Akzent lustig machen

Gebildete Menschen ihr Wissen teilen

Und selbstbewusste Menschen dich inspirieren wollen

Aber Menschen die innerlich leer sind und keine Persönlichkeit haben, versuchen immer andere zu verletzen, kleinzumachen, schlechtzureden oder zu demütigen.

[Ｍaurício Castro @fromgaliza]

PP e Boks som agentes às ordens de Israel e Washington. O PSOE, incapaz de enfrentá-los, porque sabe que o Estado espanhol nom é soberano. Por isso admite que umha sionista faga declaraçons em Madrid reivindicando umha agressom coordenada com Marrocos pra tombar o seu governo.

[Faustino Monteiro @faustmonte]

Nossa... Quero.

[Vandinha @reinomary]

😂

[Xocolate🇵🇹🇵🇹🇵🇹 @Xocolatetuga]

🤣🤣🤣

[Xocolate🇵🇹🇵🇹🇵🇹 @Xocolatetuga]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Kongar @ultrarrow]

🇷🇺 Vladimir Putin:

ABD, Rusya ve Avrupa’yı bu çatışmanın içine kasten sürükledi. Bu anlamda amaçlarına ulaştılar: Rusya ile Avrupa’nın arasına bir takoz soktular. Şimdi ise mali yükü Avrupalıların üzerine yıkıyorlar.

Bugünün omurgasız ve iradesiz Avrupalı siyasetçi nesli; medya, ekonomi ve siyaset alanlarında ABD’ye olan ezici bağımlılıkları nedeniyle Washington’a karşı koyamıyor.

Biliyorsunuz, herhangi bir büyük medya kuruluşuna yakından baktığınızda, nihai yararlanıcının çoğu zaman bir Amerikan fonu olduğunu görüyorsunuz. Okyanusun ötesindeki ABD istihbarat teşkilatları ise destekçilerini daha genç yaşlarda, henüz öğrencilik yıllarındayken belirleyip bünyelerine katıyor; onları yetiştiriyor ve zamanla Avrupa ülkelerinin siyasi zirvelerine taşıyor.

[Polityczny User Experience 🇵🇱 @PolitycznyUX]

AfD wygrała wybory w Saksonii-Anhalt i teraz może dostać najgorszą rzecz, jaka może przydarzyć się partii skrajnie populistycznej - odpowiedzialność.

Z polskiej perspektywy to może być niezwykle ciekawy eksperyment. Bo mechanizm AfD jest nam dobrze znany: wszystko jest proste, winni są jasno wskazani, wystarczy odsunąć “system”, ograniczyć migrację, rozprawić się z elitami i państwo zacznie działać. Tyle że po wyborach kończy się TikTok, a zaczyna Excel.

Saksonia-Anhalt jest idealnym miejscem do takiego testu. Land się starzeje, traci mieszkańców i ludzi w wieku produkcyjnym, ma problemy z dostępnością lekarzy, opieką, szkołami, transportem oraz utrzymaniem usług publicznych poza większymi miastami. Do tego dochodzi słaba dynamika gospodarcza, zagrożony przemysł i rosnące zadłużenie samorządów. To problemy strukturalne, których nie da się rozwiązać wskazując wroga.

I tu zaczyna się pierwszy paradoks AfD. Jedną z odpowiedzi na brak ludzi jest imigracja zarobkowa. Saksonia-Anhalt już dziś coraz mocniej korzysta z pracowników zagranicznych. Jeżeli AfD rzeczywiście zacznie realizować politykę odstraszania migrantów, może pogłębić dokładnie ten problem, który mieszkańcy odczuwają w przychodni, domu opieki, zakładzie pracy czy lokalnej firmie. Hasło “mniej obcych” zderzy się z pytaniem: kto właściwie ma tu pracować?

Drugi paradoks jest finansowy. AfD obiecuje jednocześnie niższe obciążenia, rozbudowane świadczenia, wsparcie rodzin, inwestycje i poprawę usług publicznych. IWH wyliczał jeszcze przed wyborami, że sam program AfD pozostawia co najmniej 2,2 mld euro rocznej luki. To klasyczny populistyczny produkt polityczny: każdy dostanie więcej, nikt nie zapłaci więcej, a pieniądze pojawią się po usunięciu “marnotrawstwa”. W Polsce tę konstrukcję znamy bardzo dobrze.

Najciekawsze będzie jednak to, czego AfD nie będzie mogła zrobić. Rząd landu nie ustala niemieckiej polityki zagranicznej, nie może samodzielnie wypisać Niemiec z UE, zmienić federalnej polityki energetycznej ani zrealizować dużej części antyimigracyjnej rewolucji. Gdy więc problemy pozostaną, AfD stanie przed wyborem: przyznać, że rzeczywistość jest bardziej skomplikowana niż kampania, albo znaleźć kolejnego winnego - Berlin, Brukselę, sądy, media i “deep state”. W Polsce znamy również ten etap.

Dlatego nie zakładałbym, że rządzenie automatycznie zabije AfD. Populizm potrafi przeżyć własną nieskuteczność, jeżeli skutecznie przekona wyborców, że niepowodzenie jest dowodem działania spisku. PiS po ośmiu latach władzy nadal potrafi występować jako ofiara elit, Unii Europejskiej, sądów i mediów. Konfederacja również buduje atrakcyjność na prostych odpowiedziach na problemy, których rozwiązanie po wejściu do realnej władzy wymagałoby kompromisów, podatków, administracji i decyzji niepopularnych.

Ale Saksonia-Anhalt może pokazać coś ważnego dla Polski. Populizm najlepiej testuje się nie pytaniem, czy lider mówi efektownie, ale czy po przejęciu odpowiedzialności poprawia codzienne doświadczenie obywatela. Czy łatwiej znaleźć lekarza? Czy szkoła ma nauczycieli? Czy firma znajduje pracowników? Czy gmina ma pieniądze? Czy inwestorzy przychodzą, czy uciekają? Czy młodzi zostają? W tym miejscu kończy się wojna kulturowa, a zaczyna klasyczna polityka.

Największym zagrożeniem jest jednak to, że AfD może oblać egzamin z gospodarki i usług publicznych, a jednocześnie zdać egzamin z przejmowania państwa. Rząd landu ma realny wpływ na edukację, kulturę, administrację, policję, finansowanie organizacji i lokalne instytucje. Populista może więc nie naprawić przychodni, ale za to szybko przebudować otoczenie instytucjonalne tak, żeby kolejny wybór obywatela odbywał się już w gorszych warunkach demokratycznych. To również znamy i powinniśmy traktować bardzo poważnie.

Wniosek: eksperyment w Saksonii-Anhalt może osłabić AfD tylko wtedy, gdy jej rządzenie będzie mierzone skutkami, a nie kolejnymi narracjami. Dla Polski to test szerszej tezy: czy wyborca populisty zmieni zdanie, kiedy zobaczy różnicę między łatwą obietnicą a trudnym państwem na zewnętrznym przykładzie. Nie ma żadnej gwarancji. Populizm nie ginie od zderzenia z rzeczywistością, jeżeli potrafi tę rzeczywistość skutecznie przepisać na kolejną opowieść o wrogach.

Ocena Doświadczeń Obywatela: 4/10 🟡

Rekomendacja: polskie partie demokratyczne powinny bardzo uważnie obserwować Saksonię-Anhalt i przestać odpowiadać populistom wyłącznie oburzeniem. Każdą prostą obietnicę trzeba sprowadzać do czterech pytań: ile to kosztuje, kto ma kompetencję, kto to wykona i jaki będzie mierzalny efekt dla obywatela. AfD może stać się dla Polski żywym laboratorium pokazującym, co dzieje się z populistycznym produktem politycznym po kliknięciu przycisku “wdrożenie”.

— #PolitycznyUX

[Faustino Monteiro @faustmonte]

Fafe

[Civixplorer @Civixplorer]

Name a city that everyone should visit at least once in their lifetime.

I’ll start: Edinburgh

[Jürgen Nauditt 🇩🇪🇺🇦 @jurgen_nauditt]

Trump described Canada as a far greater enemy of the USA than Putin’s Russia.

It is time to say this openly:

– The USA is currently ruled by a dictator who was most likely recruited back in the days of the USSR.
– As it turns out, the American system of checks and balances does not actually exist in reality.
– The trust between Europe and the USA—which had existed since at least 1945—has been buried; if not forever, then certainly for a very long time.

https://t.co/KgFtDwAzqw

[Daniel Zea @daniel153177]

AHÍ ESTAN ELLOS 🔯...
Y TU, CREYENDOLES Y DEFENDIENDOLOS??

[Faustino Monteiro @faustmonte]

Não sei não...

[Frapor @Frapor90]

Так вот оно что , Семион Семионыч 🤔.

[Republicans against Trump @RpsAgainstTrump]

Trump: “We could do tremendous good for ourselves by just not trading with countries.

We lose $200 billion dollars a year with the European Union. If I didn't trade with them, we would lose nothing.”

Dumbest. President. Ever.