Posts from Forum

Let's get down to business and do a couple of things for the community.

First, let's take on the 121 constraint track, and second, let's complete the Heroes glossary.

Personally, I am against such changes. I had enough of 1990 and 2004, after which the country regressed to the level of Zanzibar. And what you are talking about is not freedom, but anarchy, although it may be freedom for you...

You just haven't encountered it yet, but I personally experienced all the "fun" of such revolutions when my company was audited 5 times in a year. The tax authorities openly said, "Sorry, buddy, but understand, the budget is empty, we are being squeezed, we can't collect taxes, so we'll make up for it with fines."

Or another example. My wife lost my driver's license, and I need to retake the test. I go to the traffic police, and there is complete chaos, and the bribe is now 10 times higher because everyone is nervous. And without a license, I'm already losing a lot of money every day. Study? That's nonsense. It's almost impossible to pass the test on your own, everyone wants a bribe. I had to pay.

And a third example. Before the revolution, fines were issued for speeding, ranging from 1 to 10 minimum wages, starting with 1, then 2, then 3-5. After the revolution, they immediately issue the maximum fine on the first offense. And there are many such examples.

So, the question is, why do I need all these revolutions?

Don't get so worked up. These are all normal occurrences for a transitional period. After any changes, it's not like paradise arrives the next day; there's always a period of chaos. The problem is that our transitional period has dragged on, but that doesn't mean that all the changes are for the worse... Perhaps someone is simply interested in that ;)

Yes, we are probably adults and we fully understand that. But in this case, psychology interferes with this stereotype. In my opinion, a member of the "Hive" will never come to an agreement with a "Tower", because they know each other's nature, just like a thief will not come to an agreement with another thief for the same reason. They can talk on the phone every day, but that doesn't mean they will agree on something. Everyone has their own plans and ambitions. They can quite easily use each other to achieve their goals, but it is unlikely that they will be able to come to an agreement and create a grand scheme. For this, they need to form a team, and for this, there must be trust between them. But what kind of trust can there be in this pair? It is enough for one of them to trust the other, and the game will be over.

And if they do come to an agreement, how could such a "megamind" allow the Maidan to happen? Or is this also part of a grand plan? Then what awaits us next? A forceful solution? You yourself deny such a possibility. What other options are there?

I'm not particularly upset, I'm just wondering why revolutions happen so often? 5 years of chaos and then 3 years to return to the previous level - this is at least a step back... especially since the elections are in a year, so show your will there...

Again, a simple example, under Yulia, everyone was outraged at customs. There was no way to pay bribes, they were constantly watching, and as a result, even the expiration dates of products with a short shelf life were reduced "legally." And trucks stood for weeks...

In the next 20-30 years, no one will change the issue of bribery. As they paid bribes under Yanukovych, so we will pay bribes under any government, the question is only in the prices. But bribery through laws can be brought to the point of absurdity, simply by increasing the terms for making decisions. That is, in theory, everything is beautiful, everything is democratic, but the decision-making period is increased from 3 months to a year.

And even if something happens, Russia won't have time to prepare its rockets; within 48 hours, all strategic objects across the country will be gone. The war was lost to the United States by default 30 years ago, and I'm not even mentioning what would happen if China joins in.

In the next 20-30 years, no one will change the issue of bribery. As they took bribes under Yanukovych, so will they take them under any government; the only question is the price.

With this paradigm, we are definitely doomed. And not for 20-30 years, but forever. I am amazed by people with such judgments, as if we are talking about some random guys passing by the windows or flashing on the screen. But start with yourself, start changing yourself, your children, influence those around you, and don't blame someone else. Our society is you and me, and only you and I are to blame for the fact that things are the way they are, only you and I have done absolutely nothing to change anything, and the longer we whine about fate, the less likely it is that anything will change.
Everyone pays bribes, and I pay them too, oh dear, the government is to blame. But who is this government? These are people just like you, who yesterday were ordinary citizens, tearing their throats out about the government, but if they come to power, they fall silent and line their pockets. And how can they refuse if they are paid? We ourselves are fools, and then we get indignant about how badly everything is arranged. It's in our blood; it will take a long time to fight it, but if we don't even start, then everything is lost.

The 15 billion that Putin gave to Yanukovych was stolen from our pensioners.

Do you know the difference between a gift and a loan?

Do you know the difference between Putin and an honest person?))

most people are rather simple-minded and blissful, preferring simple, sweet lies (like those about the EU, human rights, democracy, and so on).

Well, for a politician, Putin is quite honest.

The main thing is that this money is not a gift, but a loan. Do you know the difference between a gift and a loan?

Formally, this is a loan that is offered to be repaid. But in this situation, the parties can agree - to write off the loan in exchange for some concessions.

Okay, it's a deal. What Yanukovych gained is clear, but what's in it for Putin? (and please, no more talk about saving a younger brother, it's not even funny anymore).
Formally, yes, it's a loan. But in reality, Yanukovych didn't care about all your formalities. He got what he wanted, and he's the least concerned about who, how, and when will pay for it. So, with this "help," Putin has likely worsened relations with Ukraine rather than brought closer the bright moment of uniting brotherly nations. What's the logic?

Added 8 minutes later
Oh, yes, he bought time to put his insidious plan into action, what was I thinking...