Why politicians don't ever do anything for the people, a model

In an entirely unrelated dispute I won't rehash here, I used to great rhetorical effect a piece by Constantin Tanase, who is easily one of my favourite Romaniansⁱ mostly on account of that "el tic, eu tac"ⁱⁱ scene. Let's transcribe and translateⁱⁱⁱ :

Uite draga astia pleaca si se duc la mine-acasa. Au sa vada Ateneul, Piata Mare... ei! Ce le pasa! Numai eu ramin aice ca prin sferele ceresti sa ma chinuiasca dorul dupa tine, Bucuresti!

Bine e la Bucuresti, Bucuresti, Bucuresti, n-ai unde sa locuiesti
Nu sunt lemne, nu sunt case, dar il am pe Chir Tanasa,
Care-ti cinta un cuplet.

[...]

It goes on, but the rest doesn't interest us here. Perhaps another time. To put this fragment to English,

Check it out, these guys are leaving to go where I'm from. They're going to see the Athene, the Big Market, eh! What do they care! While I'm left behind to be tortured in the Celestial Spheres by nostalgia for you, Bucharest!

It's good in Bucharest, Bucharest, Bucharest, there's no place to live ; no wood, no housing, but at least I have Sir Tanase singing a couplet.

The complaint, before the Nazis were invented, was that teh people don't have where to live, in the capitol of Romania. I'll spoil it for you : the complaint today, after the Natos started fraying at the margins, is that teh people don't have where to live, in the capitol of Romania.

Meanwhile, and this is the incredible part, Nicolae Ceausescu, estwhile dictator cum summum malum of Romania, supervised and in fairness impelled a major programme of construction, which tripled -- yeah, you read that right, tripled -- the living space available in Bucharest. And he was utterly, lividly hated for it, too.

In between 1930^iv and 2011 the stable^v population increased 2.65 times^vi whereas the household count increased 4.38 times^vii (the fact that the building count increased just 1.57 times^viii is more a sign of the improving construction technology during this century -- they didn't build that many skyscrapers back in the early 1900s, at least not in Bucharest).

Most of that crazy increase, outpacing significantly the population growth, was due to odiosului regim. Yet why don't politicians ever do anything for the people ?

Building a half million homes is not something ; certainly not for ther people (and notably, the factually correct observation that now there's bakeries in every village didn't protect teh tyrant at his "trial" much, either). Why not ?

Let's consider a model. There's a country with a population of 10`000, of which 100 live in "the capital". These 100 are not particularily happy to live there, like all people ever. The 1`000 that know them, however, suffer from a serious case of envy for la vie du chateau enjoyed by their well placed friends, and do all they can to both move there themselves, or else at the very least sell all their daughters into it plus prepare their sons to take their place in it as far as possible. Because nobody can say no to free cunt, especially if youthful and from the provinces, and because even peasants' sons can be now and again useful, the stable population of the capital may well be 100, but the real population soon becomes 190 : an extra 55 or so cuntbearers + a further 35 or so barbers.^ix

Should the lord of the town ineptly decide to acquiesce to the begging and pleading filtering to his ear from the queefs^x of the aspirational class and build a further 50 households, they will be immediately occupied by twenty or so of the 55 cunts that are most merituous, married to the sons of the 100 that were least competent ; plus FIFTY or so further cunts picked from among the paysannes to assuage the inferiority complexes of the adult among the 100 who didn't get to... you know, to aupair any of the original 55. Living two or three to the house, but you know, at least they're there.

That's 45 out of 50, the remaining five might be allocated to particularly competent kids among the 35, maybe. Maybe. And this is patriarchy at work for you, mind. Patriarchy. That "disadvantages" women, somehow, yet nevertheless allocates the principal capital good available to the common man^xi according to their aspirations.

So now the population is 150, and they know 1`500 people from the countyside, and what has happened ? Why, the real population of the capital is about 300, of which 95 or so from the new crop of young cunts in the countryside, the younger sisters of the 55 from before ; and a miserable 55 for the same sort of boys as before. See how gender roles are ambiguous ? The cunts used to be 55, now the cocklets are 55, it all evens out!

The building of 50 more houses, a 50% increase in real estate, which cost half (probably more) of whatever the fuck the town cost in the first place, resulted in an increase in the number of cunts aspiring to have a house there and frustrated in this legitimate aspiration of theirs. Because men hunt and women nest, and fuck you.

So the lord builds another 100, and the clamor ever increases : there's nowhere to live! And the more places to live are built, the fewer places to live there are! You understand me ? The provision of a social good of this class increases its demand. Always. Forever. If they could, all the cunts in this world would live at Horseface Whatshername's address. Because that's how they're built, for reasons.

The end.

PS. The politicians don't ever do anything for you because you never beat your wife, or her daughters.

1. Being about as Romanian as Caragiale, another one of my favourite Romanians, has little bearing. [↩]
2. Dude was assassinated by the Soviets, just as soon as they "liberated" Romania. He had spent the entire war mocking the Nazis, you know, that entirely intolerable regime of quelli cattivi cattivi che urlano. Then the country was liberated by the "friendly" and "democratic" soviets, and he dared go up on the stage with

   Rau era cu der, die, das, da-i mai rau cu давай часы.
   De la Nistru pin' la Don, davai ceas, davai palton,
   Davai ceas, davai mosie, haraso tovarasie.

   and was assassinated forthwith.

   In fairness, they did warn him to stop doing it, so he dragged a huge grandfather clock on the stage and as the thing tick tocked he sang "it ticks, I tock, it ticks, I tock" which is a double entendre in Romanian, he might as well have said "it ticks, I don't speak, it ticks, I don't speak". Which had the imaginary "mass movement" in favour of the communist party in tears of laughter, and the entirely irrelevant Russkis quite livid.

   You know they airbrushed the dozen watches off the Russian's hand in that iconic "taking the Reichstag" picture, yes ? The "democrats" I mean, not the Russkis, the Americans. Yes.

   Do you know what makes it all ok ? The circumstance that when the Russian puppet regime in Romania decided to make a film about the man, they pretended like he was assassinated by the Nazis. The very same Nazis who didn't assassinate him. But they weren't "democratic" see. We know it's true because Churchill said so. [↩]

3. For reasons. [↩]
4. There was another census in 1912, which would have perhaps been more useful, but the fucking imbecile romanians DO NOT PUBLISH IT. Because fuck them, and their whorish mothers and the drunks they fucked to produce such idiots. Muie, ba!. [↩]
5. Actual population, including everyone's slaves etc, readily doubles the figure. [↩]
6. From 631`288 to 1`677`985. In 1912 it was probably 341`321. [↩]
7. From 158`043 to 692`019. It was probably 80`570 in 1912. [↩]
8. From 72`319 to 113`863. In 1912 it was probably 32`041. [↩]
9. Largo al factotum della citta, della cita, deeelllllaaaa.... citta! [↩]
10. Yes, it's mostly cunt-powered, what do you want from me, it's not speech as much as queefs. [↩]
11. To this day. Whose equity isn't mostly their home ? [↩]