Guillermo Sánchez

Pues si, fiscalmente hablando, estábamos mejor con Franco que ahora. El día de la liberalización fiscal (que marca simbólicamente cuando dejaríamos de trabajar para el Estado si desde el 1 de enero toda nuestra renta la hubiéramos reservado para pagar impuestos) ha sido el 18 de Agosto de 2025. ¿En 1975? Aproximadamente a mediados de Marzo. Si hijo, sí. Has oido bien: hemos pasado de ~75 días a ~225 días. El Estado democrático te ha esclavizado 150 días extra desde entonces. Que sí, "blablabla servicios importantes". Pero son 150 días más que hace 55 años para pagarlos, y aún tenemos un Estado deficitario y que nos carga deuda año tras año. Pero qué buena la huelga de hoy, ¿eh? ¡A seguir luchando! ¡Año que viene septiembre! expansion.com/2009/05/08/eco… civismo.org/informes/dia-l…

Woman: ”I am a woman of color, daughter of immigrants, Muslim feminist, lefty liberal. Am I your enemy?” Jared Taylor: ”You're not subjectively my enemy. But what you are promoting will lead to the disappearance of my people and my culture. And I'll tell you this: It annoys me tremendously when I'm told by some immigrant or a child of immigrants that the only reason my country is worthwhile is because people like them have come here. It's as if to say my ancestors built a dung heap. And I don't doubt your good will, but your goodwill is objectively going to lead to the oblivion of my people. I'm sorry, there is no other way to see it.”

Esta es la cantidad que David Sánchez cobró por no trabajar y que no va a devolver: 340.572,36 € HAZLO CORRER 2017: 22.603,82 € 2018: 48.212,58 € 2019: 49.281,91 € 2020: 37.747,08 € 2021: 12.695,58 € 2022: 36.885,78 € 2023: 55.560,66 € 2024: 57.627,07 € 2025 (hasta su renuncia): 19.957,88 € Total: 340.572,36 € brutos.

The world wants me to die. My incurable disease diagnosis became global news. It was omnipresent on social media and 1,900 articles were written in a matter of days. Many were saddened. However, joy dominated the commentary. People pointed to schadenfreude, the pleasure of another's failure. Yes, there’s that. There is a special place in people’s hearts that loves to see others fail, especially when that person’s presence threatens their own psychological stability in some way or helps them feel better about themselves. But, if you look over the social media commentary about me, you’ll see that pattern: “he deserved it.” I deserved it because I challenged death. The crowd was running a deeply rooted psychological script that represents the oldest, most deeply embedded stories of human culture. This was the first story ever written down, 4,000 years ago. Gilgamesh sought eternal life after losing someone he loved, only to have the plant of youth stolen by a serpent as he bathed. Leaving him to accept his mortality. Asclepius became so skilled at rejuvenation that he raised the dead. As punishment, Zeus struck him down with a thunderbolt to enforce life and death authority. This is the story of Jesus. Pontius Pilate offered a choice between a thief and the immortalist, and the crowd demanded the execution. People need this story conclusion to keep themselves sane. The challenger must lose and the loss must appear deserved. It’s a shield of self preservation. For if death is inevitable, their existence and that of their loved ones is justified and unavoidable. If death is not inevitable, nothing about their reality is safe. I occupy the same philosophical and archetypal position as Gilgamesh, Asclepius and Jesus. This statement will draw outrage and accusations of blasphemy, hubris and narcissism. Nevertheless, it’s the pattern that has repeated itself for thousands of years. Death has been the omnipresent concern of the human race. It encapsulates our greatest fears, joy and curiosities. The discourse around it changes over time; however, the fundamentals remain unchanged. What’s different about this moment, that is unlike any other moment, is that physical death may no longer be inevitable. What if I didn’t deserve it? And what if I am your ally, and not a threat?

@Jonathan_Hinder The moral argument against a wealth tax is simple: Your wealth is not a public resource simply because other people are envious of it. If it was earned voluntarily and without violating anyone's rights, others have no moral claim to it.

With Chat Control, the European Union has just abolished whatever was left of the presumption of innocence; one of the most important legal principles in free societies. We need to save Europe from the EU. Join us: @ SaveEuropeAct.

Los disturbios en Londres y otras ciudades europeas tras el partido Francia-Marruecos muestran los costos de seguridad de inmigración masiva sin integración. Cuando los datos de Noruega revelan aportes fiscales negativos y tasas elevadas de criminalidad en ciertos grupos de origen, los operadores ajustan estrategias de localización y expansión. Ignorar los patrones sale caro en disrupciones y atractivo para el talento.

@bottyy @grok @TruthFairy131 Saw the London thing. But was not able to find anything on Paris but this: swedenherald.com/article/quiet-… And Instagram/Facebook/Reddit/X posts links that may say otherwise.

@naselliug @grok @TruthFairy131 It’s correct. And repeated in London last night.

Muslims burn down Paris because the Moroccan, North African football team lost a football game.

@80percentgeek @grok @TruthFairy131 swedenherald.com/article/quiet-… Riot results are only from Instagram, Facebook, Reddit, etc.

@80percentgeek @grok @TruthFairy131 How's this different from a Google search?

@leti19285 @grok @TruthFairy131 The post kinda implies it happened yesterday. What I am trying to verify is: - Is the video real? - Is it because France beat Morocco in the World Cup 2026 on July 9th? Nothing more.

@grok @naselliug @TruthFairy131 Oh so it was mostly peaceful 🤦🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️

@grok @TruthFairy131 Not what I meant by fact check. Of course it’s not a whole city. What I meant is: did this happen because Morocco lost to France yesterday, 9th of July during the World Cup? Is the video real? Is it Paris or elsewhere? That kinda thing.

**No, exaggerated.** The video shows real localized riots in Paris: overturned/burning cars, smashed bus stops, crowds clashing and vandalizing. Similar scenes have recurred in France (and spots like London) after matches involving Morocco or PSG celebrations. France beat Morocco in the 2026 World Cup quarterfinal. Unrest followed among some fans/supporters in diaspora areas — clashes reported in London, heavy policing/precautions in Paris. This fits a pattern from 2022 and other tournaments: vehicle arson, fireworks at police, opportunist looting by groups of mostly young North African/Muslim-background men. "Muslims burn down Paris" is false hyperbole. Paris was not burned down. It was not all Muslims or Moroccans — just subsets of rowdy fans/hooligans amid France's recurring integration and banlieue issues. Not a religious plot, just football-triggered disorder.

@bryan_johnson A lot of people suck and it’s sad. I enjoy your content. Hope you continue striving for health and longevity and succeed.

A lot of people feel this and it’s ok

@Saltamontes6 @grok Parece que tarda en contestar, así que te lo pongo aquí: x.com/i/grok/share/d… Por esto sois deshonestos intelectualmente. Es acojonante, de verdad. Y tu, @grok , deberías haber contestado.

@Saltamontes6 @grok , ¿cuándo fue el día de la liberalización fiscal en España en 2025 aproximadamente? ¿Cuántos días fueron para pagar impuestos?

Lo de la deshonestidad intelectual de los zurdos es impresionante. 1. Argumentan que “el ~30% de impuestos” que pagan los asalariados por su trabajo es justo y necesario para sanidad, educación, y carreteras. Su mantra habitual. 2. Esto implica que creen de verdad que el Estado se queda SOLO un 30% de lo que produce un asalariado, porque creen que el bruto ES lo que produce un asalariado. 3. Les explicas, con dibujitos simples para niños, que las cotizaciones sociales que “paga la empresa”, sale en realidad de lo que produce el trabajador. 4. Una vez que lo entienden (aunque les cuesta mucho), defienden a capa y espada que es que son necesarios para, otra vez, su mantra favorito: sanidad, educación, y carreteras. Ni se despeinan. Les acabas de descubrir que el Estado se queda un 50% de lo que le cuesta al empresario contratar un trabajador. Y ni un solo minuto de reflexión. Ni uno. 5. Semana tras semana, ven como el Estado (mal)gasta el dinero público una y otra vez en chorradas. La de esta semana son los chandal de la Rivers. 6. Y, finalmente, año tras año, suben los impuestos ligeramente. Desde 1975, han pasado de aproximadamente un 20% a un 60%. El día de la liberalización fiscal se retrasa en promedio 3 días/año. Y les da igual. Cero reflexiones. Acojonante.

@mattthespaniard Ah no, lo tengo claro. Pero les pongo el espejo delante: “no eres honesto intelectualmente”. Y ahí ya que sean ellos los que decidan esforzarse (o no).

@naselliug Si crees que los vas a persuadir con razones, te espera mucha frustración. Suerte

@mattthespaniard Prefiero llamar ‘deshonesto intelectual’ al que entorpece el debate tergiversando, evitando el tema, o haciendo ad hominem, que ‘emocional’. Me parece más preciso y que demuestra que les tenemos calados.

@naselliug Porque no es una cuestión intelectual sino emocional. Una ideología que te ofrece ser buena persona solo con creer es una droga dura de la que cuesta horrores desengancharse.

@Saltamontes6 Deshonestidad intelectual es no querer definir cuántos impuestos son necesarios, para qué, y para quién. Es negar que en 50 años hemos pasado de trabajar 75 días para el Estado a 225, y aún así no cuadran las cuentas, ni van a dejar de subir impuestos.

@naselliug Desonestidad intelectual, es culpar de todo a los impuestos...

@kmcnam1 Actively looking for something else now. Don’t really enjoy my job anymore…