Fantasy World
Fantasy World

Fantasy World

the children
 the children

the children

moomins
 moomins

moomins

deads
deads

deads

the shire
the shire

the shire

panned
panned

panned

let me
let me

let me

gag
gag

gag

peter
peter

peter

lilliput
lilliput

lilliput

🔥 | Latest

Michael Jackson, Michael, and Jackson: Rockwall on the playground at Michael Jacksons Neverland Ranch, (1985)
Michael Jackson, Michael, and Jackson: Rockwall on the playground at Michael Jacksons Neverland Ranch, (1985)

Rockwall on the playground at Michael Jacksons Neverland Ranch, (1985)

Anaconda, Crime, and Food: did you know? In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000 ? did-you-kno In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. Source redbloodedamerica This is what equality" looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland. They punish you proportionately to how successful you are. Sounds really "fair." alternian-neverland Except... it is fair? Because it's proportionate. I don't get what's difficult about that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn't the same as a millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal? By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their yearly income that a poorer person would. That's what makes it fair. They woulc be impacted the same way but you are looking at the amount rather than the equation. Also, it's important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does. prochoice-or-gtfo Oh no... rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them... how unfair Did you know about the liberal fairy tale land of Finland?
Anaconda, Crime, and Food: did you know?
 In Finland, speeding tickets
 are calculated based on your
 income - causing some Finnish
 millionaires to pay fines of
 over $100,000
 ? did-you-kno
 In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income causing
 some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. Source
 redbloodedamerica
 This is what equality" looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland. They
 punish you proportionately to how successful you are. Sounds really "fair."
 alternian-neverland
 Except... it is fair? Because it's proportionate. I don't get what's difficult about
 that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn't the same as a
 millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could
 mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for
 a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in
 their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to
 starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal?
 By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive
 while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars
 would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the
 law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their
 yearly income that a poorer person would. That's what makes it fair. They woulc
 be impacted the same way but you are looking at the amount rather than the
 equation.
 Also, it's important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a
 fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does.
 prochoice-or-gtfo
 Oh no... rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not
 doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them... how
 unfair
Did you know about the liberal fairy tale land of Finland?

Did you know about the liberal fairy tale land of Finland?

Anaconda, Crime, and Food: did you know? In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000 ? did-you-kno In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. Source redbloodedamerica This is what equality" looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland. They punish you proportionately to how successful you are. Sounds really "fair." alternian-neverland Except... it is fair? Because it's proportionate. I don't get what's difficult about that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn't the same as a millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal? By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their yearly income that a poorer person would. That's what makes it fair. They woulc be impacted the same way but you are looking at the amount rather than the equation. Also, it's important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does. prochoice-or-gtfo Oh no... rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them... how unfair Did you know about the liberal fairy tale land of Finland?
Anaconda, Crime, and Food: did you know?
 In Finland, speeding tickets
 are calculated based on your
 income - causing some Finnish
 millionaires to pay fines of
 over $100,000
 ? did-you-kno
 In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income causing
 some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. Source
 redbloodedamerica
 This is what equality" looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland. They
 punish you proportionately to how successful you are. Sounds really "fair."
 alternian-neverland
 Except... it is fair? Because it's proportionate. I don't get what's difficult about
 that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn't the same as a
 millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could
 mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for
 a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in
 their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to
 starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal?
 By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive
 while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars
 would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the
 law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their
 yearly income that a poorer person would. That's what makes it fair. They woulc
 be impacted the same way but you are looking at the amount rather than the
 equation.
 Also, it's important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a
 fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does.
 prochoice-or-gtfo
 Oh no... rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not
 doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them... how
 unfair
Did you know about the liberal fairy tale land of Finland?

Did you know about the liberal fairy tale land of Finland?

Ass, Bad, and Children: now you kno! In the original Peter Pan book, he killed the Lost Boys when they got too old nowyoukno.com maybe-this-time: supernaturalshadowhunter: adventuretimetimeline: fuckier0: tempestuous-sovereignity: alittleworldofimagination: forgetpolitics: mariavontraphouse: philliciaglee: nowyoukno: See More Daily Facts Here! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH Sorry….kind of isn’t captain hook and his crew suppose to be a lost boys who escaped and that’s why he’s trying to kill peter pan …what the actual fuck I NEVER TRUSTED PETER PAN nah everything in Peter Pan was fucked up.  Tinkerbell and her fairy buddies were having an orgy when they found baby Peter. Tinks also extremely jealous, tricking one of the Lost Boys into shooting Wendy in the fucking chest. Peter’s also crazy omnipotent. Like, he “make believes” he’s a doctor, and heals Wendy. When he’s hungry, he pretends to eat imaginary food and his stomach actually gets fuller. He’s also a dick. He would teach children how to fly but never how to stop, so they’d fly for months on straight without rest or break, and they couldn’t sleep either or they’d stop flying. And when one of Wendy’s brothers actually fell asleep and plummeted into the ocean, Peter laughed his ass off. He only saved him when Wendy begged him too. okay but that’s the point of Peter Pan. It’s not supposed to glorify never growing up, it’s supposed to show kids why growing up is not only good, but necessary otherwise they’d end up as fucked up as Peter. He never matured, never learned right from wrong, he never listened to his parents because - according to Peter - he ran away as an infant.It’s a tale to teach children that listening to their parents and growing up is good. As far as Tinker Bell goes, if you actually read Peter Pan you would know that fairies only feel one emotion at a time and they feel that emotion very strongly so the orgy? lust. Trying to kill Wendy? Jealousy. She embodies the seven deadly sins and what happens if you let your emotions get the best of you. (And as far as the new fairies series of films making her nicer it’s because you only see the jealous side of her in Peter Pan and you see other sides of her in the series because those movies are about her).Rant over, you can go back to your regularly scheduled blogging now. So if Peter Pan shows up in your window. Stab him in the fucking chest kids. You have school tomorrow Reblogging because I believe this will be important to the Once Upon a Time fandom tomorrow. It’s more complicated than that. Peter is kind of a tragic hero. He chooses not to grow up, he knows he is incomplete. I mean, he cut off Hook's hand because he thought it was a game. He clearly doesn’t know right from wrong. He also only knows the unconditional love of a mother to a child, which is why he thinks everyone wants to be his mother. He also switches sides in a fight just for fun, kill pirates for fun, and “thins” out the Lost Boys when they can’t fit in the tree anymore. But, like, it wasn’t a cautionary tale to tell you to listen to your parents, it’s a story about death and youth. Why can’t Peter grow up? One of the popular theories is that it’s because he’s dead. J.M. Barrie’s older brother died when Barrie was little and he dressed up in his brother’s clothes to please his mom. His mom - who was always distant, whose love Barrie craved like Peter craves a mom - started crying and said something like “At least my baby will never grow up” and that idea stuck with Barrie forever. Then, as an adult, it’s believed he never slept with his wife because Barrie was just a kid. He was Peter Pan. He was too innocent for that. He befriended the Llewelyn-Davies boys and based Peter Pan off of them and their games. (Fun fact: The boy Peter Pan was named after, Peter Llewelyn-Davies, threw himself under a train). There was also a bunch of stuff about Barrie being in love with The Llewlyn-Davies boys’ mother, but that’s not important here. People think Peter’s dead because he literally cannot return home. He tried and the window was barred and his parents had replaced him with another baby. Why? Probably because they had lost Peter to the flu. Why does Peter come in through the window? Because of the joke “I once had a bird names Enza. I opened up the window and ‘influenza’.” Because lots of babies died back then form the flu. The Lost Boys are children who fell out of their prams. Odds are babies could not survive falling out of their prams. Peter is liked the pied piper ferrying the souls of young children to the neverland/afterlife. Barrie believed that all children were “gay and heartless” but he didn’t think that was a bad thing. Also, Hook and his crew are not old lost boys trying to kill Peter. Hook was once a British gentlemen (hinted at to be associated with Charles II and attended Elton) and he is afraid of growing old. His biggest fear is growing old and dying - that is why his nemesis is the embodiment of eternal youth. That is why the crocodile that chases him swallowed a clock and ticks. That is why when Peter finally decided “It’s Hook of me this time” the crocodile has stopped ticking and Peter started (he’s trying to trick them into thinking he’s the croc). At that moment - Peter is time and time has ran out for Hook. Also, it’s not so much that Peter is omnipotent. All kids basically are in the Neverland. Like, it states that the island looks different to every kid because it’s the land of their dreams and stuff. Also, the island legit freezes when Peter leaves and thaws when he comes back. He’s been there so long he’s not human anymore - but fey. (keep in mind being fey isn’t good, just chaotic neutral). Peter even secretes pixie dust now. The island is so fine tuned with him because he’s one of the only people that stay, that it caters to him. Most likely any child that stayed as long as he did would become omnipotent to an extent. As for Tinker Bell, the above stated is true. Fairies are so tiny they can only have one emotion at a time - “Tink wasn’t all bad” - and they also have really short lifespans so, like, Tinker Bell isn’t even that important to Peter Pan. He forgets all about her and Hook by the time Wendy is grown up.And the orgies thing is because in the legends fey are known for their revelries.  And it wasn’t so much that Peter was a dick, he just doesn’t know when to stop. He’s a child. He doesn’t know right from wrong. He doesn’t know when to stop playing -cutting Hooks hand off was a game to him. He also has the memory of a child, so odds are he just forgot to teach kids how to stop flying or how to imagine food, etc. He is just carefree, like all children. Everything is a game to him, because he never learned anything else. But like, no, Peter Pan is not a cautionary tale. Barrie loved his character and the story and brought up a lot of good things in it. He wrote Peter as an exaggeration of a cocky overconfident boy, but, like, Peter wasn’t afraid of death. It says “he felt scared, yet he felt only one shudder run through him when any other person would have felt scared up until death. With his blithe attitude towards death, he says, “To die will be an awfully big adventure”.“ and with that Barrie is showing us both a naivety and bravery we possess as children but lose as adults and is basically telling us that we shouldn’t let that go. Like, the point is growing up is inevitable but you don’t have to lose everything. And so yeah….I’m really passionate about Peter Pan.
Ass, Bad, and Children: now you kno!
 In the original Peter Pan book,
 he killed the Lost Boys when
 they got too old
 nowyoukno.com
maybe-this-time:
supernaturalshadowhunter:

adventuretimetimeline:

fuckier0:

tempestuous-sovereignity:

alittleworldofimagination:

forgetpolitics:

mariavontraphouse:

philliciaglee:

nowyoukno:

See More Daily Facts Here!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH
Sorry….kind of

isn’t captain hook and his crew suppose to be a lost boys who escaped and that’s why he’s trying to kill peter pan

…what the actual fuck

I NEVER TRUSTED PETER PAN

nah everything in Peter Pan was fucked up. 
Tinkerbell and her fairy buddies were having an orgy when they found baby Peter. Tinks also extremely jealous, tricking one of the Lost Boys into shooting Wendy in the fucking chest.
Peter’s also crazy omnipotent. Like, he “make believes” he’s a doctor, and heals Wendy. When he’s hungry, he pretends to eat imaginary food and his stomach actually gets fuller.
He’s also a dick. He would teach children how to fly but never how to stop, so they’d fly for months on straight without rest or break, and they couldn’t sleep either or they’d stop flying. And when one of Wendy’s brothers actually fell asleep and plummeted into the ocean, Peter laughed his ass off. He only saved him when Wendy begged him too.

okay but that’s the point of Peter Pan. It’s not supposed to glorify never growing up, it’s supposed to show kids why growing up is not only good, but necessary otherwise they’d end up as fucked up as Peter. He never matured, never learned right from wrong, he never listened to his parents because - according to Peter - he ran away as an infant.It’s a tale to teach children that listening to their parents and growing up is good. As far as Tinker Bell goes, if you actually read Peter Pan you would know that fairies only feel one emotion at a time and they feel that emotion very strongly so the orgy? lust. Trying to kill Wendy? Jealousy. She embodies the seven deadly sins and what happens if you let your emotions get the best of you. (And as far as the new fairies series of films making her nicer it’s because you only see the jealous side of her in Peter Pan and you see other sides of her in the series because those movies are about her).Rant over, you can go back to your regularly scheduled blogging now.

So if Peter Pan shows up in your window. Stab him in the fucking chest kids. You have school tomorrow

Reblogging because I believe this will be important to the Once Upon a Time fandom tomorrow.

It’s more complicated than that. Peter is kind of a tragic hero. He chooses not to grow up, he knows he is incomplete.
I mean, he cut off Hook's hand because he thought it was a game. He clearly doesn’t know right from wrong. He also only knows the unconditional love of a mother to a child, which is why he thinks everyone wants to be his mother. He also switches sides in a fight just for fun, kill pirates for fun, and “thins” out the Lost Boys when they can’t fit in the tree anymore.
But, like, it wasn’t a cautionary tale to tell you to listen to your parents, it’s a story about death and youth. Why can’t Peter grow up? One of the popular theories is that it’s because he’s dead. J.M. Barrie’s older brother died when Barrie was little and he dressed up in his brother’s clothes to please his mom. His mom - who was always distant, whose love Barrie craved like Peter craves a mom - started crying and said something like “At least my baby will never grow up” and that idea stuck with Barrie forever. Then, as an adult, it’s believed he never slept with his wife because Barrie was just a kid. He was Peter Pan. He was too innocent for that. He befriended the Llewelyn-Davies boys and based Peter Pan off of them and their games. (Fun fact: The boy Peter Pan was named after, Peter Llewelyn-Davies, threw himself under a train). There was also a bunch of stuff about Barrie being in love with The Llewlyn-Davies boys’ mother, but that’s not important here.
People think Peter’s dead because he literally cannot return home. He tried and the window was barred and his parents had replaced him with another baby. Why? Probably because they had lost Peter to the flu. Why does Peter come in through the window? Because of the joke “I once had a bird names Enza. I opened up the window and ‘influenza’.” Because lots of babies died back then form the flu. The Lost Boys are children who fell out of their prams. Odds are babies could not survive falling out of their prams. Peter is liked the pied piper ferrying the souls of young children to the neverland/afterlife. Barrie believed that all children were “gay and heartless” but he didn’t think that was a bad thing.
Also, Hook and his crew are not old lost boys trying to kill Peter. Hook was once a British gentlemen (hinted at to be associated with Charles II and attended Elton) and he is afraid of growing old. His biggest fear is growing old and dying - that is why his nemesis is the embodiment of eternal youth. That is why the crocodile that chases him swallowed a clock and ticks. That is why when Peter finally decided “It’s Hook of me this time” the crocodile has stopped ticking and Peter started (he’s trying to trick them into thinking he’s the croc). At that moment - Peter is time and time has ran out for Hook.
Also, it’s not so much that Peter is omnipotent. All kids basically are in the Neverland. Like, it states that the island looks different to every kid because it’s the land of their dreams and stuff. Also, the island legit freezes when Peter leaves and thaws when he comes back. He’s been there so long he’s not human anymore - but fey. (keep in mind being fey isn’t good, just chaotic neutral). Peter even secretes pixie dust now. The island is so fine tuned with him because he’s one of the only people that stay, that it caters to him. Most likely any child that stayed as long as he did would become omnipotent to an extent.
As for Tinker Bell, the above stated is true. Fairies are so tiny they can only have one emotion at a time - “Tink wasn’t all bad” - and they also have really short lifespans so, like, Tinker Bell isn’t even that important to Peter Pan. He forgets all about her and Hook by the time Wendy is grown up.And the orgies thing is because in the legends fey are known for their revelries. 
And it wasn’t so much that Peter was a dick, he just doesn’t know when to stop. He’s a child. He doesn’t know right from wrong. He doesn’t know when to stop playing -cutting Hooks hand off was a game to him. He also has the memory of a child, so odds are he just forgot to teach kids how to stop flying or how to imagine food, etc. He is just carefree, like all children. Everything is a game to him, because he never learned anything else.
But like, no, Peter Pan is not a cautionary tale. Barrie loved his character and the story and brought up a lot of good things in it. He wrote Peter as an exaggeration of a cocky overconfident boy, but, like, Peter wasn’t afraid of death. It says “he felt scared, yet he felt only one shudder run through him when any other person would have felt scared up until death. With his blithe attitude towards death, he says, “To die will be an awfully big adventure”.“ and with that Barrie is showing us both a naivety and bravery we possess as children but lose as adults and is basically telling us that we shouldn’t let that go. Like, the point is growing up is inevitable but you don’t have to lose everything.
And so yeah….I’m really passionate about Peter Pan.

maybe-this-time: supernaturalshadowhunter: adventuretimetimeline: fuckier0: tempestuous-sovereignity: alittleworldofimagination: forget...

Anaconda, Bitch, and Crime: did you know? In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. PHOTO: SWINGLECOLLINS DIDYOUKNOWBLOG.COM futureevilscientist: thespectacularspider-girl: lewmzi: prochoice-or-gtfo: alternian-neverland: redbloodedamerica: did-you-kno: In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. Source This is what “equality” looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland.  They punish you proportionately to how successful you are.  Sounds really “fair.” Except… it is fair? Because it’s proportionate. I don’t get what’s difficult about that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn’t the same as a millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal? By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their yearly income that a poorer person would. That’s what makes it fair. They would be impacted the same way - but you are looking at the amount rather than the equation. Also, it’s important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does.  Oh no… rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them… how unfair…-V Finnish person here. Our speeding ticket system owns and only people who bitch about them are people who wanna break the laws - the loudest whiners are the rich people who think they can just pay their way out of trouble and that’s why we have laws like that. 400 dollar ticket. Person making 10 dollars an hour: “Fuck, I better slow down” Millionaire driving a Jaguar: “LOL 400 DOLLARS, FUCK THAT, NYOOM” Compared to a proportional ticket. Person making 10 dollars an hour and must pay 400 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.” Millionaire who must pay 100,000 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.” Like wtf. Some people have been so brainwashed by capitalism and worship of the rich that they literally can’t tell the difference between fairness and unfairness anymore. It IS fair. The fact that it flies in the status quo so much should make you think about that status quo.
Anaconda, Bitch, and Crime: did you know?
 In Finland, speeding tickets
 are calculated based on your
 income - causing some Finnish
 millionaires to pay fines of
 over $100,000.
 PHOTO: SWINGLECOLLINS
 DIDYOUKNOWBLOG.COM
futureevilscientist:
thespectacularspider-girl:

lewmzi:

prochoice-or-gtfo:

alternian-neverland:

redbloodedamerica:

did-you-kno:

In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000.   Source

This is what “equality” looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland.  They punish you proportionately to how successful you are.  Sounds really “fair.”

Except… it is fair? Because it’s proportionate. I don’t get what’s difficult about that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn’t the same as a millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal?
By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their yearly income that a poorer person would. That’s what makes it fair. They would be impacted the same way - but you are looking at the amount rather than the equation.
Also, it’s important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does. 

Oh no… rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them… how unfair…-V

Finnish person here. Our speeding ticket system owns and only people who bitch about them are people who wanna break the laws - the loudest whiners are the rich people who think they can just pay their way out of trouble and that’s why we have laws like that.

400 dollar ticket.
Person making 10 dollars an hour: “Fuck, I better slow down”
Millionaire driving a Jaguar: “LOL 400 DOLLARS, FUCK THAT, NYOOM”
Compared to a proportional ticket.
Person making 10 dollars an hour and must pay 400 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.”
Millionaire who must pay 100,000 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.”

Like wtf. Some people have been so brainwashed by capitalism and worship of the rich that they literally can’t tell the difference between fairness and unfairness anymore.
It IS fair. The fact that it flies in the status quo so much should make you think about that status quo.

futureevilscientist: thespectacularspider-girl: lewmzi: prochoice-or-gtfo: alternian-neverland: redbloodedamerica: did-you-kno: In Fin...

Gucci, Michael Jackson, and Music: yung-rasta-gawd: misadventureofcleopvtrv: chubbyfkinbulma: gucci-flipflops: If Michael Jackson made trap music 😂 RIP THO Omg lmfao 🤦🏾‍♀️ Neverland. Hella bands.
Gucci, Michael Jackson, and Music: yung-rasta-gawd:

misadventureofcleopvtrv:
chubbyfkinbulma:


gucci-flipflops:

If Michael Jackson made trap music 😂 RIP THO

Omg lmfao


🤦🏾‍♀️

Neverland. Hella bands.

yung-rasta-gawd: misadventureofcleopvtrv: chubbyfkinbulma: gucci-flipflops: If Michael Jackson made trap music 😂 RIP THO Omg lmfao 🤦🏾...

Bitch, Crime, and Driving: did you know? In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. PHOTO: SWINGLECOLLINS DIDYOUKNOWBLOG.COM trapqueenkoopa: futureevilscientist: thespectacularspider-girl: lewmzi: prochoice-or-gtfo: alternian-neverland: redbloodedamerica: did-you-kno: In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000. Source This is what “equality” looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland.  They punish you proportionately to how successful you are.  Sounds really “fair.” Except… it is fair? Because it’s proportionate. I don’t get what’s difficult about that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn’t the same as a millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal? By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their yearly income that a poorer person would. That’s what makes it fair. They would be impacted the same way - but you are looking at the amount rather than the equation. Also, it’s important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does.  Oh no… rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them… how unfair…-V Finnish person here. Our speeding ticket system owns and only people who bitch about them are people who wanna break the laws - the loudest whiners are the rich people who think they can just pay their way out of trouble and that’s why we have laws like that. 400 dollar ticket. Person making 10 dollars an hour: “Fuck, I better slow down” Millionaire driving a Jaguar: “LOL 400 DOLLARS, FUCK THAT, NYOOM” Compared to a proportional ticket. Person making 10 dollars an hour and must pay 400 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.” Millionaire who must pay 100,000 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.” Like wtf. Some people have been so brainwashed by capitalism and worship of the rich that they literally can’t tell the difference between fairness and unfairness anymore. It IS fair. The fact that it flies in the status quo so much should make you think about that status quo. I can’t believe they tried to rationalize that it wasn’t fair it’s literally the fairest way to assign a ticket wtf.
Bitch, Crime, and Driving: did you know?
 In Finland, speeding tickets
 are calculated based on your
 income - causing some Finnish
 millionaires to pay fines of
 over $100,000.
 PHOTO: SWINGLECOLLINS
 DIDYOUKNOWBLOG.COM
trapqueenkoopa:
futureevilscientist:

thespectacularspider-girl:

lewmzi:

prochoice-or-gtfo:

alternian-neverland:

redbloodedamerica:

did-you-kno:

In Finland, speeding tickets are calculated based on your income - causing some Finnish millionaires to pay fines of over $100,000.   Source

This is what “equality” looks like in that liberal fairy tale land of Finland.  They punish you proportionately to how successful you are.  Sounds really “fair.”

Except… it is fair? Because it’s proportionate. I don’t get what’s difficult about that. An impoverished person paying $400 dollar fine isn’t the same as a millionaire paying the same amount. For the poor person, $400 dollars could mean starving. Would you really claim it would have the same consequence for a rich man? Would it even be noticeable to him, while the absence of food in their stomach would be glaring to a poorer man? Would it be fair for a man to starve for the same crime as a man that would be having a three course meal?
By taking income into account, it allows the impoverished able to still survive while paying any fines they may incur. And, ultimately, while $100,000 dollars would be noticeable to a millionaire, they would still get by. And, assuming the law is properly implemented, they would be paying the same equivalent of their yearly income that a poorer person would. That’s what makes it fair. They would be impacted the same way - but you are looking at the amount rather than the equation.
Also, it’s important to make sure that even the rich would pause at the cost of a fine. They need to fear the law just as a poor man does. 

Oh no… rich people facing fines that might actually make them consider not doing illegal things because the punishments might actually hurt them… how unfair…-V

Finnish person here. Our speeding ticket system owns and only people who bitch about them are people who wanna break the laws - the loudest whiners are the rich people who think they can just pay their way out of trouble and that’s why we have laws like that.

400 dollar ticket.
Person making 10 dollars an hour: “Fuck, I better slow down”
Millionaire driving a Jaguar: “LOL 400 DOLLARS, FUCK THAT, NYOOM”
Compared to a proportional ticket.
Person making 10 dollars an hour and must pay 400 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.”
Millionaire who must pay 100,000 dollar ticket: “Fuck, I better slow down.”

Like wtf. Some people have been so brainwashed by capitalism and worship of the rich that they literally can’t tell the difference between fairness and unfairness anymore.
It IS fair. The fact that it flies in the status quo so much should make you think about that status quo.

I can’t believe they tried to rationalize that it wasn’t fair it’s literally the fairest way to assign a ticket wtf.

trapqueenkoopa: futureevilscientist: thespectacularspider-girl: lewmzi: prochoice-or-gtfo: alternian-neverland: redbloodedamerica: did...