Open Letter to Bulgarian Public
© Ivancho Jotata, 2016
TO BULGARIAN PUBLIC
(about the pensioning and the poverty in Bulgaria)
By: Ivancho Jotata, 2016
Open Letter to Bulgarian Public
Subject: pension curiosities, propositions for their eliminating, advices to the pensioners, opinion on our social policy and the fight against poverty, again ideas and propositions, opinions about the collapse of capitalism, how to make our image before the world better, and others.
By: Ivancho Jotata, anonymous author, ancestral intellectual, ex-scientific worker, with two and a half tertiary educations, and unemployed from 25 years, now pensioner.
Ladies and gentlemen, politicians, ordinary citizens, compatriots,
I take for my obligation to inform you about some incredible curiosities in our pension system, and from there also about other moments of our social policy, which, with the coming of our democracy, is practically missing, and by the fault of which moments (as well also of other things, of course), we are now on the last place concerning the poverty in European Union (with the only hope to move at least on the last but one place if our politicians succeed to convince somehow the Union to include also Albania in it). The letter is very long, definitely, yet this is because Jotata does not intend to terrorize our people every time and again, but has decided to tell something maximally essential. Well, and something comical, naturally, because it is, still, better to laugh rather than to weep, or to look for a fight or to make strikes or revolutions, am I right?. In view of the large volume of the letter I provide it with contents, with a brief indication of where you will find which matters, for faster orientation, although it must be clear that it is better to read everything in succession, for else there will remain white spots in the material, because I have not the habit to say banal things, and also make in places unexpected relations (which exist, after all, everything is dialectically linked).
For the various media, if they decide to pay some attention to it, is better either to publish it on parts /points, or then only this point, and after this some links to an Internet-page, where the whole letter can be found; you have to believe me that shorter than me one will harder retell it, so that I save you time and editorial work, I could have, so to say, pretend also for some fee, but my damned anonymity deprives me of this possibility. For the political powers, if they will also pay (how the English-speaking people have the habit to say) some attention, it is better that initially at least someone of their leading cadres reads it as a whole, and only then decides whether to inform also their supporters or not; but let it be clear that the main political powers, the antipodes BSP (the former communists) and UDF (or SDS, the first coalition of democrats, which is almost non-existing from about the year 2000), as also all kinds of their possible sprouts (chiefly of the latter) carry collectively the guilt for this, that for one whole generation, 25 years, they have done practically nothing in order to prevent our slumping so very deep (in the mud) of misery. That this is exactly so speak eloquently the elections, in which from more than a decade of years every second Bulgarian does not vote (because there is nobody for whom to vote), and to vote for the new parties there are no reasons for the moment, they have no precedences, and have not yet made errors only because have done nothing. Our "Talking House", or the Parliament (it is called National Assembly), is one so fuzzy notion, and they have so many urgent problems (and political quarrels, of course), that surely will have no time to get acquainted with the material (and because of this we will continue to stumble, if you ask Jotata). And the employees of NSSI (National Social Security Institute) are so engaged to fulfill the necessary requirements that they simply have neither time, nor desire to show whatever initiative of their own. So that the problems are complicated, and it isn't clear who must pay attention to them, but someone must load this burden on his back, and even if those people will be the fascists then this, probably, will be better than if nobody will pay attention to them. Though, if I have missed some important from your point of view addressee, then you just send it to him, as well also hang it somewhere, because I write this for the people, not for myself. In view of the use of Internet I am sending not only .doc file, but also .htm, which can somewhere be more suitable for reading; in any case with an ordinary copying of the text will be lost all bold and italic chars, which are many and needed by the reading.
And now the plan of the letter.
1. "Epicrisis" of the case in NSSI.
2. Clarifications and interpretations of these events.
3. Some propositions for easy changing and mitigation of the curiosity.
4. Useful advices to the brethren-pensioners, as well to the future ones.
5. The question with the fight with poverty, and why we alone are those, who have to solve it.
6. Some hinted ideas and propositions for bettering of our social policy.
7. Global sight over the unavoidable crash of contemporary capitalism.
8. Possible Bulgarian contribution for at least postponing of the moments of crisis.
9. Appendix with the correspondence with NSSI, anonymized.
10. Conclusive remarks.
[And addition of the emails which I have sent]
11. First email (the first year).
12. Second email.
13. Third email.
In the end of March 2016 I filed an application in NSSI for granting of a pension in accordance with the table for 15 years length of service and reached nearly 66 years, where after 2 weeks I attached to it one UP-2 (certificate for retirement, type 2, I guess), for my work in one subdivision of BAS (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences) for the period from 1982 to 1985, where my Individual Coefficient (IC) turned to be 1.28 (but else, on some other places, from where I have also taken such UP-2, in case of necessity, it was about 1.2), what turns in principle to be one good IC (this is the quotient of one's personal monthly salary to the average one for the moment). My whole length of service was 14 years and nearly a month, plus 2 years and 3 months self-insurance between 1997 and 1999, what gives 16 y. and about 4 m.; well, this, naturally, is not much, but nobody is guilty that I have studied so much, and this in several countries, so that to fall in position not to be able to find work for myself with the coming of our democracy. After this moment for less than a month (the letter lingered at their fast couriers a bit longer than was needed for them to answer me) I have received approved minimal pension for this table from 133 lv. (then, now it is already 137; and to add for the readers from abroad that the lev is our national currency -- meaning, by the way, a lion, no matter that there have never been lions on our lands -- which is equal almost exactly to 1/2 Euro, so that it goes about some 67-69 Euro for one whole month, imagine this, please), and they have even sent me in one go the pensions for 2 months and a bit, what was very good, if we don't count the minimal amount, but such were their practice, with what I agreed. Yet later, in the course of nearly five months, I have received not a single message about my final pension, but they have transferred me each month the necessary sum of 130 and a bit more levs.
Only after I decided to show some insistence and ask directly the central office of NSSI, why for whole 5 months I have not yet approved final pension, it was answered to me, fast and expeditiously, that my pension was approved, but I have not received the official letter because I have not went to them, while I have not went to NSSI because I did not know that I have to go to them, yet they have called me twice by the phone but nobody has answered. Well, naturally that no one will answer my phone because your Ivancho keeps it practically all the time switched off (why should he spent electricity without any necessity), due to the fact that, anyway, nobody calls him (and it isn't exactly mobile, it only imitates this but has landline number); nobody calls him /me because I live super-economically and don't maintain whatever contacts (except the minimal relations with several Internet sites abroad, where I publish various things, quite a lot), for the reason that for everything are necessary money, and I neither can afford me to go somewhere in the city with the ordinary city transport, nor to drink even a simple coffee from a vending machine. But, however it was, after I went to NSSI (by foot, some 10-12 stops with several transports, but in spite of this I can't take it that in this way I economize more than a daily card of 4 lv) I received my document, from which it turned out that, in short, despite my relatively high IC, as a result of some economical tricks (although lawful, I don't deny this), I am falling with about 10 levs below even the minimal amount, but OK, the people are generous, and give me again the minimum!
Now, I will explain these moments also in the next section, but everything is related to this, that the pension is calculated not exactly on the basis of three chosen by the person years, but according to these year plus the years from 97 till 99 from the last century, when I have not really worked, but because I have ensured myself alone, it is taken that I have worked, and despite the fact that I, quite naturally, do not want these years to be included, then the people include them, because such are their normative requirements established once by somebody. It is more than obvious, that this is not right, because this does not make the IC more real, they don't take into account other places of work (and they are not much in position to do this, because for the 70-ies they have no information), but makes it lower! How much lower, ah? Well, very! My IC for this time becomes 0.49 (it is even not one half) and this lowers the entire coefficient from 1.28 to 0.943, what, and for this laughable length of service, gives amount, which, as I said, is under the minimum, which is provided for such cases like mine, it is a kind of social umbrella (or threshold, as you prefer). But pay attention also to the fact, that for the minimal amount of the pension they send me letter via courier, yet for the exact amount they don't send any (even to inform me that I am to go personally there), and one more letter later they also send me by the post, and via the Internet they answered me on several emails, but exactly for this letter about the final amount of my pension, which looks exceedingly unexpected, it lowers my IC with more than 1/4, nobody tells me anything, the people wait for some time to pass and me to become acquainted with the minimum, they have their psychologists there (I presume).
So, and then I make one absolutely normal move, in my view, deciding to want recalculation of the pension, where the paid by me insurances for 97 and 98 years (1 y. and 3 m.) will be eliminated at all, this letter is added to the included here correspondence, and remains only the last one year, 1999, in order to have the desired minimum of 15 years (and nearly a month more), what, obviously, will lessen my length of service, but according with my calculations it turns out that the IC will grow at least up to 1.08 (probably also to 1.1), yet because my service will fall a little, then this gives one significant (well, with about 10 percents) increase of the amount of the pension, but still with precision of only a pair of levs about (most probably under) the minimal threshold. I, for my part, cant see what so very ingenious is in my request, neither what so strange can be in it, because I do not question their legal requirements (true according to the letter, yet not to the spirit, of the law), bur simply want some paid by me sums to be left without attention, I relinquish of something what I have, but, my God, everybody has the right to deny or renounce something of his own, this is not taking of something alien, and if in this way one obvious paradox in our pension system stands out brighter, them I am not to be blamed for this, because it, the paradox, anyway exists, everybody can check this by the tables for calculation of pensions.
In some sense I want to make a present to the state, but the people there do not allow me to do this. It remains only to clear whether this unwillingness to judge on the part of the staff of this, maybe not the highest, but, still, responsible state's authority is, so to say, inborn, or acquired, required by their work (in accordance with the old army axiom: "shut up and obey")! Well, I will continue these thoughts also in the next section, but with this I decided to stop my "pestering" of the workers of NSSI, because they have answered me twice om this request, where can be said that both times they simply "turned a deaf ear" to me, as the expression goes. And this, at least on this stage, gives no enhancement of my pension, this is just a matter of principles, how is it possible that one research assistant of BAS (with 2 tertiary educations etc,) can have an IC significantly under the one, this is the shameful matter, in my view, and this is what I want to eliminate with my further actions, even if I must pay something (to what I was not able to come there, when they, again according to one saying, "neither receive, no transmit").
These clarifications I would like to begin with explaining of my two major mistakes, because it is not excluded that they will be made also by other people, by pensioners, or future ones, or also by the media, in Bulgaria and abroad. The first one is that these calculations with the use of the average salary and not the minimal, which simply can not be falsified, it is established with a law and is published in the State Gazette, has chiefly psychological meaning to delude the people! To delude them in this to think that the minimal pension corresponds with the minimal salary, and the average -- with the average one, what is not so! The minimal pension is one social umbrella, and it can be bigger than the average, somewhere with about 10 percents, yet everything is individual. Look, for example, that by me, with a coefficient significantly above the average, it is somewhere with 10 levs above the calculated. Or let us take length of service exactly of 15 years, and exactly average income (IC=1), which during March 2016 was exactly 730 lv, what will give 1.1 * 15 = 16.5 %, or 0.165 * 730 = 120.45 lv, but then the minimal pension by this table was 133.82 levs. This is simply a logical paradox, and it is well known by the people from NSSI that the average salary is between 2 to 2.2 times bigger than the minimal one (where there were times, somewhere in the end of the last century, when it was given about 3 times bigger), so that is implicated an error from about two times and a half! (Well, but when the populace can be easily deceived, then why not to deceive it, right? This is quite lawful and democratic approach.)
Similar deceiving (or red herring according to the English) is present also when is said, that the average pension was 320 lv, by MMS (Minimal Monthly Salary) of 420 lv, what means that, according to their rules for calculations, when we have 40 years service and IC=1 then this must give 1.1 * 40 = 44 %, or 0.44 * 730 = 321 lv, but only one -- I beg a pardon from my readers -- oligophrene can believe that all our pensioners work on the average 40 years; surely this is true only for such, who have more than 38 years (and then most probably the maximum is reached for about 44 years, and only 1-2 % of the people can have longer length of service). Most of the people went to pension by the table for 15 years minimal service, be it also 30 years, and then they will have, e.g., 0.33 * 730 = 240 lv, what is nearly half MMS (from 420 lv); and for 25 years service they will receive 27.5 % or 200 лв., and also for 20 years service this will be 22 % or 160 levs. So, but under our bad "bai Tosho" was said that the pension was about 60 to 80 % of the salary (and the less the salary was, the higher the percent for the pension was, in what I am not quite convinced), and, above all, for going to pension were necessary only 20 years service (and for half a pension 10, not 15 like now), and if for 20 years service at those times earlier was received 60 % pension (let us take it average, so is more convenient), then now for the same years of service it turns to be 22 %, what -- I suppose this is obvious for everybody -- makes one diminishing of the pensions 3 (three) times with the coming of our democracy. Let us congratulate ourselves with this, ladies and gentlemen! And this is the second catch, or national "peculiarity", or how you call it. Where for some people, predominantly intellectuals, who have not succeeded to find work for themselves (by the fault of the transition, obviously), the pension amounts to 133 / 730 (to the average) = 18 %.
But let us look now from another angle at the things, in terms of what a person pays and what he uses, personally anyone who has lived to the pension. Well, here everything depends on the insurance payments, which now are given as 17.8 %, but for the old people, where for the young one it is less, because they alone have to pay something additionally in order to reach this percent (and such fabrications, not to say stupidities, have existed never before, the employer has paid all the insurance), yet this is from relatively recent time, earlier, about the end of the century and the beginning of the new one, there were periods when were paid more than 30 %, nearly 35, and not less than 29 if it is only for pension, without sick leaves, and this over at least two minimal salaries if one self-insures himself. So that it is normal to take for approximate calculations, and hoping that the things will not worsen again, that there are paid some 20 % for some x (let them be 30) years, and in this way is accumulated so much money, which can be spent for some 20 years by x (more precisely 1.1*x) percents from the last (most often, as the highest) salary, expressed in levs, i.e. the years and the percents are swapped. Then, if the average pensioner (or then you exactly) lives 20 years, then the calculations are more or less correct, yet the point is that the life expectancy in Bulgaria is extremely low and is given now as 75 years, but before 10-15 years it was given about 70 (for the men 67.4 and for the women 74.6, something of the kind, I am quoting from memory), and even if the expectancy is 75 years, then if you go to pension at 65 this gives only 10 years on the average, but as if at least for the men it turns to be much less, somewhere about 6-7 years averagely in the best case, what means that you pay on the average 2 to 3 times more than you can use! So this is the situation, as you like it, how has said even Shakespeare in his time.
In addition to this do not forget that for one generation time, about 25 years, the age for pensioning for men has grown with about 5 years, and that for women with about 10 years, with numbers and words, because for our whole totalitarian past (well, at least for the last 20 years) the men went to pension at 60 years and the women at 55; there were also moments, somewhere between 90 and 95-th years, when the age for pensioning was lowered to 57 for the men and 53 for the women, according to the opinion of some prominent leaders from UDF, because, you see, the old people unnecessary have occupied the places for career-making for the young ones, so that let us shove them fast in pension. And also: let us free the possibilities for changing of hard currency to 2,000, as far as I remember, US dollars in an year officially, and this by one MMS about 50 or so dollars monthly, what, obviously at least for your Ivancho, has led to emptying of our pension funds and to the "crazy" inflation from before introducing of our Currency Board, which, on its part, has glued us at the bottom from that point on, and even today, and also for 20-30 more years, probably. Such things, really.
From what follow different conclusions, good and bad, it depends on the standpoint, so that they can happen to be simultaneously good and bad! For example it follows that, for one thing, NSSI does its work, as far as it can, in circumstances of everlasting (i.e. at least for 26 years now) continuing crisis, some 90 percent or so of its staff are invariably polite with the pensioners, who, quite often, have gone a bit (or more than this) crazy from their advanced age. They have one pretty good system of interchangeability, there are many persons who can do the work of others, transfer strictly the money, what is the most important thing, and answer to any kind of questions, in certain limits, until one does not begin to annoy them. But when he begins to do this, as it happened with me, because they answered me at 3-4 emails (well, not essentially, not to what they were asked, but they have tried, they "sung" their "song" how they have learned it), but at the end, when I wanted nothing more from them, I simply informed them that will seek another external instances, that could have probably done something in order to eliminate the paradox, they already refused to register by Internet my letter from 18. Oct, with the motivation that I was supposed to show myself there personally, despite the fact that I told them my Personal Identification Code (PIC), which I have got from their central office for such cases, and which must have been enough to convince them that I am myself, so that I registered it exactly one month later, during my subsequent "excursion" to the center of Sofia.
Or then: why these people send me non-essential letters by the post, but this one, which is important, the calculations of the real amount of pension, they do not send me? Or also: why they are "turning a deaf ear" to me -- I apologize for the expression, but you propose more polite one for not paying enough attention and for going by, for ignoring of the concrete plea -- when I explicitly explain in my application (which is in the additions here) from 15. Sep, with simple words and in Bulgarian language, that I want precisely to ignore my self-insurance for the first one year and 3 months (I use even capital letters for underlying, what is a bit impudent, but I do this because it is necessary), and do not at all answer me on this question. Indeed, read the application and you will see that it contains 3 paragraphs, where in the first I explain the situation and my errors, in the second I write exceedingly clear what exactly I want, and in the third I tell them my motives for this, i.e. that this is not a whim, but a wish to raise at least a little my IC, where I am even ready to pay something, if only according to their calculations "the game is worth the candles" (understand, if I would be in position to restore the given sum for at least about 10 years -- because I already in that moment have decided, that I am simply bound to live at least 16 years, when I am going to pension with 16 years service!). Well, after one explanation of 2 pages sent by Internet they answered me this time on the plea, yet not essentially, they tell me something of the kind that "it is forbidden to fly in the air, because the human is heavier than the air and will not be able to rise up in the air", something similar, describing that this would have messed their way of calculations (with what I, up to certain extent, could have agreed), but not that according this and that regulation it is forbidden to refuse his or her length of service (or whatever it is -- I am just curious to see this prohibition, it would have been a legal case). Well, I am inclined to believe, if they make efforts to convince me, that I provide additional work for them, but, after all, they are paid for doing this, and they have no rights to make errors -- I am that who can make errors, and be even a senile or dotty old guy, isn't it so?.
Generally for me appeared this question, whether they are really so, well, I will not use epithets, even adjectives will not use, but will invent one new illness called "inability for logical reasoning", ILR, i.e. are they really sick of ILR, or simulate this, in order to earn somehow some bonuses? Because, see, it is clear that they can't earn bonuses as premiums, or whatever kind of additional payment, or at least to defend with something their salaries, to move ahead in the hierarchy, if they make overruns, right? They can be distinguished only if they make savings to the pension fund. And their work gives quite multiplied result, I want to say, that 1 lev economy monthly turns to minimum 100 levs, on the average about 150, and in the worst case for them even to 200 (if not more) levs! How I calculate this, ah? But very easy, 1 lev these are 12 lv in an year, and for 8 years this makes about 100, for 12 years -- 144, for 16 this gives 192, and for 20 years makes exactly 240 levs. And what if I make the money to 2 levs, and if I live really 16 years and a little more, then this will become 2*200 = 400 lv, and if with some additional payment I raise my pension with 10 lv, then this will give 2,000 lv, isn't it so? And if I can succeed to overcome them and one of my propositions given in the next section will be introduced, then, theoretically, one coefficient of 1.25 (let it not be exactly 1.28), on the basis of the old (from Mar 2016) average salary from 730 lv, even for 15 years service (and nearly 0.08 more) will give 15.08 * 1.1 = 16.6 and 0.166 * 1.25 * 730 = 151 лв. (now even about 155), and the difference between 151 and 133 is 18, what multiplied by 200 lv overrun for them only for Jotata, will give about 3,600 lv wasted money, yes?
Id est, how one can be sure whether these economists in NSSI are not factually very clever and just pretend that they are sil…, sorry, sick of ILR, because if one agrees with one ancient Latin phrase, Ars est celare artem (The art is in this to hide the art), it is quite possible that the people just pretend that don't understand what is said to them. Now, I personally am inclined to think that they are not so clever and cunning and don't pretend, as also that their ILR is not inborn, i.e. outside their place of work they are all such very reasonable and intelligent, just to wonder at them, but their work compels them to act as such (ah, I almost said simpletons, but nice that I have not said it), or that by their applying for work their bosses held an interview, and if they succeed to give reasonable answers to some questions they are not taken for this work! Something of the kind, or else, that the people are so bored by irritating pensioners, that don't want to make their lives more complicated. Yeah, OK, but I tried to clarify enough the situation for them and to convince them that it is better to do what I am begging them to do, because otherwise, no matter what is the cause for this ILR, it is not-permissible in one, as I said, not highest, but, still, state instance, where must exist also people who can take decisions, not only to pass the "ball" between themselves. Because they do exactly this, with their mentioned perfectly working system of interchangeability, each time to me answers somebody else, never one and the same person, and you can not guess who stays behind him (or her) in order to address him! As you see, the things can really have different interpretations, and I leave to our readers, politicians, and compatriots, alone to decide what causes this unwillingness of the staff of NSSI to help me to resolve in the easiest way one paradox, which has appeared, probably, for some objective reasons, during the turbulent years of transition to democracy (which is not yet finished, alas, but the years are not so turbulent now, and our politicians are not so crazy as before).
My propositions are several, in order to permit some choice, if the people want to do something, were it in the National Assembly, were it by initiative of some political parry, were it in the very NSSI (because there, after all, can't not exist clever heads), as well also to convince our citizens that this Jotata is not one who is only seeking reasons for quarrels and spitting over our high ranking authorities, but is looking first of all how to help to his people. Yet I will on purpose jump initially over the obvious solution, so that this introduced amendment to the spirit of the law for the three years by choice of the person (i.e. to add compulsory the years from 1997 till 1999), which makes the things lawful but incorrect, still remains! The propositions are arranged according with their simplicity for introducing, beginning with the simplest.
a) To add somewhere explicitly, that everyone has the right to refuse from some years (periods) of service, if they lower significantly his IC. After all in this way the person directly looses, it turns out that he makes a present to the state, this is obvious curiosity, but why should one be deprived of the right to do this? This is, so to say, our subsequent democratic right, like, e.g., to reject having central heating, or to switch out the refrigerator because it consumes much electricity (averaged for an year my refrigerator from 250 liters spends about 8 lv monthly, what means 100 lv in an year, where in the summer it is twice more, up to 1.4 kWh /day, than in the winter, and because of this I have stopped it for about 10 years), or not to use city transport under the current prices of the tickets (how I am doing for up to 10 stops), and other similar deprivations. If via one deprivation one can get rid of another deprivation, then this is justified to be allowed, and later on, with the flowing of time, we can try to cope better with the situation. For me is obvious that this has to be allowed, when it is not forbidden, according with the classical formula of Roman law, but just to be sure, and in view of the exceedingly strict (in some cases) employees of NSSI is better this to be added somewhere as a new paragraph.
Only this can not give a good decision in some cases (for example for me this is too weak decision), but without it is no go, it is the first possible and easy step; in addition to this especially 1997 was a botched year (let the guilty politicians be sought, if somebody wants this), because I pretty clear remember that have begun to insure myself for the reason that initially I paid only 10 (ten) levs current money, what is a funny amount for insurance for a pension, so that this curious period of time must simply be cut out, it is not real! By this situation the pension fund, i.e. the state, will make in the beginning one obvious economy, they will have to have received some money without the necessity to pay whatever from it, because I don't require that the paid money will be returned to the people, they are voluntarily given by them and received in good faith by the state, so that backdated corrections should not be provided. Everything is right and correct, and that after this some citizens could win from this, well, exceptions happen, here probabilistic dependencies are in play, and if some people win then some other will lose, and there is also no danger that pensioners will begin massively to reject their length of service with the hope that will win from this (because they will not win, as a rule).
b) To allow additional payment of social security contributions for a past period. At first sight this seems something pretty twisted and complicated, such things are not done, but it is also not proper to allow to some people to buy labour service, yet this is allowed for the time of their study, and exactly for a past time, and when this is allowed, then this can be considered as right in some cases, and this case is very similar, so that it must also be allowed; in the end, our life is full with exceptions, they are this, what makes it interesting, as long as they are justified with something. The whole subtlety is in this how exactly to calculate the necessary sums, because they were different then, the percents of payments were others, and so on, and, primarily, how to "glue" both pieces of contributions to the pension, the old one and the new one, together. Yes, but this could have been difficult if there was not accepted the quite correct -- I can also praise, not only criticize -- decision to calculate everything through the average income, and average salary once is counted for average salary now, this is so, and if you now pay insurance for some past time you pay it on the basis of the average salary in the moment. So that this is possible, and it is done, it remains only the gluing of both pieces.
But this also is not a problem by this approach of calculations via the average, because the people take the quotient of the payment from the one's salary to the average then salary, and this gives some coefficient, say for me (I am not pretty sure, because now I don't know what exactly I have paid then, but those in NSSI know this) it will give that for 1999 I have insured myself for 60 % of the average then salary. In the moment the average salary let it be exactly 800 lv (it is somewhere about this) and if I want to have coefficient 1.25 this gives insurance basis of exactly 1,000 lv, and by 17.8 % this gives by 178. lv each month; yes, but I have already paid 60 % of the average, i.e. by the contemporary conditions this makes 0.178 * 800 = 142.4 lv, and 60 % from this sum are 85.44 lv; hence from 178 lv are subtracted 85.44 and I will have to pay additionally 92.56 lv /mon (respectively, 92.56 / 142.4 makes 0.65 or 65 %, and if we add 0.6 + 0.65 = 1.25). So that if, for example, I want to have the calculated before pension from 151 lv by a bit outdated average basis, or about 155 lv by the valid in the moment basis, I will have to pay them the sum of 12 * 92.56 = 1,110 lv, and will receive an increase of 18 lv (over the 137 lv in the moment), what for an year will restore me 216 lv, or for a bit more than 5 years I will return my money back, with what I will agree (if I don't make some error somewhere, and if they confirm this my arithmetic). And this can as well "warm up" some other pensioners, and they probably will not make such precise calculations, or will meet our Maker earlier than planned, and from this NSSI will only win.
c) To eliminate this contradicting to the spirit of the law amendment for compulsory adding of years 97-99 of the last century. Well, this is related with some calculations, which I am not in position to make, I have not the necessary information, and nobody will allow me to search for it and do the calculations instead of them (I can miss something), but this is the right approach because the law is simply distorted with this amendment, it is not correct, it is legal, yes, but this does not mean that it is right! This can give some significant increase of the necessary for the payment money, and this was the reason why it was introduced, but let us not forget that from that time have passed more than 15 years, many people have just died (on the average about 10 % for 7.5 years, if the average life span is about 75 years), so that this must purely be checked in NSSI, they can quietly make some program for recalculating of all pensions if this amendment will be made, and after the writing of the program, even if it will run for a whole month (what is absurd for the present-day computers), they will have the exact results; I personally, though, do not expect that this will increase the entire sum of paid pensions with more than 3-4 percents. Why I do not expect this, ah? But because this affects chiefly the unemployed people in this period, such who have insured themselves alone, these who have worked can't have such drastic changes in the amount of their pensions (like more than 25 % with me). And, besides, these unemployed people are predominantly intellectuals, because both, in the first (ten or so) years of the transition without work were chiefly highly qualified specialists like myself, and the others have succeeded to find some work for themselves, and plus this most heavily affected by this were people who also later, in the first years of this century, have still remained without work, so that their length of service is laughably short exactly for this reason.
In other words, this is the next dying wave of, to call it directly, genocide of Bulgarian intellectuals (because, see, they were pro-communist -- as if the mathematics and other exact sciences are communist inventions). I do not state that this genocide was somehow organized, but it existed, and a tertiary education is received for five years, practical experience in the given area is gathered for another five or so years, but all is lost for about only two years, I have to tell you. So that I personally think that even if this can impose one increase of the entire sum of pensions with 4-5 %, then this must be done, yet I, as I said, don't believe it to be so high, and, after all, let the people in NSSI calculate this, because the existing decision is not correct, both when it was introduced, as also now. This variant will be the best, but I propose it in the end as the most difficult for performing; besides, in this case must be performed recalculation of really all pensions, and not to leave that a heap of people have to go to them and file applications for recalculation, and to stress in this way the error of NSSI, while by one slight increase of some minimal pensions people will simply take this for elementary social care.
Let us, however, be clear that this will not solve the problem with the low pensions in Bulgaria, because under this system of calculation they can be raised only with raising of this mysterious coefficient of 1.1 (till at least 1.2, and later even higher, till 1.5 if possible). Yet exactly this is the most difficult thing, and for this purpose is not enough that the people pay 2-3 times more than they can expect to receive, here is needed that many more people die, so that after less than about 10 years I personally don't believe that it will be changed, alas.
Now listen, the advices are many, and I will not order them specially, yet I think that it is good if I say something, because I have enormous experience in living under miserable conditions (for I have studied much, as I have said, and not some classical discipline where money can be won, like law, medicine, or economics nowadays), and, to give an example, I can quietly make ends meet with sums between 40 and 50 lv (25 Euro) monthly for eating and drinking, and don't complain about this (well, I can, I suppose, if this will be really necessary, to spend up to 100 lv monthly for this, but more than this seems to me improper in our democratic conditions), I complain only about the communal expenses. It must, however, be told in the very beginning something obvious, but what must not be forgotten, and it is, that it is not important the size of the pension, but how long one will receive it, as also this, that the pensions are not for the wealthy ones, they are for the poor, and however small they can be this is significant help in the old age. As long as one is healthy, does not visit physicians, buys no medicaments, leads moderate way of life, and has some interesting occupation, not simply to fall in heavy drinking. So that I will spend a lot of time on this how to live properly.
But let us begin from earlier time, at somewhere about 50 years, or at the earliest at 45 (at 40 one does not think about his old years, he does not believe that will get old). So when one passes over the "climax" of his life he must begin to moderate himself in everything in what he can, to begin to exercise by the by some sporting activity just for himself, otherwise a heap of various illnesses begins to appear. Look, the life is above all an adaptation to the environment, and the old age is an inability for good adaptation, which comes gradually at about 50, because one thinks that he is still the same as before, yet he isn't. So that this is the moment when everybody must give up smoking if he smokes, not because the cigarettes harm, but because they help him to cope with the situations -- this has to be the idea of English "fixing" --, i.e. the cigarettes harm with this that they help the person to fight with his organism, which wants its necessary rest at moments, and in this way they wear down the organism, the concrete organs, the weak places of everybody (stomach, lungs, sexual organs, brain, and others), but also the whole organism. I am not a professional medic, I judge as intelligent … laic, but this has to be so, because the cancer is development of new cells, right, i.e. under it the organism wants to become younger, only that it does not know how to do this (exactly like our whole society, it wants to be good, yet it does not know how to become good, so that not to perish or harm itself -- and now say that I am not right!).
Then one has to begin some sports or loading of the muscles, if he is not from those people who work with them, but such people are practically absent, nowadays exist technical mechanisms for everything. The simplest is jogging, i.e. jumping, not exactly on the place, I do this in the corridor of my apartment, and once in a week (in order not to get bored by this), but some 10 minutes or so are simply necessary; and the other simple variant are the push-ups, at least 20, of course. Because we, and this time the people generally, not only the Bulgarians as barbarian (or a bit perverse) nation, are fond of putting the cart before the horse, how the English say, and many people rush to exercise sports, to go to fitness clubs (if can afford this) only while they are young, at most up to 30 years, and later they get married, or at least become lazy and begin to lead sedentary life and to gain weight. Yeah, but sporting in young years can at most do you some harm, because this will develop stronger your heart, and later, if you do not continue active exercises till deep old age, begin the infarcts, it is so, ask some physicians if you don't believe me, but my judgements are logical, it is not right to do something when one wants to do this thing, but when one does not want this, in order to reach some moderation! When at 50 is exactly time to begin, if not literally active, but, still, some sporting activity, not for achievements or records, but for health, then there is no danger to overdevelop some of your organs, they don't grow so intensive (I look also at myself, after I am making, not to boast, but at least 30 push-ups in the winter, and in the summer even more, and only after the tenth year, I marked that my breast muscles as if have begun to develop themselves, because I have been all my life definitely a skinny weakling). Add to this also the moving generally, especially by the current ticket prices for the city transport, so that you must make at least 5 stops daily on foot, else it is bad; now, the jogging is something else, by it one flies in the air, mobilizes his whole organism, while the walking is chiefly tiring of the muscles, yet this is also necessary, believe me, after such walk one sleeps quietly, this is a thing that all medics know, they have told it me when I was still a student, but I have not believed them much, yet now I see, that it is so.
And this moderation, obviously is valid also for the alcohol -- and now tell me again that I am not right. Because the alcoholism may appear in young years but with the age increases (I have quite recent example with one colleague of me), and when the organism then is not the same the alcohol does it more harm. Let me give again myself as example -- Jotata, the new Bulgarian yoga, maybe -- but I drink every day probably for 30 years, yet it does not happen more often than once in a month to drink more than 100 ml concentrated alcohol and about 200 ml wine (from wild fruits, not with chemicals), but as little as that is useful, it warms the organism, widens blood vessels, is recommended by the medics. Also the sex must be decreased, and oily food has to be avoided, and natural wines must be taken in small amounts, and healthy food has to be consumed, yet I will return later to the food.
But there is another important moment on which nobody pays attention, and it is in this, that the pensioning happens … at once, and everything that happens with a jump requires good adaptability and, hence, is not for old persons. Yet I, by Jove, have not heard that anybody proposes gradual retirement (what I propose somewhere, I have probably about a hundred various propositions, and at least a dozen of them are in the social area, but they are on various sites under my real pseudonym, so that I will avoid touching them here). Put in two words this means that when nobody proposes to us officially reduced working day, then one must alone decrease it, or at least try to do this, write the needed application. For example, 5 days by 6 hours, initially, or 4 days by 7 hours, something of the kind. Such mode of working would have been of advantage also for the employer, because (according to your Ivancho obviously) when one loads himself less, he works more efficiently, with fresh forces, and can do nearly the same work as on a whole day basis. And then after 55, and especially after 60, he must work on half day basis (and partial pensioning means that he has to receive also some part from his pension, beginning with 10-20 %). It is obvious that in this way the salary will drop down, but why do you need much money in your old age? Because (this question requires more profound consideration, but I am trying to keep the material in some borders, so that will skip long explanations) the contemporary society moves to this, that who works receives at least 2, and even 3, times more money than is necessary for him alone, what is so because otherwise people would have not thrown to the garbage a heap of nearly new products; only who does not work needs means for existence, here lies the injustice of the society, that one works but other not. And one gradually decreasing with about 10 percents of the working time and the salary by a pair of years, taking into account also the possible increase of the salary because of bettering of the qualification (something like our so called "class" for years of service, that we have now rejected), plus some symbolical pension initially, and slowing of the growth of length of service, but helping for improving of the state of health of the person, would have been very useful both, for the worker and for the employer, as well for the state. Yes, only that nothing is done on the question, and because of this, after one goes to pension, he begins after a pair of months to search where to begin to work on a half-day basis, what is especially valid for various military, police, and others, who retire at age of 45. While the less you work the less you wear out, this is obvious, so that also here the point is in finding of the necessary compromise (between the desire to earn more and the cares for yourself).
And now it appears another moment -- because the things are related, as I told you. It appears this moment, that the pensioners pure and simple begin to "leave this world" in the first 4-5 years of their going to pension, some 20 percents, a priori, in addition to the fact that 15 percents or so simply do not live to their pensions. For these things, surely, exists some statistics, or it can be done (I personally would have done it earlier, for me is interesting to know these things, like also, for example, when people die most often, as seasons, I have not seen such statistics -- I suppose that this must have been in the winter, yet it can turn that this will be about the month May or also Oct, when the weather changes, whether I know?), but nobody tells it to you, because this will debase significantly the pensioning system, by which, as also in many other cases, it is relied on mutual delusion (what is basic democratic principle, if I do not disappoint you with this, yet also if I do disappoint you). Only somewhere after 70 years sets relatively smooth, by asymptote, dying of the people, what has to be so, at least because the … drastic lowering of the prices of transport cards happens exactly after 70 years, i.e. then have to be remained not much alive pensioners. So that, ladies and gentlemen, think, take measures, oppose somehow the death, don't create suitable for it conditions, do not rely on medics, I personally act so, because I have not money for physicians (and although I have self-insured myself I do not visit them, I prefer to keep myself sound, than to visit physicians and take medicines).
And now let me move to the food, because there the matters also do not stay good generally. I have the feeling that about 90 % of people think that this, what the supermarkets offer them, is good, modern, and this is how they have to feed themselves, and the more twisted are the things the more they are bought, if they can allow themselves this, while the poor and miserable (but who are only about 10-20 %) buy predominantly basic products (bread, sugar, sunflower oil, rice, etc.) and cook alone and continue to make preserves for the winter, and there is no wonder if they will live longer than the typical consumers (to remind you that already in ancient China the wealthy ones suffered from some avitaminosis because were eating husked rice). Now, in some supers they use exactly this hook to catch you, proposing you something as if healthy but at least 3 times more expensive, but who knows whether it is so, while there are things that everybody can gather alone, which are positively healthy, and cost almost nothing, yet he does not do this. Generally, to make the long story short, there is one super-simple rule (which I have announced more than 20 years ago, but few have listened to me), and it is: counteract each advertisement, i.e. do not buy anything what they advertise to you, exactly because somebody advertises it to you. Yeah, but the damn vanity, ah? How is it possible that you will miss to buy something that is advertised to you? Well, it's up to you, of course.
And what are these things that exist everywhere and are useful, ah? Hmm, say, the … dandelion! Bulgarian people consume nettle (especially if it is from Greece, because are lazy to pick it alone), but nobody consumes dandelion, and it is known healing herb ever since Hippocrates and is applied chiefly for liver diseases, and up to my mind also for the stomach (because is bitter). Or also the monks rhubarb ('lapad' in Bulgarian and lapathon in old Greek), lime leaves (rather linden ones, not from lemon tree), wild onion (which I have seen in one super to be sold as "Himalayan"), 'levurda' (this is wild garlic, with entirely different leaves), acacia blossom, blossom of elder, many wild fruits such as blackberries, sour cherries (they grow as if everywhere), mulberries, raspberries, wild plumbs (mostly green), and other things, which can be cooked, or made syrups, jams, wines, and so on. But the basic point is that we confuse, as I call it, the clean (ecologically) dirt (or mud), with the ecologically dirty "cleanliness" (like various artificially grown vegetables, fertilizers, mutants). I avoid to buy even spices (for economical reasons, initially), and grow everything what I can on my terrace (e.g.: celery, parsley, kalofer -- a quite specific herb chiefly for beans, mint -- yet not exactly, it is called 'dzhodzhen' in Bulgarian, 'koriander'-cilantro, dill, 'mashterka'-thyme, hot or chili peppers, etc.). Now, let me "sing my song" to the end: eat also the egg … shells, because they contain calcium in the purest form (better than in the milk, where are many slimy things), and it is necessary not only for the bones and joints, but also for all kinds of connective tissues, like blood vessels, so that this is also medicine against atherosclerosis! This is a thing that all physicians know, yet nowadays no one of them will tell it to you, because they defend the interests of their guild. The shells are simply gathered, no matter out of raw or cooked eggs, they are grilled slightly, and are crunched, where the approximate dose for me is an egg shell for 4-5 days or 6 shells a month. And the most interesting in this case is that it turns out that the milk is consumed chiefly because of the calcium in it (about 7% together with other salts), so that I simply feel no necessity of milk and buy not more than one liter in a month (and even less), what for me is also significant economy.
Ah, I almost forgot, think also about your brain, i.e. about the "food" for the brain, the interesting occupations, which gives you meaning in your life (because otherwise even alcoholism will not help you). This has to be some hobby, naturally, like to paint, to cook, to make some things, to dig in the garden (if you have one), to repair your apartment, to give lessons in something, to play chess or bridge, and so on, yet I want to propose you one perfect, in my view, method, which is not used practically by anybody. These are the foreign languages. Or at least one foreign language, and to read books in it, not in your mother language! Do you get it, not so much in order to speak this language, but to be in position to use it for entertainment, reading this what you prefer -- crime books, actions, love romances, verses, whatever. When one reads in a foreign language one at least honours the author, because the latter in all cases has made efforts, has invented epithets and expressions, but the most useful of this method are the different idioms, which exactly make the language. Well, also the translation from one language into another, because everything is learned on a given language, and when you search the translation in your head it usually is remembered one-directionally. You guess how it was from one side but don't guess how it was from the another, and you are irritated and curse yourself, this sustains the brain, and the nerve cells are not restored, as they say. (For a fun I can tell you that once, before many years, but really, I have wondered for hours and cursed myself in my mind how it was Easter in English, because in Bulgarian it is something like "Great Day", yet it wasn't exactly so, but how was then?)
So that the restoring of at least one foreign language must begin somewhere about the 50-ies, not after 60, but everybody has learned sometime in his childhood some language, which can be restored up to some level with a bit more perseverance for 2-3 years, chiefly with reading, where you look initially for every second word in the dictionary, then for about 10-20 words on a page, then for 4-5 and so in this way until you reach till 1-2 and then begin to jump them over, because you guess the idea from the context. Not that you can not begin to learn a new language, yet let it not be later than 60 years. But if you so really do not guess about anything else, then at least all Slavonic languages can be read from the Bulgarians with a dictionary and some initial acquaintance with the grammar, I suppose (I have never found time to check this personally). This is significantly better than solving of crosswords, from which you can only become stupider, like also from watching TV or video, obviously. Well, enough on this question, let us move to the next.
Gentlemen, I also under my usual pseudonym have remarked quite recently the obvious moment, that the fight with poverty is easier to be led in the wealthy countries than in the poor ones, simply because the wealthy can afford themselves this, right? Yeah, but this means that nobody will help us if we do not help us alone -- did you get it --, because the West teaches us how to compete, how to become "battle-worthy", so to say (with the obvious hope that we will not become such, will not beat them), but what to do in order not to have exceedingly poor people they do not say us. They don't tell us this also because this is a question of traditions, of national views, and the people presuppose (methinks) that we will alone guess that the more poor we are the more we will turn to the left, and they don't want to make us turn more to the left, yet we, as quite "perverse" small nation, make exactly the contrary, the poorer we become the more to the right we turn, this is the next paradox in the land of paradoxes, Bulgaria! I personally think that the main reason for this is the damn UDF-spirit, which is still alive in a heap of Bulgarians, probably in a 1/3 of us, despite the fact that this union can't collect even half of a percent of the votes, but this spirit floats in the air and confuses our souls; this is the basic motive also of Duce Boiko, how I call him (Boiko Borisov, the leader of GERB party), who scares the Bulgarians exactly with this, that, look, people, if you do not vote for me then will come again the communists, and the people believe him, in general. And this very spirit is to cry "uhh" and "down" (instead of "viva" or "long live"), and to insist that compromises can be made with everybody, except the communists.
I beg your pardon that with this I will jump a bit to the side, yet the case is typical, I have one acquainted woman (old one, of course), who judges exactly in this manner, and the only explanation for this (except that she is alcoholic and sick of all kinds of illnesses) is that she … lives on our Rakovsky Street in Sofia, where lives, the so called earlier (and in all appearances rightly observed) "not killed bourgeoisie", Ha-ha, naturally, but this is justified with nothing statement, this is continuation of American "witch hunt" somewhere from the 50-ies and 60-ies of the last century, that when they are communists this means that they are some beasts, man-eaters, monsters, something of the kind, which viewpoint does not exist now on the very West somewhere from the time of Gorbachev, i.e. from before 30 years (but in Bulgaria it exists -- probably because we are "original" and unique nation). Practically quite analogous, only looked from the other side, is the case with us, the "Bugars", for which there is spread very bad opinion on the West, from quite old times, from more than a century, and in what has to be convinced every Bulgarian who has lived at least 6 months somewhere on the West, because the people become just dumbfounded hearing the word Bulgarian, they close in their shells, as is said. There is no need to go wide away for examples, everybody of us knows at least these three: the case with the Reichstag and Georgi Dimitrov, the attack on the Pope and someone Antonov, the case with Bulgarian medics in Libya; in all of these cases is relied on the subconscious belief that when the name Bulgarian is mentioned then everything is clear, they are savages, sodomites, giaurs, and so on. This is very interesting case, but I don't want to go astray anymore (I personally think, that here exist rather … etymological reasons, take for example also this, that the Greek call us literally 'vulgaros'), but this reputation is quite undeserved by us, because we are probably the most peaceful nation in the whole Europe.
So or otherwise, I mentioned this because there are no reasons for it (although I will soon come to one typical barbarian manifestation, i.e. we give to the world examples for strange behaviour, but such with which we endanger only ourselves, not the others), but this is subconscious background for the judgements of other nations, in the same way how we continue to think that the communism is something bad and the democracy is a panacea for everything. The truth, according to your Ivancho obviously, is in this, that the communism is one very nice idea, but its realization (like practically every realization) limps, and the compulsive communism or Leninism is not appealing to the people (for the reason that nobody likes the compulsions, no matter to what purpose); on the other hand the democracy is a conception without any idea, except the suitable deception of the masses, yet otherwise it is very adaptive environment for making of any changes. From what follows the obvious conclusion, that in conditions of dictatorship (or other strong centralized form of governing) is important to strengthen the democratic elements (which exactly limped by our peoples democracy), like also that in conditions of democracy the important thing is to strengthen the dictatorial elements (what we, as also other nations, do, looking to chose some strong personality, which will "brandish the whip"). All right-wing parties depend on the strong personality, all fascists, and all left-wing, too.
So that, in order to return to the question of poverty, the transition to as possibly right-wing capitalism was the subsequent madness of Bulgarian people, caused by atavistic and unmotivated, subconscious understandings, and if they will continue may be necessary revolutions, although I personally can't imagine them in contemporary united world, but at least to unrests and misery -- guarantied. And do not forget also this, that the world economic crisis does not for the moment show signs for ending, while what can be worsen continues to become worse, for example appear negative percents in the banks (on the West this is already a fact), and in all appearances it will not end before 2020, and, help God, not after 2025, but nobody can say anything for sure, because the people on Earth are simply too many and everything is produced automated, i.e. people are not necessary, they must either be slaughtered, or to stop giving birth, or to refuse the progress and automation, or to search some other way for organization of exploitation, different from personal benefit. I am not sure whether you have got me, because the problems are difficult, yet these are the ways out, or some compromise between them.
Hence, however we twist it and bend it, the fight with poverty becomes central problem in the contemporary (as well as the future) society, and we have not at all a vision, some common sight about what is rightful and moral, what are we to strive for, where are we to go. We live day by day, and think that with confrontation and "pulling of the blanket" to ourselves (as we use to say) the things will go better, what is … true, only that the social price will be higher! And the West will not help us, as I said. But then exactly we can be those, who will help it, ah? Because -- not I have invented this simile but it is good -- the chain breaks into the weakest place, so that exactly it has to be strengthen. And this is the main reason for the epistolary explanations of Jotata, how to fight with the poverty, and the concrete case in NSSI with him is only the cause. It turns out that we have again to sit around some round tables and to discuss what is right and what isn't, in order to make one common concept for the future development of our country, as well as for the world, am I clear? Good, then let me tell you my views to the question, and who wants can criticize them, who wants -- accept them, who wants -- reject them (and search "actions").
Ivancho Jotata thinks that there must exist rich and poor, in order that the poor have examples before them, idols, because the conscience and the high morality, alas, are not much spread on this world. Very rich, after all, can exist (although they are not necessary, this is impediment for the very persons), because they will at most wonder how to divide their wealth, so that to be enough also for the others, but very poor, miserable, tragic cases must simply not exist, for the natural reason that now we can allow us this! Do you understand me, not because this is moral, not because so say the communists, but because we can allow us to cloth and feed all, to heal them, educate, and so on, and when the poor are satiated (and there are various "circuses" for them), then this makes the society quiet, and the accumulating of capitals happens best of all in peaceful conditions, the sated masses do not crave for the luxury of the rich, and so on. In other words the cares for the poor are simply necessity, otherwise appear revolutionary situations, and the wealthy ones are not monsters (like also the communists are not), the wealthy ones want to help the poor, yet to help them really, so that they will be able to work more actively for the wealthy, ha-ha. But it is so, everybody cares for himself, and the society is this, what has to care that under this situation all could win, something what, in principle, is possible, and in the wealthy countries, as I said, this happens.
The next moment, which is related with the previous, is that exploitation, contrary to the statements of communists, must exist, otherwise there will be no society, it will fly apart. But this must be such exploitation, which will be wanted by the exploited, because they win through this (say, receive more money, can buy more goods, there is an employer for whom to work). Yet together with this must exist also basic rights for everybody, even for the poorest, independently of their income or even if it is practically zero, such like the right of shelter, food, sex, education, healthcare, transport, communications, and so on, up to some satisfactory for the moment level. Is it not so? What is reduced to the communist statement, that "to everybody according with the necessities", where I have even cut away the first part, that "from everybody according the abilities", because the person may have (yet or already) no abilities at all. Because if the society is wealthy enough then why not to guarantee this right? Yeah, but what turns out then, ah? Hmm, it turns out that if somebody (say Ivancho), wants to travel somewhere in the town, because this is necessary for him (not to go to watch some match, but even if with this goal), then he can simply sit in the tram or subway or whatever it is and travel, and if a controller comes he will say to him that he will pay the ticket some other time, and if it happens so that he will not manage to pay it, then such was the will of God, after all, something of the kind. Also, when he becomes hungry, he enters in the shop and takes there something eatable (again with the phrase that will pay another time). Or he becomes ill, or wants to learn, say, the relativistic theory, or his "thing" has hardened (what with your Ivancho happens once in a month), and so on, then the society has to stay ready to satisfy his wishes, does it not?
Well, it is so, and it isn't, i.e. everything depends on the extent, as well also on the abilities of the society in the moment, yet not like it is in our barbarous -- I'm sorry if I repeat myself -- country, where, only to give an example, your Ivancho can't allow himself to go even a pair of times yearly to … his father's grave, because under the previous ticket's prices (to say nothing about the current ones) one return travel cost him a little more than the food for one day (what is about 1.30 – 1.50 lv), and because of this he waited whole 10 years, with digits and words, in order to inscribe his grave (to chisel only the name and the date, but this turned to be 100 lv when he was able to afford himself this from the first pension)! Or another example, it is not right that in entire Sofia there's no bath, and the central mineral bath, known since 5 century (if not since earlier), after its privatization ceased to work. Or that there was not a single self-service laundry, the so called laundromats, which are often shown on Western films. Or also, when the democracy came to us and have or not passed 4-5 years and all buses to Vitosha mountain (it is situated just around Sofia and touches some suburban regions) stopped at all to function, and now the ordinary Bulgarian is put before the situation from the times of our writer Aleko Konstantinov (from a bit more than a century now) -- or you will say that I am wrong, ah, gentlemen democrats and politician? And where have disappeared the cheap, so called, shkembedzhiynitsi, where, true, at least from the 80-ies there was no shkembe-tripe soup, but was such fat soup of pork heads, that kept you sated a whole day and only for 10 cents, including the ground hot pepper (where about the bread I am not sure whether it was also included), and these cents were a little less than the price of one egg? There are absent all these things, ah? And the medical care, as also the medicaments, ah? I personally, Ivancho, remember very well that one tablet aspirin was exactly 1 c -- 6 tabs, 6 c, or 10 tabs, 10 c --, and now it is about 10 times more expensive, or at least 5-6 times for all medicaments, compared with the average salary. Or the pensions, about which I have spoken and with which I began, which were about 60 % from the last salary, not 20-25 for 20 years or so, which in those times were enough for a whole pension.
But there are by us even more drastic curiosities, there are such that are worthy of the Guinness Records, because this, what the media tell, that in Gabon or somewhere else in Africa the minimal pension was 2 to 3 times higher than in Bulgaria can happen somewhere. Your Ivancho is aware that between different countries can exist different strength of the money, this in English is called purchasing power parity, this is subject to interpretation, there must be "woven" consumer baskets, but there is one absolute curiosity, which is not subject to interpretation. And what is it? Ah, you turn the pension in … bus tickets! The so called minimal pension under the table for 38 years service (what, as I mentioned, are quite many years) is about 160 lv, what makes exactly 100 tickets monthly, or by 3.33 tickets daily, and my pension of intellectual, former research assistant of BAS, with 2 and 1/2 tertiary educations, received in 3 different countries, and who knows in the moment 3 and 1/2 foreign languages, is a bit under 3 tickets daily, where I think that some social pensions are about 120 lv, what will give 2.5 tickets daily and this for all expenses! This is the Guinness Record, life on 3 bus tickets daily for everything, including electricity, water, central heating, food, medicaments, transport, and you name it. These are the examples for barbarity, which we show to the world, because I am convinced that on no other place such thing can happen, neither in Albania, nor in Bangladesh, nor also in Rwanda, or wherever this were, this can't happen even on the Moon, it was impossible to happen also during the Turkish yoke, if then have existed pensions (but there might have existed for some persons), and I have never ever dreamed that such thing is possible, yet in Bulgaria this is possible. Ah, ladies and gentlemen Members of Parliament, if Ivancho Jotata has voted some similar thing he would have made himself "sepuku", what is the other name of the known hara-kiri (what is easily explained in Bulgarian as this, that the person 'puka' himself, what is to burst, break open)! Because it can exist some exploitation, can exist some inequality, yet just such savagery (I will not excuse myself, for it is exactly so), is not allowed!
So that you better listen what Jotata will tell you after he has gotten the "floor". Methinks that it is necessary to introduce the following division of people in categories according to their poverty: poor are such with personal income from 1/2 to 1.0 Minimal Monthly Salaries (MMS), miserable are those with income from 1/3 to 1/2, tragic are those with income between 0.2 and 1/3 (maybe even from 1/4, but the interval is too narrow and for this reason I expanded it a bit), and those under 0.2 MMS monthly are distressed, they must be taken under the auspices of some social patronage, if we can't do it on national level then on international (extinguishing animals, ah?), or rarae aves (rara avis in Latin means rare bird). From the other side of the one stay: middle -- from 1 to 1.5 MMS, upper-middle -- from 1.5 to 2.0, well-off -- from 2.0 to 3.0 MMS, prospering -- from 3.0 to 5.0, and wealthy -- with personal income above 5.0 MMS. Where under "personal" is understood, naturally, this what is the part of every person, not this what one gets as salary, i.e. if a mother is raising one child and there is no father, then her income must be divided by 2 and only then to withhold taxes when necessary, but have you heard that something of the kind is done? In a similar way has to be proceeded also with a pair of parents (I don't mean necessary married), what is the common case, and then the child is simply counted as a half with each of the parents, where if the father, for example, has 2 children, then his income is divided by 2, and if the mother has 1 child then her income is divided by 1.5, and this child, which is common for these both parents will receive the corresponding half from his father (according to his income), and a half from the mother (again so). In any case something of the kind, yet do not think that this is who knows how complicated, because in tax offices they have information for the income of every person by the PIN code (called EGN in Bulgaria), and in the Municipalities they have info about all heirs, so that this can be tied together, as is said, in no time.
Well, it is more than obvious that it can't be led fight with the poverty if we have not this data, but till now I have not heard (not that I follow the media, to tell you the truth) that somebody has showed a wish to know these things. And according to quite a priori data I think that the distressed in Bulgaria are somewhere around 300 – 400 thousand, hardly less, because I alone was such for about 10 years (after my father died), for I have not have whatever official income, and the unofficial was somewhere about 200 lv /yearly, one year even to 10 (ten) lv, 1 year exactly zero, and one as if up to 400 and something, but even in the best case if you divide 1 MMS by 12 months this gives less than 0.1 MMS, and this unofficially! Approximately as much, if not half a million, are the tragic ones with income to 1/3 MMS, what from 420 lv is exactly 140, so that I will enter in this category also today with my 137 lv pension. The miserable is possible not to reach to half a million, but who knows, while the poor (till a whole MMS) positively exceed 1 million. How you find these "enviable" democratic achievements, gentlemen MPs? And does it now become clear to you why the people do not go to vote? Because up to my mind exactly these about 2 mln people in total with income below 1 MMS can be those who do not vote, for Jotata does not vote, to confess you. But it is quite possible when I jump over the 70 to decide to vote, yet most probably for the Turks (later on I can explain for what reasons), because it is so, looking at the age are voting chiefly the young (for the fascists), the middle aged (for Duce Boiko, if we do not count those who do not vote), and the very old pensioners (for the communists, who are not even socialists, when can propose flat taxes, but most ordinary opportunists).
And now let us cast a look at this, how much money are necessary, if we want not to have distressed, tragic, and miserable people. Well, not so desperately much for the simple reason that we are just a handful of people, and how they have made us the Money Board, in the same way they can even adopt us! In other words, for help from outside we are not at all many people. But is it so really? Well, let us say that each European citizen sacrifices the price of one only pack of cigarettes yearly, for rounding we will count this for 5 Euro, so then for some 500 mln Europeans, and turning the 5 Euro in 10 lv, this will give 5 mlrd lv, is it not so? OK, and let us for simplification take that we have well-off (over 2 MMS income) and above about 2-3 mln people, so that to be able to divide 5 mlrd lv to 5 mln people and get by a whole thousand levs for each of the left Bulgarians, and if we count only from the poor (below 1 MMS) and down, then the people will have also by 2 and 3 thousands levs, or by half MMS monthly; with one pack of cigarettes in the year sacrificed by every one Europe can save the whole Bulgaria, or at least the poor and worse Bulgarians! Do you think that by such reasonable presentation of the things the West will not help us even with a pack of cigarettes from each person, ah? I think that the help is guarantied, or at least they can help us to guarantee for everyone at least 1/3 MMS, and with this we will simply build the communism, or I am wrong? We even can -- whether I know -- help also them a little, because when they will draw off some money from the banks they might be able to raise the bank interest a bit, in order for it to reach at least the zero; in any case, however, we will lift a little their self-esteem; and in any case they will win also from decreasing of emigration from us to them.
But we, positively, can help us a little also alone, we just do not know how to do this what is necessary, and, as I said, still argue about what is needed (and whether the Communists are people, and so on). For example, I remember well that by us, it has to have been somewhere in the first 2-3 years of the century, we have placed here and there on the streets some metal commodes, which were only for dresses, and were locked with padlocks, so that nobody could open them, and if somebody has something old but still useful he could put it there, and later somebody (either the Municipality or some church) can collect it and give to those in need. And what happened then, ah? Hmm, happened this, that quite soon they were thrown down to the ground and gutted out from below, because the Gypsies could not allow themselves not to check what is lying inside them, what if there was something useful for them, i.e. they can resell it. Because the ancient nations just can't avoid selling something, be it this their wife. But look how nothing came out of this good idea. And I tell this not because the Gypsies (and who wants can call them also Romas, but the latter have gone through Rome, like the Romanians, while ours have hardly made this tour, and there is nothing offensive in the name, it is used by Germans and by Italians, not to mention the Slavs, and was derived from the river Ganges), so that our Gypsies don't interfere with anything in our governing, on the contrary, they help us in their own way anywhere they can, work massively in the clearing and hygiene (instead of Chinese or Arabs, for example, because a Bulgarian would have been ashamed, wouldn't he?), and lately they conduct actively selected collection of the waste, where they tour around the garbage cans and collect, each one according with his "profiling", either the paper, or the iron or other metals, or the plastics (most often), because we don't know how to perform this (and to bury in the ground the air in the bottles is the next madness of Bulgarian rulers).
In two words, in order to finish with this point, we definitely can alone overcome the poverty if we decided to, but this requires pure and simple consensus of all political parties and of the entire nation, about this quo vadis, how the old Latins have said, and what is moral and what not, but we are not nation of believers, and know only to divide ourselves in "fighting units"; this what is written on our National Assembly about the unity let go someone and tell it to the marines, as the saying goes, but we will not unite (never compromises with the communists, right?). Yes, but there are no other ways to govern one big group of people, one nation, except either somehow to unite the poles (say, the communists and the fascists, ah?), or if some strong centrist parties appear. The other way is the dear God Himself to come down to us and to begin alone to govern us, yet if I was on His place I wouldn't have done this, because for what reason should I make exception for one disunited herd? The poles does not unite, but they also unite, will tell you your Ivancho, who has invented also this example with the colours of rainbow, where the dark red and the violet stand on different sides of the spectrum, they correspond to quite different wavelengths, they do not touch in whatever way, but for us, the people, they look similar, simply because we want to relate them somehow (and it is so, because between green and blue, for example, is felt bigger difference as between these two poles of the rainbow). So that this method remains open, only that here must be added also the third strong party, the Turkish one, which, too, is some kind of end, yet it is also a center.
And, ah, gentlemen politicians, I, as have already mentioned this, avoid to follow the events in Bulgaria, in order not to get angry without need, I care about my nerve cells, and also my last TV set broke and as result of this I feel myself very happy, that I must not waste my time to listen even to the news (sandwiched between ads), but I deeply doubt that somebody of you has answered himself the question why, damn it, these ethnic party (for it is so, the entire West knows this) is centrists, where the answer is so elementary that it can't be simpler than this. So DPS (translated in English as Movement for Rights and Freedoms, MRF) is centrist party because it is ethnic! Does it become clear or I must explain as to first-graders? Well, let it be so, I will add also that it is the only ethnic party for the Turks, although it is used as if by the Gypsies, too. In this way it has to be clear, right? Because when exists one single party (like it was once, only the communist -- this BZNS, as if agrarian party, was a maneuver, red herring), then it tries to please everyone, the rich and the poor, but more the poor, the oppressed, the pariahs, the labour slaves, for they are more than the rich and the strong, who are minority. I don't state that if there exists only one party it is not possible to come to errors, predominantly to stagnation, naturally that this is possible, but it is at least centrist and pleases everybody. So that, make another centrist party with influence, but you can't. I have expressed somewhere some opinions, but will not repeat them here, here I will come later to one method for uniting of the ends, what can also be a way out.
Gentlemen, as I said, I occupy myself with social problems for more than 20 years, I have some achievements (although not known widely), yet my goal is not to advertise myself or to distract you from the topic, or rather from the themes, because they have grown up in their number, as you see, NSSI has remained in background, to the foreground came Bulgarian poverty. So that I want to say that this, what I explain here, can be understood without some links to another pseudonym, here I said that if we are of the same opinion, that exploitation has to exist, but misery has to disappear, it is quite obvious that first of all must be chosen some special and permanent body, which has to deal with these questions, some Social Ministry (let me shorten it to SM), or at least some department to this for labour, which unit has to exist forever, or at least some 50 years (after what it will simply become tradition). This SM must firstly make the necessary calculations in order to see what are the percentages to each of the proposed by Jotata groups, and from them to estimate the necessary sums, which are needed. The Ministry of Labour does some work, but here I speak about something else, not about concrete work but about estimations and scientific developments, which must be imperatives for all politicians, not that they will be exactly their bosses, but the rulers have to ask them for propositions. Because, there is no need to twist our souls, our politicians are rarely competent cadres by the democratic form of government, they are only strategists, and the tacticians are others. Besides, as far as I know, this Ministry works no some programs, and this does not solve the problems, because the program is a way for spending of the allocated funds, i.e. this is the well known (at least to me) method from our totalitarian past to justify the means, practically nothing new, while I am speaking about establishing of ways, means, variants, for the fight with poverty, if you want, development of some programs for this purpose, but not their execution, what is the next stage.
Look, ultimately we can fight with the misery in two extreme ways, either equalizing the incomes before receiving of the salaries, or when we equalize them a little after their receiving; in the first variant we have communism (or socialism) in the frames of capitalism (because it, the communism, turned out to be simply state-monopoly capitalism, not principally new order, how the communists affirmed), and in the second variant, which I propose here (because now we have no other choice), it goes about establishing of communism under the conditions of capitalism, and I don't see what is so bad in this, when approximately the same method is used from at lest half a century in the Scandinavian countries. But surely, these are the variants, and, naturally, there is a difference whether you receive much money or a little, yet if you receive much then you will also pay everything more expensive, because otherwise, to want that the poor pay also for the wealthy, is highly perverse. Yeah, only that we, as country of paradoxes, as people with botched gene, or like savages, and so on, make exactly this latter thing, quite often, the poorer pays relatively higher than the wealthy one! And don't think that your Ivancho exaggerates, not the least, the examples are numerous.
Take for example, the real minced meat, which is about 6 lv, and this about 5 lv with a bit soybeans yet also with meat, and then these which are only with soybeans, eventually with adding of emulsion of pork skins (the last hit in culinary industry), which are sold for about 4 lv, but must have been on the half of this, i.e. by 50 c a package of 250 grams. Or take the ratio of sprat fish (caring the funny name 'tsatsa' in Bulgarian) to mackerel, which earlier was, as if, 0.40 : 1.60 = 1 : 4, and now is 2.20 : 4 (eventually 5), what is twice less. And generally all the prices in the shops are such, that they earn more out of the cheap products (and this is why they sell them), while from the expensive ones earn less as percentage, so that it turns out that the poor, who eat offal or inwards (which now are at least 3 times more expensive as ratio to the meat from our totalitarian years), pay also part of the price of pastramies and other special dry sausages of the rich. Or that the contemporary tickets, from which the rich people with cars can also win, because they leave the cars in the parkings (of the subway) and spare petrol, and generally for them turns to be cheaper to travel with the city transport, and compare this even with a person who earns something, who is not like me on the zero, but the ticket is clear expenditure for him, because he simply has not the car alternative in his disposition. Also the method of selling of several things or services, or in bigger quantity, for relatively less money, than if they are bought in smaller retail, is reduced again to this principle. Or two one-bedroom apartments will be significantly more than one two-bedroom, even three-bedroom one. Or the more expensive cars use less petrol, and so on, i.e. this principle is not new, in our world of the stronger is naturally that the stronger are benefited in some way by their strength, yet it is not naturally when in addition to this is applied this principle also in places where this is not necessary.
And let us look at the things in another way, let us give some approximative answer to this what kind of people are unemployed nowadays? It is obvious, that the answer, that these are the lazy ones is wrong, or the incompetent, no, nearest to the truth in the general case stays the answer: the good! If you do not believe Jotata, then look for some examples in the Christianity, or in other religions, where everywhere is preached mercy, compassion, help from the stronger (what in the world of money is equivalent to the richer); I can give you also one … etymological proof, in Italian (i.e. Latin) to present as a gift is regalare, what is clear that must come from the ruler who reigns, i.e from the king-rex, i.e. it is supposed that the kings make presents (because they can do this). So that it is normal to take more from the richer, only not in our (well, I will not say wild) country, where it is not so, where, for example, one who has not a car, in order to climb on Vitosha mountain has to take a taxi, because there is no public transport, say, to the hotel Shtastlivetsa. And that unemployed are not the incompetent is clear, because exactly the rich can afford themselves to be incompetent, they will always find someone to do for them whatever work, and the able and competent will serve under them and with their money, and the same is valid for the lazy ones, the rich can sit and speculate (i.e. judge, compare, juxtapose the things) and do nothing, but the poor one can't, he must earn something to eat.
So that I, by the example of some preachers, could use also the comparison of the good and the bad with the cultivated and wild plants, i.e. why have to exist weeds, wild plants (or nations, or animals) when the cultivated are nicer, more ennobled and lucrative, and generally better? Well, because the wild is more sustainable, endures longer, it survives, while the cultivated is nice and useful, yet delicate and weak, right? Yeah, but in the world of capitals stronger and more endurable (respectively wild or brutal) are the rich, while the poor are those who produce the goods, but can not use them much. So that in this sense can be even said, that the unemployed are those who do not want to displace other people from their work, they are not so impudent, do not crouch or cringe so much, and so on, in what, naturally, is hidden a big dose of truth (if we do not absolutize much the things). However it is, it has long been clear, that it must be helped the poor and underprivileged (maybe because the kingdom of heaven would have been theirs, or reversed, that because they are such and nobody helps them, then the moment when they leave this world and they will fall in ecstasy in the paradise, while the rich, and so on), and for this reason the poor must be cared for even if they do not work but can. (Exactly like your Ivancho, he definitely could have sold something since the last century, but no, he wanted not, he explained that he had tertiary educations, yet what of it? The laziness is laziness, and when he is unable to adapt to the democracy, then he is unable, incompetent, and that's that.)
OK, and now let us see how to help the poor and good ones. Well, in two words so, that everyone with income below 1/3 MMS must disappear, and those with income under 1 MMS have to become less in number. Literally so, when one must travel to somewhere (say, to visit his father's grave) he just sits in the bus and travels and does not at all care that can't pay the ticket; or he becomes hungry and then enters in some shop (eh, not exactly in a restaurant) and takes something, because must satiate himself; and so on. This is communism, right, to everybody according to the necessities? And it is really so, only that for the moment we can't afford it, but at least to make efforts to do it. Now, there are different approaches to this how to satisfy the needs (for example with girls -- even Jotata feels once in a month such necessity, to tell you the truth, but with 130 lv how could this be done?), where there can be given money, so that the people buy the things with them under the market mechanism, but can also the prices be regulated in such manner, that they were to the pocket of the poor, what under the capitalism is more difficult, yet not impossible (where something for these services is paid from other instance), and there can also exist some special places, something like boarding houses, where to use some discounts. Generally is obvious, that it is easier to take money instead of to give (i.e. the prices to be regulated with adding of taxes), but the contrary is also possible, in principle (for example, I have read once, and something similar as if is applied also by us, but we surely have messed again something, and it consists in this, that when the agriculture is not profitable, then to all villagers, or rather farmers, must be paid something, in order that they were able to live -- because both, these people are many, and they offer something natural --, so that they were in condition to sell cheaper their products). Questions like this must be considered by the SM, how to give to the poor, so that the sums were not misused, was not allowed to other people to make use of them.
Well, but it is possible, if the matters are thought through. Say, for the tickets for the city transport exist absolutely no problems to sell reduced on 50 % tickets, not cards for a whole month, to students, pensioners, as well also to unemployed (and disabled, and others), something what really is done on the West, and I have seen it at least in one country, but in Bulgaria -- no and never. The card is one thing, and the ticket is something else, the tickets are good for a pair of exits in the month, while the cards are for at least half of the days in the month, these are different things. And by us this will even not be related with printing of new thickets, the old 10 pieces for 8 lv can be used, what is exactly the half of 1.60 for a ticket, where they are sold in some limits (in order to avoid misuse and resell) and their usage is accompanied with cards that give them this right (student's or pensioner's); a bit more difficult it will be with the unemployed, but this is obligatory, and probably can somehow be arranged with checking in some computer data bases; and the limitations can be to 10 tickets monthly, or at most to 20, but the lessening of the price twice is something, they become bearable, under compelling circumstances.
Or also another example: I personally think that 50 % communal and other obligatory expenses (like for medics and medicines, for education, or Internet), have to be accepted as a ceiling, and to be compensated in some way, because the right situation is that such expenses do not exceed 40 or even 30 percents. Only that for the moment it is not clear how this will be measured, though even now can be proposed something urgent, can be proposed that if somebody wants to show such help, say, the Church of the 77th Day (or I don't know exactly which day it was), then it can declare, that if one comes with a document for the pension or salary, and with the bill for the heating, then if this bill in the limits of the month exceeds 1/3 of his income, then the difference will be restored to him. Well, this is a weak measure, but is, still, some help (for the most winter months like December, January, and February). Or for example, if one has no official income for the month (proven, say, with his Labour Booklet), then to him are reimbursed half of all communal expenses, plus up to 10 used tickets, something similar. Or some big supermarkets can want to make some discount, let it be 20 to 30 %, for people with some documents, for goods of first necessity, like: bread, milk, sugar, sunflower oil, rice or pasta. The shops will always find ways to recompense this discount with some unnoticeable raising of the prices, and with the hope to attract clients, which will buy also meat, and other goods together with the discounted.
Or then, by paying of the taxes for education they can be personified according with the abilities of the parents, where the poorer use discounts up to 50 %, this is also possible, and when it is linked with concrete persons then this can stimulate also in some way the success of the students (it can be made discount according the marks, too). Or take also the taxes for the GPs (the district doctors), it is clear that such taxes in a country like Bulgaria must not exist, but well, let them remain, yet to be proportional to the income, but they are not, i.e. it can be required payment of 1 % of their personal income, with the addition that those with income below 1/3 MMS (or no income at all) pay on the basis of 1/4 MMS, and those with too high income on the basis of 2 MMS. In broad outlines this must bring nearly the same money to the physicians, but will be significantly more justified; and don't forget also that these taxes are a kind of tip or backshish for the physicians, who how much gives, roughly, not to the cent. And it is high time to change this flat tax, because it is the utmost right-wing way for taxation (more to the right will be when the less the income is, the higher percent of tax must be paid, but such thing does not exist, maybe, in other galaxies, to say nothing about ours), and to calculate the tax based on the personal income, taking into account the dependent persons, because this is the easiest way for reaching of some proportionality of the expenses to the income, else must many things (electricity, heating, etc.) be sold more expensive to the richer, what nevertheless can be done, but with small differences, about maximum 10-20 % more expensive for very wealthy ones (in the end, let them build their own power stations, when are such big brass; wind ones as if are already possible). And so on.
So that we are coming to some banking institution, which has to perform the various transfers, accepting donations and sending them where is necessary. I have to remind again the unavoidably needed categorization of everybody with some magnetic card by EGN, so that to be able to check in every moment to which category one belongs. If the income is above 1 MMS this will not affect him, if it is above 3 or 5 MMS might be required from him even slightly higher paying for some of these services (as I mentioned, electricity, heating, education), but if the income is below 1/2 MMS have to begin to be made some discounts, and if it is under 1/4 MMS, or 0.2 MMS as I proposed, then have to be compensated all expenses, because such people simply must not exist by us. But the important thing is, mark this, that it must not be required that the person should beg whatever instance, file whatever application, simply when one is poor then he receives some discounts, no matter whether he is an intellectual with 17 tertiary educations, or narcotized teenager, or pregnant woman, or HIV positive, or alcoholic old man or woman, or whoever he is, I repeat, the reasons are not important, the important thing is that he is alive person and has all rights his elementary needs to be satisfied, according with the abilities of the society at the moment. When we can afford this, then we must afford it, and whether we can afford this will be estimated after this card-filing (unless somebody explicitly declares that he does not want to be monitored, what will be valid in the limits of the year). This is the idea of humanity, this is the idea of communism, and this is the idea of one well-regulated capitalist society. The other countries do somehow with their measures, but we, as the poorest of the entire European Union, need strengthened measures, I think that this is obvious.
Ah yes, and pay attention also to this, that if the miserable and so on receive some additional money, then they will use them, and this can enliven the economy, because the stagnation occurs when people have no money to buy what they need. Similar crisis, according to me, happened in Bulgaria with the building workers before 5-6 years and it still continues, because we have built a heap of homes, which there are not enough people to buy, the people have no money, so that, despite some increase of the housing stock somewhere with about 50 % compared with the situation before a quarter of a century, we have now again many needing housing, for the reason that those who buy homes do this chiefly as way for investment of money, but the people do not live in them. Also look how many pubs and cafes are there in the towns, and they can not be filled even to 1/3 on the average, and most often only to 10 % of the places. All this is result of our exceeding efforts to catch the "bone", at which later we neither "gnaw", nor give it to some other (dog, according to one Bulgarian proverb). This, obviously, is botched capitalism. Like also we overdo the matters with the paid education, in result of what the children simply do not want to learn, why should they need this, when they can easily buy their education paying the tuition taxes and finally getting their diploma, and this also is putting of the cart before the horse. The right method is this, that we denied, paying for the education by some instance, for which later one has to work some years, if does not restore the given money. And so on: SM, banks, phone cards with filed citizens, different prices for different people, according to their abilities, this is our near (say, up to the end of this century) capitalism, otherwise we can expect only fascists and revolutions, ladies and gentlemen. Because we can not overcome our human flaws, can not fight ourselves, not the nature, we neither can nor wish unite ourselves and think about the others, we are not interested where we are going, what we are fighting for, we think only to consume, and have forgotten that on this world exist other values.
So, and let me now give you my idea about the uniting of the extremities, about this Block of the Poles, for example, where will enter communists and fascists, and also ethnic parties (only without the Chinese and Arabs, please, for them is yet too early to sing "to be called young Blugarian first delight me brings"). Let us not want exactly one party, this, by all appearances, exceeds our human abilities, but Block, with common strategy and vision for combating the poverty, we have to make, and then, willy-nilly, the other centrist parties, if there are such, will also enter in it. This can be difficult to make if we are not clear on the point what we want, communism or fascism or capitalism, but if we want not to have poor people, then this is one worthy goal and common platform for all. We can call it, for example (and here comes some game of words, which quite not always is well translatable): BBB, like Block for 'Borba'-fighting of the 'Bednost'-poverty, and if somebody will say that there was once such party (for it really was), then I can easily add one more "B" in front, Bulgarian, and such political power with 4 equal letters surely does not exist anywhere in the world (and there follows one impossible pun with a heap of other names beginning in Bulgarian with "B" in order to make the party even with 5 B-s when necessary). But there can be also another approach to the name, like … (and here come several names built from the initials of the words in its name, which say approximately: SLAP, CHUCK, PRICK, GUY, BUDDY, SHIELD, DUMB, BLOWJOB, OAF).
Well, fun or not fun, yet you think gentlemen politicians, like also you ladies. Because else nothing good expects us, for the world goes to the left, but does not confess it, does not call it so, yet there is an idea in the left, while in the right there isn't, the right is the brutal reality. And while turning to the left naturally appear also the antipodes, the fascists, and the world has suffered enough from fascists (not how from the communists, they did not stir up wars, they terrorized their own people), and this not only is not good, but generates situation of two sharp stones, which, as we know (we have a saying about this), and have seen it in practice, don't grind flour. And the single centrist party in Bulgaria is this of the Turks, but we do not want Turks by us. And, on the other hand, parties built around personalities, more or less right-wing, don't last long, yet they must last, already Machiavelli has remarked that the King must rule long. And then what happens, ah? Hmm, it happens that, want we this or not, but from time to time the communists, who are not communists, as I said, but people associate them with the latter, again come to power, yet the population does not much want this, and then appeared new fascists, who can't unite themselves, and the Turks come to pacify us and win the sympathies of Bulgarians and abroad, and Kings we have not more, the dear God does not bother about us at all, and as hope for us remains the revolution, but NATO will not allow this, or meaningless civil protests, to which we have now the rights, but gain nothing out of them. So that, in one word, you either make somehow coalition with the communists, or later you alone will be guilty, that have not done this; the population will in any case suffer (the last convinced communist was the "comrade Zhan" (Videnov), to whom the UDF supporters have "blown under the tail" -- what is our idiom for to chuck out somebody), but this is the situation, it remains the choice only between the Turks and the communists (because the witch hunt will sometime stop, and then there will be nobody to vote for some right-wing bullies or tough guys, just to prevent the coming of the left-wings to power).
I think that have made myself sufficiently clear. For me personally it is just the same, I don't vote for this reason, because the clever persons acknowledge whatever power, because there is no go without rulers, while the silly ones do not accept whatever, find drawbacks in everything, and nobody can please them. Yeah, but the most of the people, one terribly big part of them, are from the silly ones, and as consequence of this nobody can please them. The change is a good thing, this, that we change our rulers like some strong guy changes the whores, helps a little, but does not solve entirely the problems, because one wants to become a bit emotionally engaged with the "whores", right? On the West people vote for their politicians because they like them, but by us we vote in order to prevent the coming of the others, who we hate; yes, but with hate nothing good on this world has been created. Enough on this point.
Ladies and gentlemen, compatriots, I understand that I am boring you, and I also am sick of writing this long letter, I have many other ideas, how I have mentioned, but it has to be said something also about the sunset of capitalism, because it as if goes away, yet a heap of people show discontent, for example some Bin Laden's, and also we can easily manufacture atom bombs, so that it is good to soften the things, and the damned crisis does not want to end, so that the world is messed up, and if Jotata will not teach the world then who else will do this? Now, let us approach more generally the things: one civilization comes with some suitable form of exploitation, and goes away when this form becomes ineffective, does not sufficiently unite the people, and they are herd animals, and left on themselves simply lose meaning in life, rise one against the other, don't bother about the others, comes decline of morality, and so on. Further comes this, that if they find some new better form of exploitation (or organization) they move to it, it was so till now, but if they can not find, then, I simply don't know, probably they return to some form of commune, to the primary source, close the cycle, because we have started from there, from the primeval communes, so that now we can begin to built some post-industrial communes, who knows?
In any case the civilization goes away, what is obvious at least due to the loss of purpose in life for the young, from here are all drug addicts, this is escapism, an escape from reality, because it does not offer enough emotions; earlier, while we were killing each other, that was what has giving the actions, but now the virtual reality appeared, and we do everything virtual (also the sex, if you like, because under the influence of narcotics or alcoholism it becomes practically virtual, unreal). Then comes also the overproduction, what, too, is obvious, so that people are simply not necessary, everything is automatized and robotized, and we avoid today to do whatever by hand (probably for this reason for some years by us also the … beans became terribly expensive, and we now eat, at least I do this, such ones either from Zanzibar, or from Tanzania, or also from Ethiopia, and the closest to us is, maybe, Kyrgyzstan). So, but to buy something and to carry it to the garbage long before it has worn itself out is simply unmoral, this is like, for example, to … kill the people when they reach approximately 25 years, what is 1/3 of 75 as average continuation of life, if we throw out something 3 times earlier! But this 3 times is already not enough for us, there are thrown away things even 5-6 times earlier, yet they are not destroyed, with the hope that somebody will use them as second hand, but this is like: when the children come in their passport age, or even their teens, and to drive them out of home, because we are already tired of them (and, in fact, interesting are the young children only), if somebody wants to adopt them, OK, it is his business. This not only pollutes the environment, encumbers it with many things that do not decompose and return to the nature, but also makes senseless their production.
And from this senseless production comes also the futility of our existence, somehow associated. Now there are also no families (according to the last census in Bulgaria, not in some America, 55 % of the children are this, what until recently was called bastards), and the states are not so confronted as before, in order to be defended, and one has not purpose in his life, has not for what to heap money, because under the capitalism if one does not accumulate money he has not a goal in life, this is a vicious closed circle, out of which we can't exit (and out of which succeed to exit as if only some … kamikaze, like the "brave" boys of Bin Laden, or such who blow themselves up somewhere on the street, because in this way they give sense at least to their death, when can't give such to their life!). The capitalist form of exploitation begins to "deposit the luggage" (as we like to say, i.e. to lose weight), in Bulgaria not yet, we are still holding on, have purpose in life, especially your Ivancho (who with the coming of democracy got at once purpose in life, not to work for his science, but to fight for his survival, and in case he succeeds to survive then to try to tell something to the world, to live for the future, this is the highest goal in life, up to him, reached thanks to his … misery, such things), but in the developed countries it is not so. In the developed countries, and by the by also in such like ours, the society splits in: such who work, and then they win 3 and even more times more money than they need, such who do not at all try to work (unless something from time to time, odd jobs, according to the Americans) and live like drones, as drug addicted and alcoholics, or simply as bums, and a heap of others in the middle, who have not yet oriented themselves, but as if are more inclined to become bums than "doers" in the society. That's it, ladies and gentlemen, the people just don't see sense in this to accumulate money (and then to pay to the banks to keep them, ah?) and prefer to live how they like and without cares, what, of course, is quite logical, only that this indicates decaying of the society.
So that if I am right -- and for Jotata to be wrong is something directly impossible (nearly like this the Sun not to rise some day, or our dear God to show Himself to us) -- then the most important thing on this world in the moment is to be proposed some new way for exploitation, which can have money equivalent, but must not be based on the money, only to be measured with it! Well, I have not invented it, but there are several variants, where the most fantastic is when the people are paid some money in advance, on which they will be able to live, and, if they want, to be able also to pay in order to work somewhere by half day, or even by a quarter of a day, for the others, for the society! Another variant is to be built some new, post-industrial communes, for which the people will want to work, and to leave what they have to these communes, what will solve in significant measure the use of money, they will not be something unnecessary; only that these communes must be profiled according to the professions, and one has to choose them in his mature (or teenage) years, and they have to substitute somehow the family or the tribe, which are absent now. In any case the people must feel themselves as part of the society, both in the space, i.e. around them, in the moment, and in the time, i.e. with the past and future generations, else it dissolves.
Else, you see, it turns out that the purpose of the money is to deny or reject itself, what is one quite dialectical view, but is a bit silly, don't you find so? Id est, isn't it better if we purposefully reject it as goal, and use it only as means -- for measuring of the abilities of everybody? And I, in fact, propose something of the kind, with the defending of the thesis, that for the miserable, no matter for what reason, must be taken care from the society, because in the most cases they are not bad people, they do not make revolutions, do not steal, and so on, they simply have other values! Because our behavior is result of priority of values! Are the exclamation marks enough, or I have to put more? Because there is one such moment which is a little comical, but the comic and tragic go hand in hand, so that don't be surprised. The moment is that the contemporary consumer society, the same that goes to its ruin, is based on the … snobbism of the people, ha, ha. Our society is based on the consumption, which creates work for the people, and the consumption is based now -- for a long time, since the time of Marx and of various bourgeois and technical revolutions -- on this, that the people want to consume something what is not especially necessary for them, but how can they remain behind the others? That's it, and because of this, Jotata, who has never been snob himself in whatever degree, is glad that the others are such, because the life continues. With what I want to say, that major part of the people, who receive some helps permanently, will not be satisfied with them, they will definitely want something more and will seek some job, will not become lazy, and the very communication with people on the place of work is also very important psychological moment, while those, who have other values, who feel in themselves the necessity to do something for themselves, to develop themselves a bit more, or are forced to care for somebody, for such people these financial assistance will do ideal work, they will be ready even to kiss the hand of Miss Democracy (if will meet her somewhere).
Yeah, but how long will continue this consuming of unnecessary things, how much snobbish can a nation, or the whole world, become? But if the people are not snobs then they do not need work for the invented, sucked out of their fingers, necessities, they will search something else, because not all are … masochists, to work only for their self-exploitation. So that the point is not only to find some sense for the exploitation to continue, but to find also for what can be used the accumulated funds, like also to free the people from unnecessary cares for their survival (when this is possible), if they have some higher, according to them, values (for example: they study something, it may be the relativity theory, but may be also to walk on hands, or they are caring for someone, a parent or child, or love the animals, or are growing plants, or compose something, or even have fun in the sex, while they can, or do something else, whatever it is, but for them this is more important than the filling of the guts). Well, now, it both, while there exist rich and poor the capitalism also exists, and because of this is important to slow the equalization of all people and countries (first of all) around the world -- what is unavoidable, the world nowadays are connected vessels --, and also it is good that there do not exist very poor people, in order that the richer ones have better self-esteem, and with the hope, not at all illusory, that if the people do what they want, then the bigger part of them will look to do something good for the others! You see the exclamation mark, right? Because I have stressed on many places that the people (as well the animals) are born good, but they become bad because the society forces them to this, it treats them undeservedly bad (like, say, the NSSI your Ivancho, maintaining that he does not deserve his real coefficient of 1.28, but it has to be pulled down at the price of everything). I personally think that everything on this world is reduced to the satisfactory compromise, and the care for the poor, or the establishing of some variant of communism, under the conditions of capitalistic market economy, is simply an imperative for the whole world, and especially for such poor countries like ours, we are simply obliged to solve this problem and with this to help the whole world, which can help us to realize it, if we succeed to convince it in this with a detailed analysis of the property situation of our population, and with concrete measures in this direction. A smooth transition to some new form of exploitation is for me always preferable before the creation of revolutionary situations.
Well, I think that I have ranted enough till now, and it is already clear that we, as the weakest link in the European Union, must give an example to the world for solving of painful social problems, which example they will be able to apply also by them. Because I propose things, which have to be done top down, not episodic, or as they are also called ad hoc (worked out specially for the goal) measures by some local programs (for example, let us help the cancerous patients). When there are paid financial aids to all in some minimal amount, say 1/4 MMS (when we can not afford us 1/3), initially, and in the interval from 1st to 5th day of the month, via some bank and by EGN-PIN code, and later all payments go through this bank, then there are no problems to subtract from the payments the initially paid sums, if this can be done, and what remains not restored, i.e. the person is freeloader of the state, it remains and has to be covered from some fund, then can not only be required and sought means, which must be paid to the person (say, he is a pensioner, or is sick and because of this does not work, or studies something and receives a stipend and so on), but is possible to focus the attention on such persons, who would have wished to work, but nobody gives them work (like your Ivancho hitherto, and receives absolutely nothing, or literally crumbs compared with his qualification), and include such people in various programs, yet not that they were forced to go to some instances and beg and be told (if they bother to answer them) that there are no paragraphs by which to pay them whatever (because in this moment there is no demand for such workers). Did you get it? (included in English also in the original) This will not only solve radically the problem with the poverty, but will improve the receivables to the state, as well the control over all social welfare programs, and will make our society significantly more humane.
And if it turns out that Jotata is right in general (he gives you only ideas, he will not do the work of tens and hundreds of people, naturally), do you think that after our experience, of course first in some small town, with population from 50 to 100 thousand people, then in a bigger one, and so on, eventually with help of the West and even the UN, if you want, so that after such fulfilled by us experiment the world will not want also to apply our experience and knowledge? But why not, because the precedent is a great thing (and it was so in the antiquity also with the democracy, if one beliefs the historians, because the ancient Greeks wanted not to apply it initially), i.e. our small country will become an ... experimental polygon for various social experiments, what not only will make all revolutionary situations unnecessary, but will also better … hmm, the exploitation, of course, when will strengthen the society. We are appropriate for this purpose, because are in Europe, yet not in its navel, but somewhere in the periphery, are small country, and are so poor, that if something is good for us, it will automatically be good for the whole world! Obvious my dear Watson, as is said. So that in Bulgaria will be possible to investigate also various of my hinted ideas about the future form of exploitation, which will be based not only on the money, as well also variants for exiting from the crisis, if we hurry up a little in this relation (because, as I said, I don't believe that it will continue after 2025). Because, I hope that you understand, the crises, as well also the wars, are good only for the wealthy ones, they can buy easy and cheap various goods, while for the poor they in no way can be attractive (although for the poor the moments of stable development are also not pretty good, due to the fact that then the prices are high, but they have at least with what to delude themselves, that they also receive much).
Yet all this was result of the direct meaning of my propositions, but there is, naturally, also associated meaning, this that we will become known in the world, for us will begin to speak, we will get publicity, they will speak then for us not only like for those barbarians there on the Balkans. Because we may be barbarians, or quite unique, not like the others, not like in the civilized countries (say, we have not public baths and laundromats, can't even from Sofia climb on the Vitosha mountain with public transport, and so on, I mentioned some such moments), but we are, ha, ha, cultured barbarians, we don't fight with the others, we harm only ourselves! But, my God, nowadays this must have been the most valued thing in the world, that could be required from a nation. Because many civilized countries and nation show their civility until they decide to do their "jihad" (or Crystal nights, or then Bartholomew's, before). There is practically no European country which, in one or another historical moment, has not attacked not only its immediate neighbours, but has not exited far (for example 5 radii of their country) away, and about the Americans it is better to say nothing, they can not wait even 20 years without to start a war somewhere, and they have cut off all the coasts of the Canadians and the Mexicans. This is so because the "civilized" countries are united, or just religious, and can often come some moment when they fall in a mass "amok" and begin to start slaughtering, to the left and to the right, where we, with our barbarity, both, have our "vent holes", don't invade the others, fight only when someone openly provokes us, and also can't (or probably don't want to) organize ourselves in order to punish and rob the others! We, for example, not only have not persecuted the Jews, like practically all countries around the world (if we don't count the Eskimos, probably), but have also saved them, we are compassionate and tolerant, and that is the thing, of which we can be proud before the world!
So that if we do something small we will set an avalanche in motion, the people will begin to honour us, and there are reasons for this. Because our folk songs and dances, especially those from Rhodopes, are just marvelous; not that there is not interesting folklore around (Turkish, Greek, or Serbian music, and other, and farther away from us are the Negro rhythms, etc.), but ours are ours and are unique. Or take our alphabet, ah? It may not be exactly our (although the monasteries of Athos were within the borders of ancient Bulgaria), but from all Slavs we use it in the best way, we don't need a single Latin character, where even the Russians if they write 'eto' (because they write it with the so called "reversed e", which is the right 'e', if you ask me -- and to add that in single quotes I give the pronunciation of the word), will read it like '1t2', where the first vowel is like in English "yeah", and the second is like in "but", and this alphabet is better than the Latin in phonetic aspect (I have dealt with such matters), what means of all alphabets, probably, because there is no sense to mention the Greek one, it is botched (they never have simultaneously the letters 'b' and 'v', for example, have not the letter 'u', this is unbelievable, such things don't exist wherever on the West), and with the Turkish (i.e. Arabic), or Hebrew, or Sanskrit, to say nothing about Chinese, hieroglyphs nobody on the West will want to deal. Then comes the phonetics, it is directly brilliant, better (purer and richer) than Italian, and this language is a renowned example of melodicity in the world. Then comes our grammar, it is the simplest of all Slavonic languages, we have not a single casus-case; it is simpler also than Teutonic languages, and than Latin ones (because they have enormously many tenses, 14, and only the past are 5, at least it is so in the Italian); and so on (I have not time here for more details). So that our language is worth to become … world standard, just imagine! A language of literally one handful of people, one promille of the world, but valuable, easy, modern, and, mark this, formed by the very people, this is not work only of our elite, but of all people.
Yet let us look at the things under another angle, let us ponder in what other way, except with the proposed by me ideas for socialization of the society, we can better our image, and whatever political party can stand out with something significant, and this practically for no time, for some 5-10 years, and there will be already good results. Because once our "bai Gosho" (Dimitrov) has lied to us that for 10-20 years we shell achieve this, what other nations have achieved for centuries, but we, even if have achieved something during the totalitarian years, with the coming of our democracy have lost everything, have fallen lower in the living standard than, maybe, under the fascism, have fallen somewhere to the level from the Turkish joke. To think that we will be able to compete with Germans or Frenchmen and so on, or even with Poles and Czechs, even also with Romanians, we can not -- take for example our mournful attempts to produce cars, or computers "Pravetz", and other things, yet all these countries have produced and still produce their own (at least cars). So that we are disunited horde, there is no need to deny obvious things and to apply the policy of the ostrich, wanting neither to see nor to hear when bad things about us are mentioned. Yet I think that have explained pretty good the matters, we can be disunited, but we are unique ans original, we have heads on our shoulders, we can't be so easily led by our noses, like in other countries the rulers lead the plebs, we are quite specific, for us must care the whole world, joke aside!
This is so because by us the very gene is unique in its own way, we are simply beautiful, the men and the women, while many other nations with pure genes (we have never pretended for this, and there is no sense to try) look simply like one face, they are all similar (at least about the Germans, Russians, Ukrainians, and many others -- not to mention the Chinese --, this is so). We are people with hot blood, and because of this are interesting, but even in this aspect are unique, because people with more southern blood, say Arabs, Hebrews, Negroes, Greeks, and others, are not so well accepted in the West (I suppose). We can be compared only with the Italians -- and they are aware about this, for have … stolen our flag, only have swapped a bit the colours -- but we are looking probably nicer than them, more peculiar, well, and also wilder, I said this. So that we have reasons to be proud of something, as well, of course, to be ashamed of something else, but if we fall into the spotlight of the world then we, probably, will begin chiefly to be proud, and stop running away (more so if here will be paid something to everybody, but on the West not yet). In any case, I don't see faster method to improve our image, who sees such method let him tell it, I am stopping till here and it remains only to attach the main part of my correspondence with NSSI, anonymized (I have written it in interesting manner, you will not be bored by its reading), and to move to the conclusion (with something original in it).
( It is so, but because for about 10 years I am keeping in my head one comical musical idea, then let me tell it to you, and someone maybe will want to fulfill it. It goes about musical piece "Thracian dances" by one ordinary Bulgarian, Petko (Stainov), right, over melody of which can be sung a song nearly without words, i.e. with one and the same words, such: "Let us fill the gizzard let, let us fill the gizzard let, …" (and so on, but in translation this does not look good, the point is that we have here special irregular musical time, with 7 syllables, and this sounds very enlivening). This has to be sung about 5 minutes, with good exactly Bulgarian, not Serbian, not Turkish, not Greek, but ours rhythm, and with chanting of different choirs, men's, children's, sopranos, basses, such things. And this song has to be played in the National Assembly, before each meeting, in order to remind the people there about the common population, and also by the TV, before the news can be included some 10 or so seconds, because this is both, original melody, and permanent reminder, like the slogan above the entrance of our Parliament, to which nobody pays whatever attention. Because we are, of course, very good nation, but are a little bit wild, right, although in reverse order it sounds as if better. )
[ here I will put in such parentheses some remarks and explanations. ]
Subject: Why for 5 (five) months my final pension is still not calculated
Was registered as document with registration index
1030-40-????/??.8.2016 г. [they register it quite correct]
Sirs, but probably chiefly madams [the exact question]
If you occasionally decided to answer me, from this address [because I am sending it to their central address], then I am interesting why for already FIVE months I still have not calculated the final amount of my pension. I am Ivancho ??? [we have 3 names] Jotata, EGN 5005??????, from Sofia, and have filed my documents on ??.03 [you probably know that in Europe the date is given as dd.mm.yyyy] this year, on ??.04 my minimal amount (137 lv) was allowed and this money is paid me regularly somewhere from May (initially through a bank, later via the post). All this is very good, but the minimal is about 2 times less than the average, and in addition to this I have a coefficient of 1.28 to the average, so that the money must be about 300 lv and more [this in Italian is called "Campa cavallo che l'erba cresce" and is translated like "Wait, horse, until the grass grows up", we have practically the same saying in Bulgarian, and the last word beginning with "cre" is the English "grow", as well also has given the French croissant, because it had grown unexpectedly big, or gross in German, and the idea of "camparing" is like in the Campari, it is the enlivening and /or the preserving thing].
Now, maybe the point is that it is the period of summer holidays and you have much work and not enough personnel. If it's so, then good, but I'm afraid that you have forgotten about me, because I can't forget about you (with pension less even than 150 lv). And I hope it will not turn later that you can not restore money for more than 6 months back.
If till about a week I have no answer then I will come to you, but don't know where exactly to ask and must I submit some standard request or no. So that, please, just tell me that you are working on the question (i.e. to wait my turn) and I will quietly wait.
With excuses for the bothering:
Ivancho Jotata (email@example.com)
NSSI , Directorate "Pensions"
Out. № 1030-40-???? /Date: +4days.08.2016
Mr Ivancho ??? Jotata
Honorable [Jotata is honoured in the beginning, you see this, right, because they can't help him, as it turns in the end] Mr Jotata,
Regarding your inquiry, received by email of the National Social Security Institute (NSSI), I notify the following:
The officials from the territorial divisions (TD) of the NSSI strictly observe the required terms under Art. 10 of the Regulation for pensions and social security length of service -- one month for approving of the minimal amount and four months for the real amount [and it is so, really, they observe them]. In this relation the head of pension insurance has pronounced his decision for the actual amount of your pension with an order from ??.05.2016, which is still not received by you. Twice were made attempts to make a phone call with you, but your phone was switched off, due to what the same is kept in the reception of TD of NSSI – Sofia town, room ??, where you can receive it personally or through an authorized person.
Head something [there all employees are heads or chiefs]: A.B.C.
OK, Sirs [I answer them]
My phone, really, is almost always switched off (I switch it on basically after 15 o'clock), but the last letter for the minimal amount I have received by courier so that have supposed [yes, but Jotata supposes and NSSI disposes], that will receive also this letter in the same way. In addition to this I was later by you on ?.6. in order to change the receiving of the money to the post office, but nobody on the counters (? or ?), said me that I have a letter to receive (and I asked whether the final amount was established). However it is, I will come the next week by You, room ??, when you say so.
Thanks for the fast answer. It turns our that I could have asked earlier, yet I wanted not to bother You. But in such case remains the question [surely it will remain, they, the questions, for this purpose exist, in order to be able to remain somewhere], why I receive the minimal 137 lv, when the amount is established? I suppose that this is written in the letter.
[Later I write one more letter.]
I write to you, because you have answered me the last time, but if it is not necessary to engage directly You, then tell me to whom and on what address to write.
So the first thing is, that You have answered me quite concretely and exactly, and my resentments become practically groundless, but let me, anyway, explain, because I have thought that you have lost somewhere my UP-2, when with coefficient 1.28 I receive the minimal amount of the pension, what, naturally, is just not right, yet there is no need to lose Your time with discussion of bad laws. And, besides, I thought that after I have received by the post the first order about the minimal amount, then I must receive also the next in this way, but by You is correctly decided to give such documents personally to the clients, in order for the latter to be able to appeal within a time-limit, which is probably a common occurrence. So that You have proceeded correctly (and I, probably, should have entered somewhere also my email address).
Then about my principal errors, which are two. The one is that I thought that the minimal pension is in a similar ratio to the average, how the minimal salary is to the average one, what ratio must be, I suppose, about 2.2 times (i.e. in reversed way). Yes but no, the minimal is simply some "umbrella" for the people, it seems, and by me in this letter is written, e.g., that according with the calculations it has to be 123. lv, but it becomes 133 lv (and now it is even with 3 lv above this). The second thing is that I thought that this individual coefficient is defined on the basis of the three successive years, but it had to be averaged also with the time when I have self-insured myself (97-99), and in this time, naturally, I have paid the possible minimum, and it comes then some coefficient 0.49, which does not correlate with anything reasonable, so that because of this my IC falls to 0.943. Plus this I bothered myself to calculate also if it was with "my" coefficient (1.28, nearly of a boss) and it turned that then it should have been about 168 lv, or with only some 26 % more (not more with 100-200 lv).
OK, and now about my plea for recalculation. As far as everything comes from these 2 y. and 3 m. self-insurance, but otherwise I need nearly one year more, then my wish is, if this is possible, to calculate how much will be my pension (when it is the minimal, then I, definitely, lose nothing [year, surely, but also win nothing, they have there a heap of head specialists who care exactly about this]), if from the self-insurance booklet is taken only the last 1999th year and then I will go to pension with LESS years of service, i.e. with 14 y. 0 m. 26 d. according to the labour book plus the one year self-insurance, or with 15 y. and almost a whole month, what suffices for pensioning under this paragraph, and the other self-insurance let not be counted. I made rough calculations, and it turns (but am not pretty sure about the money in this year, I take them in the same relation like for the 2 y. and 3 m., what is not exactly so), that my IC will become about 1.082, yet later the % will fall to 16.5, so that, taking this and that, it will turn that my pension must rise to 130, but this is still below the minimum, so that this changes nothing. I beg you, please, check this and let me see it written in the same way like in the order from ??.05. If I have not made errors in this, I might not want this to become final, yet may also want it, because it is just insulting with this IC (and it is also laughable it to be below the 1) to be so miserable.
If this does not help to raise my pension at least with 10-15 %, then I have left only the variant with buying of length of service for one year, and full rejecting of the self-insurance, but let this question remains for the next time, because it depends, it may be the period 67-72 [my first tertiary education], may be about 83, or may be about 93, but I know neither what documents you will want, no how much this will cost me.
Excuse me for the bothering, and if I have to correspond with "lower" employees, then send me to them.
Sincerely: Ivancho Jotata
[What they register, but don't want to work in this way, they have their rules and answer me:]
Out. № 1030-40-???? /Date: ??.09.2016
Mr [as you see, already not much "honourable"] Ivancho ??? Jotata
In regard with your new questions, In. № 1030-40-????#2 from ??.08.2016 and In. № 1030-40-???? from ??.08.2016, received by email of National Social Security Institute (NSSI), I inform you the following:
The pensions are changed /recalculated from the competent body, authorized with the right to take decisions with administrative act – in this case the territorial division (TD) of NSSI – Sofia town. The latter can rule after filing of application with submission of new evidences for acquired insurance period, insurance income (including also for another 3 years from the last 15 years of service until 31.12.1996), civil status and others.
The subsequent chief somebody D.E.F. [and now it begins some "football on small pitches", as you see, because it answers another person, no matter that I write on the same email address]
[Well, then your Ivancho writes one cultured little plea, which follows below, and carries it in NSSI and begins to wait an answer. Pay attention, please, on the text and structuring of the material, in order to feel how the people there begin to fake a bit deaf ear at such clear plea.]
To the Head of Pensions Department, TD of NSSI, Sofia
For recalculation of the size of the pension
By Ivancho ??? Jotata, EGN 5005??????
Residents: Sofia-1???, St. ???, № ??, ent. ?,
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, phone. 02-???-???? (rarely, 15-20 o'clock)
Mister Head of Department,
With a letter from ??.05.16 I have approved minimal amount of pension under the table for 15 years service, despite the fact that my individual coefficient (IC) according to the applied UP-2 from the Institute for Whatever-it-is by BAS is 1.28, what, mildly said, surprised me. In the end it turns out that by the calculation of this IC must have been included also the years of my self-insurance (97-99), and during this time I, naturally, have paid the possible minimum, and there comes one coefficient of 0.49, which corresponds with nothing reasonable (because I have UP-2 also from two other places, where the IC is about 1.15 to 1.21), so that because of this my IC falls to 0.943. Well, even if it was with "my" coefficient of 1.28 (how I have decided to calculate it) turns out that my pension must have been about 168 lv or with some 26 % more, what is far below my expectations, but nobody is guilty, that I have lived with totalitarian understanding about cares for the people (as well also that nobody has forced me to study so much, that later to remain without work). However it is, because you fulfill and not discuss our laws, let me move to my plea for recalculation.
Due to the fact that the misunderstandings come from these 2 y. and 3 m. self-insurance, but otherwise I miss nearly one year service, I want, if this is possible, to calculate how much will be my pension (when it is minimal I lose nothing), if from the self-insurance booklet will be taken only the last whole 1999 year and then I go to pension with LESS years [the capital letters are my, lest they miss to see them, but they, as you will get this, make exactly this, they don't see them], i.e. 14 y. 0 m. 26 d. according the Labour Book, plus one year self-insurance, or with 15 y. and nearly one whole month, what suffices for pensioning under this paragraph, and the other self-insurance will simply be ignored. This must have been possible, because I do not suppose that somewhere this is explicitly forbidden, and what is not forbidden must be allowed (and, after all, I lose length of service in this way, and, besides, You in any case do not calculate IC for all my years of work, and it, surely has nowhere been under 1.1).
I have made roughly calculations and it turns that (but I am not sure about the installments, neither the salaries, during this year, and take them in the same ratio, what must not be wholly so, the insurance payments grew very fast, and because of this I ceased to insure myself, so that in the last year my IC may happen to be about 0.6), my IC will become at least 1.082, but later the common percent for the pension will fall to 16.5, so that, taking this and that, will turn that my pension must grow up to about 130 лв (according to the calculations in May 2016), yet this is still less then the minimum, so that this changes nothing. I beg You, please, check this exactly and let me see it written in the same form like in the order from 27.05. Let this, that the final decision is not changed (or will jump with just 1-2%) does not make You to neglect my plea, because it is simply insulting for me to be with such IC (and it is also funny it to be under the one for a person with two tertiary educations, and a bit above), because, although lifelong, my pension can be raised a little, if I decide to begin to work something, even on a half-day basis, or not year round, where by this variant I will also bring something in the pension fund, while with the today's funny coefficient I will only use. There exists also the variant with payment for additional service during the study, yet by this low percent of my pension this will surely be quite expensive in order to expect that I will succeed to restore the given sum even for 10 years.
With regards: ??.09.2016, Sofia
[After what quite expeditiously Jotata receives an answer, which I don' want to retype in details, but it is in this spirit:]
Republic of Bulgaria, NSSI, TD Sofia-city, Pensions Directorate
Order № 5005?????? [there for everything is used the EGN]
For granting /modifying a pension
Name etc. ...
With application In. № 1023-??-???? from ??.09.2016 Ivancho Jotata wants to be reviewed ... .
The personal pension for ... is granted with order ... according, Art. 68 para 3 from KSO [?, some normative document] in minimal amount. With order from ??.05.2016 the pension is changed in real amount according Art. 99, para 1, point 6 of KSO [the comma of the article they do not give, but already from here it becomes clear that to this man something is not clear, because I ask him not at all about these things, plus that the phrase "changed in real amount" formally speaking is not true, nothing is changed, not even with a cent.]
According with Art. 70 para 3 of KSO IC is calculated ... [and so on, the person sings his song, this is for what he is paid, only that I want not this].
In the given case the pension is calculated with the following data: ... [where he cites also my 3 years, and the period of 2 y. и 3 m. self-insurance, and the common IC, but this is written in their previous letter already from May, he tells me nothing new, absolutely].
The personal pension for ... is granted correctly, and with this application the person gives no new evidences [it is obvious that the employee has not at all read my application, there are no new evidences to be given for refusing of some documents, i.e. here I do not add but subtract documents] for length of service and income, hence no change in the amount of pension follows.
... [he gives his orders where refuses to change the pension] ...
Official person: G.H.I. [again a new person, of course]
[So, and after this can not at all be named an answer then Jotata sends another email, with the hope to continue to correspond in this way further, and writes the following]
Re: [Archimed -- their computer robot] 1030-40-???? / ??.8.2016 / plus questions, appeal, a plea for recalculation.
was registered as document with registration index
1030-40-????/??.8.2016 [this Archimedes of them must be a very nice "man" because registers everything precisely]
You have answered me till this moment quite correctly, so that I beg you also this time to pay attention to the attached documents, where are two things: the second is my application for recalculation of the pension, and the first is my letter why I am dissatisfied with Your answer to it.
[it follows only the first document, because the second is the same application given above:]
You surprise me with each day, in two direction. The first is politeness, rapidity, contacts by Internet, and so on, and the second is that ... well, you do not answer to the essence of the questions, you are dodging somehow, but for the moment it is not clear whether this is due to negligence or deliberately!
Well, judge by yourselves. On an application with № 1023-??-???? from ??.09 this year, which I in any case attach also now (after this letter), Your official, G.H.I., answers me already on ??.09 (i.e. the letter travels to me twice more time than for You to answer me), that everything is correctly calculated, and explains me things which I have not at all asked, and sums up that because I do not apply new proofs, then he refuses to change the amount of my pension. Now, it is true that I have no literary education, but the letter (attached here) has three paragraphs, where in the first I explain the history of the things, in the second say what I want, and in the third explain the reasons and my further actions, so that I simply do not see how better a plea can be structured. In addition to this I explicitly write that this is an application for RECALCULATION of the amount of my pension, it is not appeal, so that the officer to explain me how it was proceeded, I have understood this and explained it briefly already in the first paragraph of the attached letter. In the second paragraph, though, I write in black and white that, in two words, want my pension to be recalculated with 1 y. and 3 m. LESS (and in the letter use capital letters) length of service, where on this, that I have paid insurances, I want to be paid no attention! Let me not repeat myself (not that I can not do this, but I think that this is unnecessary). It may seem paradoxically that with less service I hope to have bigger pension, but this concerns our legal regulations, not this, what I want to be done by You.
This, what your official must have done, is firstly to answer me whether it is possible to be ignored the mentioned by me period -- but he even does not hint, that has got what I want --, and if this is not so, then, of course, why, for what reason, based on what regulation (which I would have checked, because this seems impossible), and after this, if this is possible, to calculate again my pension. I even explain how approximately must look the result, and in the third paragraph I communicate why this interest me (that I search some ways, even if I have to pay additionally something, in order to come to a normal situation, not to an absurd one). And it is obvious that there are NO further documents to be added by me, when everything is the same, i.e. my length of service according to the labour book is the same with precision of a day, and from the self-insurance book remains only the last whole 1999 year, for which this book has left by you.
So that in this case there are only two ways for explanation (respectively of my reaction), namely that your official has inadvertently not paid attention to my desires, or that this is intentionally! I will look at them more closely for completeness and your information.
An unintentional error is possible and forgiving, because my plea is not very short, and if the official is used to read "each second line" (as we like to say), because he knows what the people usually want (i.e. it is often worked by stereotype, it is stepped into beaten tracks), as well also this, that many pensioners want "their father and mother" (again colloquial Bulgarian expression), so the person explains in details things, which are not necessary in this case (but he supposes that they will interest me; and it is always better if the client hears confirmation of his calculations). But pay attention to this, that the person is wasting his time for nothing, he cites many numbers, this requires checking, even to copy partially phrases from some standard form, he has lost some half an hour at least, probably more. And this pure and simple in order to prove that he has NOT READ good this, what I want and does not at all touch the posed by me problems. This seems strange, yet I can accept it for the moment, until the contrary is proved.
On the other hand, though, this may NOT be a coincidence at all, but be a policy of your establishment, i.e. to delude the people with smiles, like this does every shop since the coming of democracy, but the shops are commercial objects, they work for win, and you must not fall in this category. Yet you may also fall in this category, because, understand me rightly, but for all of your actions can be other, diametrically opposed explanation, if there will be raised noise and will be come to media and political parties. For example, You already in the beginning send me by the post the initial decision for the minimal pension, yet the next calculation, which gives again minimal pension You DO NOT send me by post, and this may be in order that some time passes and I become used with it. Id est, naturally, you could have sent also the second decision by the post, like the first, or at least could have sent me a letter to come to you, after my phone is switched off, because my address works, the money are not returning back unclaimed; only after I ask you why for five months I have no final decision I understand that I must have come to you to receive it there. I have not studied public relations, don't know what are the psychological reasons for this behaviour of yours, but they may be practically checked and motivated.
Then, for what mysterious (sorry) reason You have to answer me on my last application for recalculation in record short time and not in essence, if not in order somehow to "hypnotize" me, whether I know? This method of distracting of attention with non-essential details and their presentation at length might be learned from the lawyers (and in other humanitarian specialties) already in the first year, in English it is called red herring, but I can't be so easily cheated. I tell You these my guesses, which also the media could alone make, or some political parties, if I will be forced to come to them, under the condition that You continue to twist the things, because they will not proceed like me wholly well-intentioned, but will look for "calf under the bull" (like we use to say, meaning to suck from the bull, not from the cow), if only they can. Because the paradox remains paradox (that for less years work I will have bigger pension), it will not disappear if you hide it; more than this, the very fact that you hide it speaks about guilty conscience, dishonest, albeit legal, methods of work, and so on. And I want to LOSE in some way, the initially paid by me money for these year and a little more self-insurance, and then maybe to pay also something more. And before the media I will be able to pose also the moral question, that, see, because I have 2 and a half tertiary educations, and have been scientific worker in BAS and in other institutes, then because of this I receive so little, because have not been in position to find myself work exactly for the reason of my higher qualification, et cetera. And before You I do not raise these questions, I want only to find some relatively acceptable variant by which I will retain my individual coefficient, because it is real, not invented. Anyway, if you begin to excuse yourselves, to prove, according to our saying, "go and show that you are not a camel", then you will at least worsen your image, which is bad not so much because of the bad quality of Your work, as because we are poor country and you are in the mouths of everybody.
So that let us solve this question peacefully and quietly. I personally, propose you to trigger the things at your office and to send me in a reasonable term an answer to this, what I want, after what I can have three more variants of action, which I will not tell you exactly now (I have only hinted them in my application) in order not to confuse You; and they also enter in effect after it turns out that I can refute of length of service as self-insurance (but if this is impossible then it turns that You punish me for this, that I have entered some money in the pension fund, i.e. that I have been conscientious and well-intentioned!). More so, because I, as I say and suppose, DO NOT expect for the moment changing of the amount of my pension, it must remain again minimal, but because of my years of work, not because of the coefficient. And reasonable term means, say, 10.10, it is easy to remember, and this not for the answer to reach me by the post, but to send it to me by the email till that time. Yet if occasionally I raise difficult case, then You can take as much time as you need, call meetings if necessary, this is up to You, only keep me posted, lest I do not begin hastily to send various information here and there, thinking that You continue Your bad-intentioned actions.
For me the question is primarily principal, and will this raise my pension with some 10 lv, and this after heap of expenses, which I may not be in position to restore in my lifetime, is not so important. After I have understood that our democratic pensions are reduced to nearly as much percents as years of work, or that, e.g., for 20 years they will be 22 %, and not like it was by the spat over "bai Tosho", when the pensions were 60 % and this for 20 years service, then from this point further nothing can be made. One can fight with dictatorships, and if can not overcome them, then with the death of the dictator (and he is mortal), in the end, the situation will change, but with democracy this is impossible, I have long ago convinced myself in this, so that I have no intentions to hold You responsible for the sins of others.
So, and for me to submit a new application there is no sense, because, when Your officers do not read to the end a letter of one page, then if I will write three, do You think this will make the matters easier for them? Besides, with a new application I will be forced explicitly to accuse Your officers at least in occasional negligence, and all this is unnecessary on the background of the same expected amount of the pension for the moment; or I can write only one sentence that, for example, I beg you to read carefully my application with this and that №, and to answer me on what I ask.
Well, this is all, I wonder how You have succeeded to establish such interchangeability of your officers, so that each time some different person answers me, but for the moment this works by You, only that I don't know to whom to address my letters. And, excuse me, naturally, for the long letter now, but I want to be convinced in bad intention on Your part, and for the moment I am not convinced, it only seems very probable (because from possible economies of the pension fund surely come out certain bonuses and rewards for Your employees -- because they can never come out from overruns, right?).
[So, and on this letter by email they answer me, again expeditiously enough, with their couriers, but again incorrectly, i.e. this time as if on the question, but continue to motivate themselves logically wrong. I will not copy it even partially, because in my answer I comment it enough.]
The things are described in the attached letter, They sound comical, but not I am the one who makes them such. I personally don't insist to continue the correspondence with You, but keep you posted and because of this answer You. If I will have no answer in a pair of weeks I take the question for finished and will act through other instances (though not in order to find solution of my problem, but because this is a curiosity worth to be known by the population).
Ivancho Jotata , 5005??????
[the very letter]
To NSSI, Sofia-city, TD "Pensions"
By Ivancho ??? Jotata , EGN 5005??????
Regarding Your answer from ??.10.16 of my letter with In. № 1013-??-??? /??.10.16
I have two news for You, the one is good and the other is bad,
The good is that I have nearly convinced myself now that there are no bad intentions on Your part, You answer fast and expeditious, and make what is in Your abilities. For example now Your officer, this time K.L.M. [another one, of course], answers me that:
"For calculation of the individual coefficient are determined: 1. ...
2. the ratio between the average monthly insurance income of the person for the period after 31.12.96 and the average monthly insurance income for the country for the same period (...). This means that the person can not refuse his insurance service, resp. counting of insurance income for the period after 01.01.97 year, and the relevant period to be skipped, because then would not have been possible to calculate rightly the individual coefficient ... ", what is an answer on the question, though wrong.
And the bad news is that Your officer demonstrates unadorned … inability for logical reasoning [marked later as ILR], alas! Because even for a child in preschool age, who may not understand what mean these long phrases about average monthly insurance income and dates before he was born, must have been clear that from these things not at all follows, that the person can not refuse his insurance service, nowhere is said that the person can not reject this, or whatever else. And there is second logical error in the same sentence, that if this period will be skipped this will hinder the calculation of the IC, for the reason that if I have not paid my insurance installments for this period, then it would have been skipped without whatever problems, right?
Because, let me for I don't know which time repeat, that I do not want refusing of my insurance payments but my length of service to remain the same, this could have entered in some contradiction with our laws, no, I want refusing of my insurance installments which I have made during this time, losing also labour service, I want simply to make one little present to the state! Who is the one who forbids me to make presents to the state, ah?
Anyway, gentlemen, including also all girls and madams in this number, naturally, I am very thankful to you for the discovering of this case in our democratic mess, really! One may search for years better example for paradoxes in our democratic legislation, as well also for naive, conscientious, expeditious, yet at the same time deprived organically of ability for exercising of elementary thinking activities work of an official state instance. Sorry, gentlemen.
Now, I suppose, that all media will want to hug me (and maybe kiss me, who knows them?) for such a brilliant example for this, why we are still so bad, hmm, because on highest state instances are appointed on purpose (You prove the contrary) people, who are not able to think, because this is contraindicated to their work! And the people, who were able to think, like myself, have not succeeded to find work for themselves, because have studied too much, in Bulgaria and abroad. But well, I have several tertiary educations, including mathematical, I may be wrong, so that let us see how will think the ordinary Bulgarian, and the ordinary politicians (from which, supposedly, BSP and UDF must be excluded, as in one or another extent engaged with our laws in that time, in the end of the last century, but these parties are no longer of big importance, remain the fascists and the "Boikovists").
But You don't bother, gentlemen, I will not criticize Your work, You, as I said, do what you can, and for this reason I will eliminate all names of Your officers, also my own, I will leave only some numbers of correspondences, something of the kind, and will use some anonymous email address, so that simply to offer the subsequent show to Bulgarian population (because, when there is not enough bread, then let there are circuses, right?). And I will not do this before 01.01.17, for one thing to leave You some time to react, and for another thing, because I alone need time (maybe I will translate the things in a pair of languages, that I use on foreign sites under a pseudonym), so that You calmly celebrate the Christmas. I, really, neither win, nor lose, what better case for blowing of a fly to elephant. And all this thanks to Your conscientious, really, work. (Ha, ha, ha, with Your permission.)
With regards: Ivancho Jotata ??.10.16
[How it was natural to suppose, after one such quite cheeky from my part letter -- yet I am not guilty for their ILR, as I called it -- it is possible that the people will begin to express reluctance, what they also do. This time their Archimedes has probably went out to buy himself cigarettes, but he does not answer me anymore, they answer me the following:]
In order to file the application via our official email -- email@example.com, is necessary to have Qualified Electronic Signature (QES).
Due to the above-said we inform You that, in order to review Your application is necessary to come to the reception of TD of NSSI -- room ???, to sign the application.
[To what I answer then]
Before a pair of days there was no necessity of such complications and You answered, but as You want.
First, this my letter is explanation for You, I do NOT want anything concrete from You, I convinced myself that You can't do the work that I want and will search other instances, so that if you don't want then don't register it, it is for Your information (but after you put hindrances before me then I may not wait exactly till 1.1. the next year for my further actions, this may happen also in a month time [yet I decided to wait, nor for other reasons, but because just around Christmas is not good to raise serious questions]).
Second, I may try to use Your electronic mail because I have got just in case certificate for PIC (Personal Identification Code) and with № ?????????? , so that if this is good for You then file my letter in the old way, like you have proceeded already 3-4 times with me.
It is up to You, I may try to see whether I will be able to do something with my PIC, but must investigate this and it will pass time, only that QES I have not, because it, as far as I know, is not for persons with less than 140 lv pension. Till now Your Archimed has done the work.
[And as result of this I filed my application after exactly one month, because then I managed to make my next "excursion" to the center of Sofia, for I, as I explained somewhere in the beginning, can't afford myself to use whatever city transport, not when a single ticket cost more than I eat and drink for a whole day, and one ticket is not enough.]
Well, at least in this section I will be short, because there are not so many things that I can "close" here. As you saw everything began with one as if insignificant occasion, our messed (although gradually bettering itself, yet around the mud or the bottom) pension insurance, but the persistent reluctance of NSSI employees to look more deep into my petition and to solve in the easiest way the paradox, made me ambitious to involve also many other, economic and moral, as well also global world problems, and our sore image before the world, yet I think that this must have been done, and for this reason I, really, am thankful to the people there. I hope that the media, like also the political parties, and the very National Assembly (if I succeed to reach it) will not be dissatisfied that I engage them with so many things, but the other variant is to "terrorize" them many times, what I think is worse for them, while in this way they can not pay attention to me only once (but otherwise it would have been several times, this is more impudent, I suppose).
Yet the questions are important, our image before the world, obviously, is very bad, and the search of ways to better it seems to me quite important goal in order for me to show some impertinence engaging the attention of many people, of the hypothetical public. Surely the case with NSSI is also interesting for me, but after they pay me something, then I, as I said, am glad, for me personally this funny low pension is enough, I suffer for other people, who are not so intelligent like me (because, you know -- i.e. we have such saying -- that the intelligent person is a thing, you close him even in the toilet and he will find what to … eat there), who may not be able to do with such low income, may show discontent. While I personally, for more than 20 years, got it that our transition to democracy served, naturally, primarily to make us an easy prey for the big Western capitals, and if the democracy was some panacea, then the millions people around the world (and probably milliards, if we count also China) would not have invented the people's democracy, which has its drawbacks (nothing real is flawless) but it was significantly more humane for the masses (only that at the end become pretty boring). Well, but what one person or a nation makes alone to him- or it- self, nobody else can do him or it, so that now we have no other choice except to wait significantly much time until the situation improves itself, i.e. until we reach the living standard at least of the times of "bai Tosho". This much time quite obviously (at least for me) will not be less than 10-15 years, but taking into account also the world crisis it may come up to one generation (of 25 years), or even more.
On the other hand I think that I have discovered one method for radical improvement of our image and our deplorable situation of the population, this communization of capitalism, although this seems pretty utopian. Yet I like the utopias, they are reasonable. And, besides, if I will not propose it to the people it will be much more worse. Well, I make under my real pseudonym a heap of propositions, and the people read a little, it is not as if they would have paid no attention to me at all, more so because I don't work in one language, but because this is in other countries, then my appearance on Bulgarian scene is probably justified. It's up to you, gentlemen readers and compatriots.
Let me, however, warn you about something, what should have been clear from the said here, but let me tell it in black and white: I don't want to occupy myself with whatever politics! For me the name politician sounds insulting, I can't lie (or deceive, bamboozle, manipulate), I have studied to search the truth, not the lie, I can't in my old age make such sharp turn, and also I don't need publicity, neither big sums of money (I have no one to whom to leave them), as well also have a heap of plans for my left years of life (minimum 16, as I have decided, but they can not be enough to realize all my ideas), in order to be able to find time for something else. So that if some political power occasionally begins to like me let it know that, as is said, "its parachute will not open" with me. To use my ideas, OK, this is possible, but not me personally, I am anonymous and remain such. Besides, I know one, it's said that old Hebrew, proverb, namely: not a single good deal on this world has left unpunished, and I don't see why I must be punished more than the democracy succeeded to punish me (because of it even all my … teeth have fallen out, and under the totalitarianism they were all intact). So that, my people, don't seek me more, else there are no problems to change my anonymous address; unless occasionally the "ice moved" with NSSI, in order to inform me, because I don't follow the media, I am sick of them, they are too vulgar for me. God be with you, ladies and gentlemen, addio.
[ And here is placed one parting acrostic in Bulgarian, which vertically says "Said Ivancho Jotata", and where the meaning is as follows:
He, who can't think works,
Amortizes hands and feet,
Naturally, routine sweats,
Yet I donate with my head the word.
Will I this or not but I live here,
Happy or sad so that I want to weep,
Yet I don't find that I am some rubbish,
Something for the people I am doing,
Often in spite of our stupidity
Natural remedies I propose.
Fruitless is as if the society nowadays,
Common ruin and crash reigns there,
So that fight with the evil is necessary,
If we do not become nuclear dust,
And because of this direct your eyes,
If you are honest, to the others.
Yeah, but because for me a simple acrostic is not enough, I end all lines also in some interesting way, on this letters: 'iaia kikiki ohohoh'. ]
End of November, 2016, leap(y)-year
And here is the text of the email with the list of addresses, to which the letter was sent in the end of February (21.02.17) and for 5 weeks there is no answer, because the people, and these are all our official instances, and parties, and media, even the Parliament and the President, pure and simple, don't pay whatever attention at something, what they don't like! What is worse than in the totalitarian times, when existed at least some persons in our security organs, who were obliged to get acquainted with the critique, which here is not at all malicious. But it, our barbarity, must somehow find its way out, right?
Ladies and gentlemen,
This is one enormously big material, which I bothered myself to write before three months, but postponed its sending, because before big holidays it is not right to raise important problems, then, when I just have decided to sent it and it become cold, and in such conditions the Bulgarian feels discomfortable, but at last I have come to the conclusion that the winter, in the end, goes away, and the letter must be sent.
It was provoked by some obvious curiosities in our pension system, and by the unwillingness of the officials of NSSI to try at least for a short time to think, but later many other moments have been added, advices to the pensioners, social questions, about our image, ans so on, so that it swelled. Naturally such letters are not written, but in this way, by such variety of numerous topics, each person will find at least one topic, which will interest him, so that I decided that I also, like one of our classical writers has said, can "make myself heard some day". Well, each wonder lasts three days, as is said, but I advice you to pay some attention to it, what consists in this, that at least one person from You has to read it carefully and forward it to the necessary instances, and in addition to this also to hang it somewhere on Your site, in order that people were able to make themselves acquainted with it, if they want this; I, in fact, am writing it for the people, I don't believe much that something in my pension status will change (I will again have the possible lower pension for the simple reason that under the totalitarianism I have studied nearly as much as possible).
Something more, if the published below email addresses according to You are wrong or not working, then forward it alone to where You think it is right, in which case it remains me nothing else except to thank You (if You have done this). My understanding about Bulgarian public reduces mainly to this: the Parliament, with all political powers represented in it, the Presidency, the very NSSI (for reasons of correctness), then some political parties with influence, at least those from the Parliament, then the largest media, and in the end some major churches (because I put social questions). Use my ideas as You find fit (I personally mention many of them in a heap of materials, on the sites where I work, yet under my real pseudonym), as long as You refer to the letter, which anyone who wants must be able to read. Don't try, though, to involve me in whatever political activities, because I have always been apolitical, in order to be able to be impartial; I can give advices (because have brains), but do not want in old years to spend my time in dealing with personalities and instances defending private interests (and capitals), because we have no vision about the fight with poverty, and have never had one during all democratic years, we know only how to "pull the blanket to ourselves", what is major manifestation of barbarous nations like ours.
Well, that is it, excuse me once more time for the bothering, but, after all, I have the right to express my meaning, and You have Your right … not to pay attention to it, what wouldn't have surprised me (since the coming of our democracy nothing else can surprise me).
I sign myself anonymously, as Ivancho Jotata, because I have always thought that important is not who says something, but what is said.
+ firstname.lastname@example.org later
Ladies and gentlemen,
I have not thought to write these continuations, already my first email was beyond the letter, for your internal consumption, but when the time passes and nobody at all pays whatever official attention at me, then I have changed my strategy, from letters to the Bulgarian public they turn into letters to the world for discrediting and shaming of Bulgarian public! Id est, I have not thought to "show our dirty linen in public", but when this is necessary, when we simply can't avoid to show, well, our barbarity, of course, -- for what is this ignoring of sore and awkward topics, if not the old jamming of foreign radio stations? -- then I am simply forced, even if I must do more work, but to make my writings accessible to more wider circle of readers, and if not in Bulgaria, then around the world, there are Bulgarians everywhere, and even if they are not Bulgarians, so then people ready to laugh at us (while we are in condition to cry with tears), and to learn something uncensored for the outsider of United Europe. Whereas before we were far from outsiders, we were looked with a most favourable eye from the part of the whole Soviet Union, not only because we use the Cyrillic, but because we are closest to the Russians and the most friendly (only in Bulgaria out of all countries of entire Warsaw Treaty there were no Russian troops), and we might have been poor and not like the Czechs or Hungarians, to say nothing about the (East) Germans, yet we were not beggars, but people with dignity. And now we are at the very end of Europe, and -- just so, for comparison -- one German has minimum hourly rate of 8.5 Euro in 2017, i.e. 17 lv /h, or for one day 136 lv, while my pension in the beginning of the year was 133 lv, yet for a whole month! Now, this is the Bulgarian democracy, ladies and gentlemen!
And that the jamming of intelligent meanings -- of my own, sirs, I see no reasons to be ashamed of my intellect -- is expression of barbarity was clear for several centuries, because before Gorbachev's perestroika, which has become known as word even in Chinese and Japanese, has existed one Habeas Corpus Act on the West, that nobody can be pronounced guilty without presenting in his body, in order to be able to express his motives and actions, while in this case even the biggest screamers, the fascists -- and we have whole three fascist parties in the Parliament, a new Guinness record -- did not bother to pay whatever attention at me, because I don't stay with them, I have no big opinion about them, too, with such like me they don't want to have whatever in common, not to mention the other parties. And, do you know, I will add two more sentences in this direction, where the one is that I do not think, like the people in their mass think, that our democracy is not real one, that everything is adjusted and somebody pulls the threads, because then at least the media would have been interested, they benefit from disputes and conflict situations, but here even they keep dumb, i.e. my sample of Bulgarian public is quite representative, it is our and true, but is simply unworthy of us, bad speaking for our image. And the second thing in this case is that trying to hide one scandal in improper way we, in fact, create even bigger scandal, at least giving reasons for the claim, that we are barbarous nation; because if I am wrong in something (what is hardly probable), then let our people express their meanings, let the things be discussed, this may lead to more reasonable meanings, or methods for achieving of the goal (for the fight with the poverty, generally speaking), yet this can not happen if you hide me from the population.
So that I, in some sense, feel myself like the … jin from Arabian fairy tail, who was closed in a bottle, and in the first hundred years has decided to reward richly the one who takes him out of it, the next hundred years has come to the conclusion that there are no reasons for rewards, when no one has took him out for so many years, and later has decided even to punish the one, who pulls him out, at least in order to leave out his anger. And in my situation I have begun, or rather continued, to work towards extending of the audience of my readers, where first have written one shorter to the half material in English, where I retold the expressed here, but with already strengthened accent on our barbarity (which was mainly hinted before). Well, but because, who am I to be read, and more so in foreign countries, I, despite the English text, have funny small number of readers -- the proper number is mullions, some 10 or so, and maybe more, because there are several materials --, so that I have nothing else left, except to begin translations in other languages. In this way I spent some 2-3 months to translate this enormous letter in German (which language I can read freely, but don't speak it good), and then also in Russian (what was much more easier for me, I have translated thousand pages with my texts in this language), and summa-summarum as Jotata I have spent about half an year. As result of this there are already four materials, and I have an idea about a fifth, this time in … Italian, which I will not tell how is called (in order not to deprive myself of the possibility to use this idea under my major pseudonym). With 4-5 things and in 4-5 languages one will hardly be able to convict me that I am a common simpleton, am I right? But maybe I will begin to … clone myself, to what I will return after several paragraphs, and on this place let me for refreshment introduce You to one of my last poetical impromptus.
[What are only four lines and they say that: Bulgaria is too narrow for my soul, the world attracts me, my mind is soaring in the foreign fields of other languages, amidst new readers, new spectators.]
What is confirmed by my, for the moment definitely modest, yet with the hope for "bright future", presentation before the world, i.e by one short list with sites, where Jotata is published (while in Bulgaria nobody wants to do this). They are at least the following:
And now, Sirs, let me tell you why I am not pleased by you, although, it is true, not due to pressure from my part, but anyway (it is clear that others are also discontented), You change something, and my pension for a bit over an year has risen from 137 to 153 and later to 170 lv, what is practically this for what I pretended, as money (my calculations reached till 168 lv -- although here is mixed the unavoidable actualization, yet in general it is so). In this case my pension is already about 3.5 tickets daily, and there are chances that it will soon reach 4 tickets, what surpasses all my expectations, and maybe will become more. Yet it isn't so and I am, still, malcontent. I am not content because this is, how I mentioned somewhere in the text of the letter, adhocracy in English, or working for the moment, without preliminary planning, according the case, what on the West may have good meaning sometimes, but by us this means patches, work in urgent situation, what simply can't be right method of work on official governmental level; under such conditions You may succeed for a pair of years somehow to raise the minimal pension to 4.5 tickets (just to 5 I don't believe), and then after some 4-5 years will ripen the moment for a new raising of the prices of city transport and this pension will again fall to 3 tickets, and all gunpowder will go to the wind, gentlemen. And everything else, what I hinted, will remain the same -- i.e., for example, there will be again no city transport to Vitosha mountain, public baths (on price of 1-2 … eggs for a bathing, like it was earlier), no health insurance on decent prices (by minimal pension of 35 % of MMS, to pay only at one medic 1 % is abnormally expensive, more so when the persons have insured themselves), the average communal expenses for a one-bedroom flat (what by us is counted as 2 rooms) will again come to about one minimal pension in the winter, and so on. So that I think it is high time to say: enough patches, we need long ago national strategy for fighting of the poverty.
Sirs, I don't want to repeat myself, but the point is that we do not maintain some ratio between prices and income, and only there, where exists free market (for foodstuff etc.) the things more or less adjust themselves (on the price of bad quality -- pig-skin emulsion in the salami), but by the communal expenses and transport, as well also in the education, the healthcare and the prices of medicaments, the prices are established centralized (say, we have no alternative city transport which will work with the totalitarian buses but 3 times cheaper tickets, or, resp., medicaments, free universities, together with the paid ones, and so on). While on the West it isn't so, and for a German, e.g., with 17 lv minimally on hour, is not such big problem to pay for a transport, or education fees, or physicians, and similar things. But earlier, under the bad totalitarianism was a Committee on prices, i.e. the things have worsened themselves, definitely, and nobody thinks to improve them; in a poor country is not possible to apply directly and unchanged things from the wealthy West, they have to be somehow "implanted" on our soil, by us is no go without special instance for statistics and fight with the poverty, and for unified strategy, which instance we, as I said, have not; the right-wing capitalism is for wealthy countries, understand, please, it is not for such like Bulgaria!
Then what means 200 lv minimal pension, gentlemen? But this is nothing, this is formal washing of the hands, these are again patches. Not that I defend the silly propositions of the fascists (I beg them to excuse me, but it is so) for raising at once of all minimal pensions and salaries and what not, but still, now, in 2017-18 year, all individual incomes below some 500 lv for round, are below the poverty limit. This is surviving, my (representative but) unworthy National Representatives and media, yet this is not dignified life! I personally can survive with 150 lv monthly, and with even less, but this is not life like before, when one did not give a thought, say, whether to drink a coffee, or eat an ice-cream on the street, or a piece of pie (the so called Bulgarian 'banichka' with white cheese), or something of the kind (say, a beer), not to mention whether to climb the tram or to walk on foot, or for medical care or education (which were before entirely free), or to maintain 14-15 degrees Celsius for economy at home in the winter (like myself), and other similar comparisons. And before similar problems of survival yet not dignified life stand (or rather lie -- when one is forced to do something against his will he usually shrinks to the ground) about one million Bulgarian citizens, as well also peasants (ha, ha, yes?), and these are many people. And so on. Less than 400 lv monthly for a person is endurable, but still is not like before with minimal income or pension, less than 300 is already bad, definitely, and under 200 is tragic and complete disgrace of our democracy, but it exists! The only positive development, if this can be called positive (because it only mends the situation at the moment), during the period of our democracy (if we don't count this that now everybody has mobile phones, but this is due to the fact that they became very cheap) is, that the population now massively does not strive to learn, looks somehow to catch some ordinary but lucrative profession (say, seller in a shop, what means also a cleaner, I'll tell you); this happened somewhere exactly around the new century, and I know this because have given private lessons in mathematics, but the children (understand, the parents) now don't want to study anymore (when can buy themselves an education). Put in another way, I personally am absolutely convinced, that if the communists have managed to retain the power (what was practically impossible), then now we could have been at least 2 times better than are (having in mind that today we are about 3-4 times worse in our living standard than before). The balance is mournful, and only the young ones (who can now ... -- se scopano, said in Italian, and I hope You will guess about what it goes, -- as much as they can and where can), who simply have no basis for comparison, are glad, but they also don't vote, as I suppose that You alone see (except for the fascists, or like a kind of untested … orgasm -- this word can as well be used in transferred meaning, what the Italians often do).
And in regard of the cause for this my letter, the methodology of NSSI for computing of the pensions, which entirely ruins the idea for the 3 years by choice of the person (when obligatory are included years, for which the person in no way wants to be included; the paragraph "obligatory" already means that it is not by choice, this would have understood even a first-grader), obviously must be changed, must return to the normal current. Yes, but I have not heard this to has been changed, it is raised the social threshold, but the wrong way of calculation remains. Expressed with another words, by us nothing is like by the people in normal countries, what is also argument for my statement about our barbarity, and it is denominative for us before the countries around the world. And what concerns a heap of other questions, which I raise, then I insist -- now I insist -- that they become known to a possibly wider audience, because there are no reasons so persistently to demonstrate that the democracy is BAD form of ruling, i.e. this is so, naturally, but in the normal countries it does the work, only in such like us (not that there are really many others, but, for example, Bangladesh, Burkina Paso, Albania, perhaps Ukraine, and some others, let is not narrow the scope to only our country) it stumbles -- because, You have to agree, that a transition, which for more than a quarter of a century still does not end (if it has ended there would have not existed pensions under some 10 or so bus tickets daily, and would have been reduced tickets for pensioners, students, and unemployed, etc.) is no transition at all, but a mere disgrace.
So that, gentlemen representative, yet not exactly the necessary, People's Representatives and media, I do not wish to occupy myself with politics, but if this will show to be necessary I may decide to begin to do it, may decide to organize one tremendous new party, the party … NAPUK! Incredible idea. Ah? And, in the end, I may not stand at the head of it, I may be hidden ideologue, I may develop one Manifesto, something like a Statute, perhaps a Plan-Program, whether I know, what is needed. So that, do not make me ambitious, if You please! In order to launch the idea around the world, i.e. in 3-4 languages, and on 10 or more sites, it remains basically to decide how to translate this name, say, in English, but this may not be necessary because NAPUK is written good enough also with Latin chars, and if I explain to the people that this word means against, despite of, on the contrary, in spite of the common practice, and etymologically comes from the word 'pukam', which in Serbian becomes 'putsam', in Russian is again 'pukatj' (and the last char is used for softening), yet there this means pure and simple leaving of … gases, this what sounds like breaking of branches, and what is, respectively: Furz in German, "fart" in English, perdeoo in old Greek, and so on to the Sanskrit, where it was 'prdj', so after I explain all this briefly, the people will get the idea, right? Id est, this will be a party against each other democratic party, and will differ from all of them! Maybe this will be the panacea for the democracy, ah? Whether I know? But one entirely peaceful radical changing of the cruel capitalism is more than necessary.
Well, I will not explain You now what exactly will be the program of this party, these are things that must be well thought, and for the moment I have no time for wasting, yet You have in mind that something opposite to practically all parties is not an easy thing, it is not like to move from extreme left to extreme right, this is complete renovation of the policy, this is some reasonable centering, but such that it will satisfy also all possible extremities (I hinted something of the kind in my letter). And I have no time to waste because since I went to pension (now with 3.5 bus tickets daily for all expenses) I am living as if under the communism (or in the paradise but on Earth), and knowing that I have no much time left (I have prognosticated 15 more years, but only God knows will this be so or not), I have hurried up myself and have a bunch of unrealized ideas, which later must be translated in several languages, and I can't already manage to write down all my verses (I need a secretary woman), so that I am pretty worried, to tell You. Ah, well, let me give You some transcription of this name in Bulgarian. First variant (where they all have the same NAPUK initials, what I don't bother at all to preserve by the translation): People's Alliance for Gradual and Moderate Communism, what is an exceptionally actual name, because our democratic development is characterized basically with this, that we desperately try to return as near as possible to the totalitarian years of stagnation, but on a new level, and we all the time can't succeed to do this (because are barbarian nation, and so on); yet when I speak about communism, this, naturally, does not mean such communism, which would have understood some communists (if such have remained by us, or then socialists, only real ones, not opportunists). Second variant, because some may out of "aesthetic" considerations don't like the word "communism": Visual Agitation for Proper and Balanced Capitalism, what for me is practically the same as communism, but each one has his own understanding of the question, so that who likes that existed capitals, then let it be balanced capitalism, yet really balanced, not like ours, which began with public manifestations of people's madness (like 46 years are enough, let us now scratch them out of our history and return with as many years back -- what we also did, of course). Third variant, which is more to the taste of some fascists, but not only, and which is: New Anti to the Political Decadence and Corruption, what is a nice and sweet name, how could have said some of us, because the political decadence and corruption is a theme old as the world, it is always actual, and if we propose something new then the people could follow us (now Jotata becomes "we", like you understand).
Such things, on the whole, where, in two words, the accent will be on planned fight with the poverty, on universal mandatory advance payment of some minimum (1/3 MMS), on social categorization of all, on formulating of minimal necessary communal and other expenses, with ability for personification of their prices, so that everybody pays according with his pocket, really free healthcare and education (how it was earlier), and other similar things. As I said, communism in the framework of capitalism, or capitalistic communism, something of the kind, so that "the wolf (the rich ones) is sated, and the lamb (the poor ones) is intact (and kicking, alive)".
So, and now about the cloning of Jotata, what is quite natural way for increasing of the power of a single individuum, and here author, i.e. to publish the same things, only that under several names. Brilliant idea, isn't it? Because some of You may decide to excuse themselves for their not paying attention to me with this, that Jotata is not a serious name. Well, good, then what will You say about Ochnavi Atatoj, ah? Methinks that this is very suitable, because it sounds mysterious (although I got the idea about this from one Bulgarian totalitarian crime novel, where the name of the criminal inspector was derived from some word, say "cardboard", and beginning it from the end, here something like Draobdrac), one can wonder is this Arabian or Japanese or Indian, it is not at all clear, and this may intrigue some possible readers, more so in 4 languages for the moment. And under this name to "expose" myself on some 5 more sites. This may be enough for the second year after my "odyssey" with NSSI (who can not or want not to think). Another variant is Ivan Bugarow, extremely clear that it goes about a Bulgarian, yet he will be the same old Jotata with the same works, and on 5 new (although I may repeat myself here and there) sites. There are already three names now, right? I think to make them five, for greater representativeness, adding also Jotabash Giaurgi, and Nostradamus Buladamus, yet if You continue to anger me it may appear also Jotabau Bulbau, like one universal for the world woofing or barking name. Because I am acting according with our saying: how you acted with me so I responded to you (I don't know its equivalent in English, sorry). And You have the opportunity to vote some variant of … Law for Protection of the State, according to which my works have to be taken out or banned from all foreign sites (with the intervention of EU, I suppose, or NATO, whether I know?), but I am afraid that this will not be so easy, to tell You, and also in this way You will only raise my rating, because they, the saints, don't make themselves such alone, the others are those, who do this, with their contemptuous attitude and underestimation of their deeds.
Yet otherwise you will have reasons for protests against me, because I discredit Bulgaria, right? Well, yes, but let me use one elementary example: there are two polar variants to wean a child from … sticking his finger in the nose, and they are, compulsive or totalitarian, related with penalties (slaps, etc.), and democratic or allowing of the action but also shaming him for it, so that the child alone has to understand that this is not good, when the others begin to laugh at him and point with their fingers. Now, in democratic conditions I apply the democratic method, I have no other choice; If you have not jammed my voice I would have not disgraced my country, but when this is the single way to help for our "integration" in Europe and the world, then I will do this, it is no other way; because everyone, who has lived at least for some months abroad, knows that when the word "Bulgarian" is pronounced the people fell silent and retreat themselves, like if is said that he is AIDS positive. Sorry gentlemen.
Now that's it. I expect also in the third year to send You the same letter, but with addition only of new addresses on which I publish myself, if You do not force me to discuss other themes.
[ And here follows very small parting verse with only three lines, saying:
Bye, bye, and don't cry. -- (this is in English)
The Bulgarian will only stutter 'vai'. -- (what is like "oh, how bad") ]
Written in November 2017, sent on 20.02.18
Ladies and gentlemen.
For third and last time I send You this exceedingly long letter, not because I believe that someone of You will read it at least this time, but because the raised by me questions in it are extraordinary important, as much for the life in our country, so also for our image before the world, and in this case I want to have made everything in my power for its official spreading, so that nobody from our official instances can say later: "But what letter, I have heard nothing about it". Has not heard only who has not wanted to hear.
But this is in Bulgaria, yet in the era of Internet hardly some country can isolate itself from the world turning a deaf ear to all reasonable meanings and propositions. So that the people, little by little, have begun to read something, because in addition to this letter have appeared other social materials, in order not to look unsubstantial, more so because I offer them choice of language. I don't know whether these are are local Bulgarians, or from the diaspora, as it is said sometimes, or also curious persons from other countries and nations, but for the moment I have more readings of my papers, I think, than if I was a professor of, say, paleo-linguistics, or something of the kind. And the Bulgarian public, as instance with weak hearing for reasonable things, I have substituted with the international, however crazy (my word was ideotized) it is in the conditions of contemporary immoral world.
So that let us see (not I, but the others after me), if not after 5 - 10 years, then after 50 - 100, who will become a winner in the end, the common sense or Bulgarian … barbarity. Because I though initially to limit myself only with this letter (and because of this I wrote it so big, in order to include, or at least to hint about, possibly everything in it) and only in Bulgarian, and to cause in this way some discussions in the media and on the sites, but by this total informational "blackout", that You imposed on me (with the use of which to prove somehow our barbarity, isn't it? -- because, if it has not existed, at least one single, either party or media, would have paid attention at me), then I have begun to cruise the world by Internet, and now my materials for 2 years exceeded 15, and for 3 years they will reach about 30, because are in four languages (and one of them is even in a fifth language, for to please a little the people there).
Well, that's it, I will not add more things (which must later also translate in several languages), so that will limit myself only with the addresses of the sites where I am published, contrary to Bulgaria, namely:
tolino.de – there only I have access,
That's all, gentlemen.
[ And the parting verse this time is acrostic, which reads vertically "Your Jota", and says approximately the following:
I finish now, my little nation,
I retreat with this from the world.
I'am feeling awkward, yet I see that am needed
Still and have the honour to make people ashamed.
Oh, by us on the social crest
Exactly unworthy persons are presiding,
But I can't collect people for a public prayer. ]
Written in October 2018, and sent on 20.02.19