Labor unions have launched a campaign calling for votes for the same people who, according to them, have already given us decent housing, salaries above the cost of living, and total protection. A proposal that, given the reality of impossible rents and tight wages, sounds more like a déjà vu than real change. It seems the strategy is to keep things the same.
The algorithm of the useful vote: repetition without update 🔄
In software development, when a loop has no exit condition, the system crashes. Something similar happens in politics: if unions insist on supporting the same managers without evaluating results (like the housing deficit or the loss of purchasing power), the electoral loop becomes a program that always executes the same instruction. The data update function has not been executed.
The ultimate patch: voting for the one who already did everything 🛠️
According to this logic, if we already have decent housing, why do I still see ads for rooms at 600 euros? If salaries rise more than the cost of living, why does my shopping cart seem like a luxury? The unions have found the perfect patch: declare the problem solved and ask for votes so that nothing changes. I wish my code worked with that same blind faith.