Looking for an article that can be used as this picture (no restriction on style)

What do you think of this? You can learn from it and don’t plagiarize.

The Queen of England’s helplessness

As the weather gets colder day by day, the heating problem becomes more and more important. It is a major event that attracts attention, even Queen Elizabeth II who lives in Buckingham Palace is no exception.

In recent years, the British royal family’s heating gas and electricity bills have continued to rise. The gas bill has soared from 319,000 pounds in 2002 to the current 606,000 pounds, and the electricity bill has increased from 249,000 pounds in 2002. It has soared to the current ￡583,000. However, due to financial constraints, the Queen seems somewhat unable to cope with this expenditure.

Seeing that the temperature is getting lower day by day, the Queen is putting a lot of thought into this. How should she solve this problem? After thinking about it, the Queen came up with an idea and thought of a way: in 2004, the British government formulated a poverty alleviation measure specifically for the poor. The government was responsible for all low-income groups and welfare units in the UK. Bearing 40% of the heating cost, that is to say, those low-income groups and welfare units only need to bear 60% of the heating cost for themselves.

The Queen was thinking, they all enjoy special treatment from the government, not to mention Buckingham Palace, the British royal family that has no direct financial resources? As a result, the Queen submitted an application to the British Treasury on October 9. She told the Treasury in the letter that the annual royal maintenance fee of 15 million pounds provided by the government was no longer sufficient, and she hoped to receive additional assistance from the Treasury. , according to the poverty alleviation regulations, she will pay 40 RMB of heating expenses, as well as replace four sets of heating equipment in Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle. The Queen also wrote in the application: "Like many poor houses on the street, the roof of the British royal family's house also leaks, but the royal family's finances are tight, and I have no money to reinforce and repair it. All this must rely on the British finances. The Ministry is here to provide financial assistance!”

Of course, at the end of the application, the Queen signed her name as Queen Elizabeth II. However, the Queen's name does not seem to have much deterrent effect on British government agencies that always only act in accordance with principles. After receiving the request from the Queen of England, the Ministry of Finance did not directly approve it. They first conducted a strict review and evaluation of the request. After careful deliberation, they believed that although the British Ministry of Environmental Protection knew that there was a special plan to provide low-income people with and welfare units provide heating subsidies, but as mentioned in the poverty alleviation measure, this project totaling 60 million pounds only targets two specific groups: the low-income class and the welfare units, and the Queen of England is obviously not in the low-income group Among them, they are not even public welfare units such as schools and hospitals. What's more, British taxpayers have paid 38 million pounds to the royal family every year. If the British royal family receives subsidies from this poverty alleviation plan, it will affect social equity. Just cause.

In the end, the British Treasury decided to reject the Queen's application. On October 14, British Treasury Darling responded to the Queen and said, "I'm sorry, Her Majesty, you have no right to enjoy this treatment!"

Queen Bey ruthlessly refused. There is no source of income, only expenditure reduction. In order to cope with the crisis of insufficient funds, the Queen can only drastically cut expenses and save the cost of royal charter flights, trains, helicopters and even daily meals. In this way, it is expected to barely reduce the cost by about one-third. expenditure. This means that if the Queen wants to have a warm winter this year, she must rely on her own frugality. Although the royal family’s request for help was rejected, the matter somehow became known to the media. At a royal event on the evening of October 16, a reporter from London’s most authoritative “Independent” asked the Queen: “Will you be affected by this?” Angry? ”

“No! I’m not angry at all. On the contrary, I also see two good things: one is that the government can pay so much attention to the poor and social welfare undertakings; So insisting on the principle of fairness and justice!" The Queen replied with a smile, with a tone of helplessness and relief.

After reading this news, I can’t help but think of ourselves, which is exactly the opposite. China is a country with a thousand-year tradition of feudal official-based privileged hierarchical system. Although it has experienced countless changes of dynasties during this period, this system has not only not been eliminated, but has continued to flourish, intensified, and been greatly strengthened. The social hierarchy is strict and the boundaries are clear. In the Yuan Dynasty, it was already very unpleasant to divide the Chinese people into ten grades; but what about now? The levels of officials alone are far more than ten, and the levels of people are also more than ten. The combined levels of officials and people are more than thirty. Officials are noble and common people are inferior, and bureaucrats' privileges are everywhere. Everyone envies and aspires to be an official. Almost all so-called talents are concentrated in the officialdom to dominate and prosper. The entire bureaucratic administrative system copied from the former Soviet Union has taken its emphasis on privileges to the extreme: the government's fiscal budget expenditure has never been transparent and has never been disclosed to taxpayers. Fiscal expenditure has always been tilted towards the official class. First, it satisfies the needs of the officials. They enjoy their extravagant and squandering consumption expenditures (the most obvious one is the notorious "three public officials" corrupt consumption, which easily reaches trillions. If it is poverty alleviation, it will not be so generous), and then it is the turn of the common people. Administrative and corruption expenses are more than enough, and there is never a shortage of money (what surprised and outraged the public most is: a postmaster in Henan Province hit and killed five students while driving a bus while drunk, and the government actually used more than 1 million public funds to compensate ), but there is a serious lack of investment in social and people's livelihood protection (actually, it is stingy and stingy). If even the officials on the stage cannot enjoy it, the common people will definitely have no hope. The reason on the table is that the government has no money. This reason is very absurd and completely untenable (because the country’s fiscal and tax revenue increases significantly every year). But public opinion is always excluded and blocked. Our systems and principles are very flexible and arbitrary. They can be interpreted and tweaked at will. They only have the right of unilateral interpretation. No matter how absurd things are, there is a high-sounding rationale.