I hereby impose a 120 day travel ban denying access to my property (the house and the 400m² surrounding it) for people from the following countries:

Monaco, Panama and Cayman Islands: I understand that it is not always pleasant to pay taxes, especially if you have to pay a lot of them. But that is obviously only the case if you have come into even bigger sums of money (as I was not sure if ‘earned’ is a proper description, I opted to choose ‘come into’) – as far as I was able to find out, the first case of a tax rate higher than 100% still has to be reported upon. As these 3 countries are commonly known to be tax havens, it is quite safe to assume that most of the inhabitants live there for tax reasons, which is enough for me to include them in the travel ban. To any indigenous inhabitants who feel they are unfairly treated by this ban: sorry, guys, but there’s collateral damage associated with everything in life. Banned!

South Korea: it should be clear by now that this country has a hidden, terrorist agenda. One of their most prominent companies is spreading devices, disguised as high-end smartphones (and even succeeding in making people pay hundreds of euros for them), all over the world that catch fire and even explode all by themselves. And now it turns out that some of the other devices (from that very same company) that do not explode are essentially spying gear disguised as smart TVs. Banned!

India: Look, since most of our kids moved out, we do have some spare rooms in the house (well, they will be spare rooms if they ever decide to also move out the remainder of their stuff), but have you recently checked the size of the population of India? 1.252 billion! Those will never fit in! Banned! OK, not the strongest argument, but is a decent argumentation really always needed? Is there really an age at which “Because” stop being a valid reply? And I wanted the list to contain 6 countries – I have heard that a similar travel ban has already been tried with a list of 7 countries, but that seems to have triggered all kinds of protest. (And yes, I know, with that argumentation I should also include China, but that would bring the total number up to 7 again – and as is commonly known: better not mess with the Chinese.)

USA: I really only intend this ban to apply to the president and his team, so in this case the collateral damage is over 300 million people. Banned!