I just took a quick look at the manual. The class definitions look seriously verbose. I guess with some coding templates or macros, it wouldn't be too bad, though.
http://search.cpan.org/~ether/MooseX-Method-Signatures-0.44/...
http://search.cpan.org/~flora/MooseX-Declare-0.35/lib/MooseX...
[Edit: I might add -- the OO system is mature and largely inspired by Common Lisp. It is better than the "competition" among the scripting languages (says the ones with heavier background in those environments than me).]
But you didn't expect a serious answer.
You've written five(!) troll comments in this discussion -- as of now, total comments are 28. The last four trolls in 12 minutes.
In short: You're a complete drag on HN signal-to-noise and give pathetic waste-of-air language war trolls a bad name.
(All complex language environments have duct tape and baggage. And... ah, why feed the stinking trolls?)