Good thing we were only left skint enough to increase the debt horrendously and reduce living standards over the last 13 years. Quite the advert for the various ideologies of the Tories in that time. Your post was a classic “how can they be poor if they have some vaguely nice things” which right wing noddies come out with all the time. It’s nothing new. Why in 2023 should having the absolute basics be all millions of people in a supposedly rich country can afford and often not even that? Politics is about choices and your lot who you’ll pretend you don’t vote for made the choice to **** the poor off.
Clearly you know very little about betting as that would imply knocking up one of them is guaranteed.
Do the British Buggering Corporation refer to the EDL as a "proscribed terrorist organisation"? Or is it just you Marxists
Just a shower of embarrassingly stupid ****ers, as far as I can tell. More tragically clueless than dangerous, for the most part.
You really are living in some sort of fantasy world. Your response still did not contain an answer to the original question and just for good measure you threw in a paragraph of drivel that bears no relation to anything that I have stated. As a percentage of GDP, national debt rose just over 10 percentage points from 2010 to 2019. Between 2001 and 2010 it rose just over 40 percentage points in the Blair/Brown administration. The “horrendous debt” and “reduced living standards” since 2019 largely came about because Bolshevik Boris and Socialist Sunak totally screwed up during the Pandemic, throwing free money around like it was going out of fashion. Since 2019 the national debt has risen by nearly 20 percentage points. When you have made your choice at the next election, you will surely be quite happy with much more debt, nobody being any better off and it still being blamed on the Tories even though most of them will have gone. Carol Vorderman and Gary Lineker will sort it all out for you – they have the answer to everything.
People are marching for Palestine and aiming their ire at Israel, when it is Egypt that is blockading them. They are demanding aid, when Hamas has a healthy bank balance, and can fund weapons and warfare as well as having fuel and power for them as well as medical aid and food for its fighters. How tight can the blockade be when missiles can be smuggled in and fired out. If Hamas are given what they want and can operate with the restrictions, will the gays for Palestine be visiting to see the reality of the regime they are supporting?
You really do know absolutely nothing. As the bookmaker you have to assume that one of the eventualities is going to come up. I can put £59 on the four odds offered and win £100 whichever happens, so brain dead bookie is guaranteed to lose £41 if one of the events occurs. There should be a price worse than 2/5 for “None of the above” to make a book more than a hundred per cent. Are you going to offer me 10/1 Manchester United, 10/1 Manchester City and 10/1 the draw this afternoon? I will have £25k on each – the easiest £200k I will ever pick up. One of those three must happen. Or are they going to refuse to play in solidarity with PLM?
Everything you post is weirdly similar to the sort of bollocks blokes named Ian and Gary lap up on Twitter but you pretend to know anything about anything. The debt % in 2007 was lower than 1997. Maybe something happened after that that may have driven it up out of Labour’s control yet for some other reason went up steadily pre-pandemic under the Tories while ordinary people saw services decline and living standards stagnate. At the next election people have the choice of a Tory party courting the far right, probably under some even more useless **** like Braverman once Sunak has ****ed off to California or an actual adult who might actually improve things a bit in spite of what he’s left with. You’ll pick the former because you’re basically dead and like pulling the ladder up on the generations after you.
Except you don’t have to assume one of the eventualities comes up at all. Loads of markets have unlimited possible winners and therefore an essentially unlimited book percentage unless there’s an option for none of them as you’ve now added and even then in this example the bet could run until Johnson is dead in the event he doesn’t knock up a GB News presenter. A football match has three possible outcomes hence the book being around 108%. It’s not that difficult to understand even for someone like you.
