A price of 1.79 is in odds-on (79p win for each £1 staked), or roughly 4-5 in old odds. With decimal odds you subtract 1 from the price to work out the actual odds; so a price of 3.5 would in reality be 2.5 or 5-2.
As a layer (acting as a bookmaker in effect) my liabilities are reversed so for every 79p my opposite number wagers I stand to win £1 (minus commission).
Laying a 'thing'; a horse, a football team, a specific event etc can also be viewed as backing all the other possible outcomes to win.
Yes it is all a mystery to me and all I can say is good luck for your future winnings
I'm pretty close to calling this election for the Conservatives, the only question being the size of the majority.
The few days after the release of the manifesto this weekend, and how it lands in the polling, will be crucial. If it doesn't move anything then from 2 weeks out (Thursday 28th November) onwards there are few opportunities left for game-changer - other than the big debate on 6th December.
It will really be a question of GOTV operations. But there could still be an 'error' of 20-30 seats either way, which is why I'm so wary of predicting exact seat numbers.
There does not yet feel like a Corbyn surge, but then I didn't really feel one in 2017 and was staggered that he managed to get over 40%. I would certainly want to wait until this weekend's megapolls before writing off Labour. If there are some single figure leads then I'm sure plenty here on PB will get squeaky bums, and after the Labour manifesto launch I would be surprised if the Tories were able to extend their lead.
Yes, getting to 40 really was impressive - I thought labour would do better than most predictions on seats but thought 40% of the vote was ridiculous.
That 40 was the most jaw-dropping part of the whole debacle - May won a share of the vote that produced epic landslides for Thatcher and Blair, but so (almost) did Corbyn.
I can only imagine it was a good slice of Remainers who would otherwise never vote Labour that made the difference for Labour in 2017, because the referendum was still raw and Labour looked to them like a chance to reverse it. If that bloc gives Labour the benefit of the doubt again, history could repeat itself, but I don't think it will.
A price of 1.79 is in odds-on (79p win for each £1 staked), or roughly 4-5 in old odds. With decimal odds you subtract 1 from the price to work out the actual odds; so a price of 3.5 would in reality be 2.5 or 5-2.
As a layer (acting as a bookmaker in effect) my liabilities are reversed so for every 79p my opposite number wagers I stand to win £1 (minus commission).
Laying a 'thing'; a horse, a football team, a specific event etc can also be viewed as backing all the other possible outcomes to win.
Hold on. How much did you put in, and how much are you expecting back if you win?
As I said yesterday, my guess is that these proceedings mean that Trumps is evens or slightly better for reelection, although it will be a bloodbath for the GOP in both House and Senate.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
As I said yesterday, my guess is that these proceedings mean that Trumps is evens or slightly better for reelection, although it will be a bloodbath for the GOP in both House and Senate.
Here's the LibDem manifesto "We believe that everyone has a right to make independent decisions over their reproductive health without interference by the state, and that access to reproductive healthcare is a human right. We will:
- Decriminalise abortion across the UK while retaining the existing 24-week limit and legislate for access to abortion facilities within Northern Ireland. - Enforce safe zones around abortion clinics, make intimidation or harassment of abortion service users and staff outside clinics, or on common transport routes to these services, illegal. - Fund abortion clinics to provide their services free of charge to service users regardless of nationality or residency. "
I don't think that helps you in case (i)
Abort due purely to gender?
That's bad, IMO, but I would not want to impose my views on this via the criminal law.
I am on the "Women's Right To Choose" side of this argument.
Poblem being, in the societies where they would abort a female purely for being a female, does the woman have the choice - or is she pressured (or worse) by the societal norms?
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
Added to my Con 340+ lay a little earlier when there were backers down at 1.79.
Can you help me and decipher that to someone like me who does not bet
He is using an exchange bookie like Betfair. Exchange bookies bring together a backer and a layer. The backer bets that something will happen, the layer bets that it will not happen, both people give their money to the exchange bookie to look after, and the booki gives all the money (minus a percentage) to whichever one is right.
@SunnyJim is laying the Con 340+ bet: i.e. he is betting that Con will not get more than 339 seats. He was waiting for a backer to arrive so he could place the bet. He and the backer have now given money to the exchange bookie and after the election he or the backer will get the money.
The price was 1.79: if the backer put in £100, then @SunnyJim would put in £179. The bookie holds the 279 until after the election, then it will give that money to whoever is correct
If this was a high-street bookmaker then the bookie acts as the layer.
Very interesting and thank you for explaining
Don't thank me just yet, @Big_G_NorthWales : I'm trying frantically to see if I got those numbers right! Oh, f*****g security filters!
You have been great outlining the process. Please do not stress about your figures
"Stressing about the figures" is my job description!
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party is nasty and spiteful the Labour Party is stupid and naive.
Refreshing we agree on something for once, which surprises me given your politics.
Maybe there is hope.
Well I'm a Hard Left Social Democrat. Something for everyone there.
What about sufferers of dementia tax.
So amongst this gumpf of labour’s so called radical manifesto (where they caved in to union barons on everything including trident) what are they saying about sorting out problem with dementia tax. Because remember Theresa didn’t propose a dementia tax, it’s already default, she proposed a solution to help people who are losing their life long savings to it. What’s in labour’s manifesto, something as controversial as Mays solution, or are they ignoring it, like every list they put out ignores renewing trident.
As I said yesterday, my guess is that these proceedings mean that Trumps is evens or slightly better for reelection, although it will be a bloodbath for the GOP in both House and Senate.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
The LD manifesto is very good indeed, and there are lots of us here who would much rather vote for a libertarian conservative party than an authoritarian one. But sadly they’ve polluted their brand by their lack of respect for democracy in the referendum of 2016. We voted to leave the EU and that should be allowed to happen.
Absolutely. If the Lib Dems really were Liberal Democrats then I would be strongly tempted to lend them my support. But as long as they persist in their support for membership of the undemocratic and often illiberal EU and refuse to abide by the result of the 2016 referendum I will never vote for them.
One of my vain hopes is that once we have left the EU, the Lib Dems will give up their Europhile lunacy and concentrate on being a proper UK liberal party.
As I said yesterday, my guess is that these proceedings mean that Trumps is evens or slightly better for reelection, although it will be a bloodbath for the GOP in both House and Senate.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
Refreshing we agree on something for once, which surprises me given your politics.
Maybe there is hope.
Well I'm a Hard Left Social Democrat. Something for everyone there.
What about sufferers of dementia tax.
So amongst this gumpf of labour’s so called radical manifesto (where they caved in to union barons on everything including trident) what are they saying about sorting out problem with dementia tax. Because remember Theresa didn’t propose a dementia tax, it’s already default, she proposed a solution to help people who are losing their life long savings to it. What’s in labour’s manifesto, something as controversial as Mays solution, or are they ignoring it, like every list they put out ignores renewing trident.
I understand they expect dementia sufferers to pay upto £100,000 each to their care from the sale of their homes
I understand Boris is about to announce noone will have to use their home to pay for dementia care, no doubt making it a NHS continuing care issue. I think the 6 billion he secured from the cancelled corporation tax cut will be used and a cross party committee mandated to agree a solution
Need to wait for the manifesto unless he says something tonight
Is there any reason why the murderer of the student in NZ "can't be identified"?
A second trial?
Under New Zealand law the judge in any trial has the right to supress the name of the convicted. This can be a unilateral decision by the judge or on request from the convicted.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
Like the Union bosses then?
I am not sure about the oligarch's wives - the union baron's prefer to extort their members, but otherwise, yes.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
Can anyone explain why there's a warning on the photo at the top of this Twitter feed? It's the Twitter page for the new Conservative candidate for East Surrey and the photo is the candidate with the prime minister.
Can anyone explain why there's a warning on the photo at the top of the Twitter feed? It's the Twitter page for the new Conservative candidate for East Surrey and the photo is the candidate with the prime minister.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
Ooooh, satire, just what I come here for.
Nothing satirical about it. I have known 5 or 6 MPs reasonably well (from both main parties) and a dodgier bunch I cannot imagine.
Can anyone explain why there's a warning on the photo at the top of this Twitter feed? It's the Twitter page for the new Conservative candidate for East Surrey and the photo is the candidate with the prime minister.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
without wishing to go full-on 4 yorkshiremen, we had the same advent calendar throughout our childhood.
Labour need to urgently clarify their abortion policy if they wish anyone remotely religious (or with a soul) to vote for them. https://righttolife.org.uk/news/labour-pledge-to-introduce-abortion-for-any-reason-up-to-birth/ These things are traditionally matters of conscience for MPs, and public opinion is that late abortions should be more restricted - rather than on-demand at 39 weeks.
ummm the LibDem policy is also to decriminalise abortion (haven't checked other parties yet). Most Conservative MPs chose not to vote against decriminalising abortion in Northern Ireland. So which party should anyone "with a soul vote" for these days?
So ther eis Surely, there is a difference between the decriminalising abortion in NI - and removing the time limit of 23 weeks and 6 days of pregnancy, in line with the Abortion Act 1967?
I don't think so. The Abortion Act 1967 never applied to Northern Ireland. Labour policy would bring England and Wales into line with the situation in Northern Ireland since October this year.
So there is now literally an abortion free-for-all in Northern Ireland, with no time limit? Any woman can turn up in Belfast and ask for a termination at eight and a half months? Just because, say, she doesn't like the sex of her baby?
But dont even think about hurting those foxes!
Killing foxes - evil beyond recognition.
Killing human babies in the womb - yeah, that’s okay, right up to 40 weeks.
So their policy is probably much the same as Canada's has been for decades
So, because another country decides to allow baby-killing, the U.K. should too?
Labour have just opened a massive box belonging to Pandora, if they think that religious groups will just accept this and vote Labour because they always do. There’s a line that they’ve crossed, whereby people of otherwise lapsed religion start identifying themselves as such to oppose policies like abortion on demand.
Bemused that this is always portrayed as a religious issue. I'm a (formally militant) atheist but I'm strongly opposed to late term abortion, or abortion on gender grounds. I would also reduce the maximum term to 22 weeks or so.
If Labour are really proposing 39-week abortion, it's not just the god-botherers who will be appalled.
Good to hear, and glad that it’s not just Christians appalled by this suggestion.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
The members at Hampstead Ladies Pond voted by quite a big majority to allow transgenders to frequent the facility on Hampstead Heath. It hasn't been an issue, probably because transgender users are rare. A friend did see one recenlty, and he/she did have a beard. Looked a bit odd apparently, but nobody fainted.
I went into the Ladies' by mistake last year in an up-market area, thinking it was unisex - the two women there glanced at me, paused, and I think quite visibly thought "Ah, this must be one of those trans people we read about, we must be tolerant", smiled vaguely and looked away.
In Moscow a few years ago, I remember a woman cleaner coming in and nonchalantly cleaned the floor around another bloke and me using the facilities. I was a bit startled at the time, but on reflection, why do we really get worked about privacy in something which we all do several times a day?
Your Moscow experience happens quite a bit in Germany.
I've been told that in Thailand (or was it Vietnam) that women squat to pee in toilets open to the other users, like men's urinals.
Readers with a memory (there must be at least one...oh, who am I kidding) might recall that I bemoaned the conversion of UK politics to American culture war politics and expressed sentiments like "we'll be banging on about abortion and gun control next". I am somewhat distressed, but not in the least bit surprised, to see half of that prediction come true...
Yes but I bet you didn't expect it to be the the Labour Party which triggered it.
I've just been poking around in the remote regions of the LibDem manifesto to see what's there (someone has to...). I was expecting my hackles to be raised, which to be fair they were in the obvious cases such as votes for children, mandatory gender-neutral school uniforms, and similar nonsense, but overall it looks pretty sensible. What I liked about it most is that it doesn't promise instant magical solutions to difficult problems, but instead in some of the difficult areas it proposes measures which seem to have some hope of actually improving things - for example on reducing reoffending, and measures to reduce violent crime.
I have no real issues with the Lib Dems manifesto
Lots of top Conservatives seem to like the Lib Dems in this election. Of course, they were top Conservatives in the days when Conservatives were competent, honest and - to a greater or lesser extent - caring. It`s a great shame that the Conservative Party been taken over by a gang of buffoons, chancers and [MODERATED]
You ok hun?
I don't recall the Conservative Party being described as caring at any point in my lifetime.
The Conservative Party are extremely caring. They have always cared hugely about thick brown envelopes from Russian oligarch's wives, keeping their mistresses secret from their wives, and keeping the oiks in their place.
I seem to remeber the "Cash for Questions" scandal literally involved big brown envelopes.
Highly, highly recommended. Sacha Baron-Cohen on the rise of conspiracy, the growth of populism, and the culpability of the internet giants. twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1197717846937276416
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
The word "win" is ambiguous in this context. Which of the following is true?
1) you put in £400 with the hope of getting £500 back if you win (stake=400, profit=100, return=400+100=500), or
2) you put in £400 with the hope of getting £900 back if you win (stake=400, profit=500, return=400+500=900)
Option 1.
Taking the actual figures on my account:
Ave backers odds: 1.82
Backers stake: £489.82
Liability: £401.66
Outstanding answer, thank you.
So. He put in 489.82 (100% of his stake). You put in 401.66 (82% of his stake). The bookie is holding £891.48 (£489.82+£401.66). If he wins, he will get £891.48 back, which is his stake of 489.82*1.82, and you will get nothing. If you win, you will get £891.48 back and he would get nothing.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
without wishing to go full-on 4 yorkshiremen, we had the same advent calendar throughout our childhood.
So did we. Every year we closed up all the windows ready for next year.
Actually, we have the same calendars now. My wife, who does crafts, made some a few years ago and we fill them up with chocolates from tins of celebrations. Living in Yorkshire now, we are too poor to pay the inflated price for chocolate calendars.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
The members at Hampstead Ladies Pond voted by quite a big majority to allow transgenders to frequent the facility on Hampstead Heath. It hasn't been an issue, probably because transgender users are rare. A friend did see one recenlty, and he/she did have a beard. Looked a bit odd apparently, but nobody fainted.
I went into the Ladies' by mistake last year in an up-market area, thinking it was unisex - the two women there glanced at me, paused, and I think quite visibly thought "Ah, this must be one of those trans people we read about, we must be tolerant", smiled vaguely and looked away.
In Moscow a few years ago, I remember a woman cleaner coming in and nonchalantly cleaned the floor around another bloke and me using the facilities. I was a bit startled at the time, but on reflection, why do we really get worked about privacy in something which we all do several times a day?
I don’t know about you but I do not go to the loo in front of strangers at all, let alone several times a day, and I most certainly do not want men coming into the ladies’ loos or changing rooms. If necessary, create some neutral loos/changing rooms etc.
But being a woman is not some sort of identity you can just put on just like that, just by announcing it. Womanhood is something real - not simply an identity. By denying that, the very real and different experiences of being a woman are being dismissed and marginalised. It sometimes feels awfully like another version of male bullying masquerading under a faux concern for trans people. It ought to be possible to protect the position of people who are transitioning to become women without denying the rights of women. Instead, it’s being done at their expense.
Has the abortion issue been cleared up yet? was it some sort of oversight in the manifesto? I can't believe they would genuinely make abortion legal up to the birth, has anyone ever argued in favour of that before? The UK already has some of the longest limits for abortions in the world.
I can't find any source other than the Catholic Herald article.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
without wishing to go full-on 4 yorkshiremen, we had the same advent calendar throughout our childhood.
Not another contest between VW e-UP drivers, please.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
The members at Hampstead Ladies Pond voted by quite a big majority to allow transgenders to frequent the facility on Hampstead Heath. It hasn't been an issue, probably because transgender users are rare. A friend did see one recenlty, and he/she did have a beard. Looked a bit odd apparently, but nobody fainted.
I went into the Ladies' by mistake last year in an up-market area, thinking it was unisex - the two women there glanced at me, paused, and I think quite visibly thought "Ah, this must be one of those trans people we read about, we must be tolerant", smiled vaguely and looked away.
In Moscow a few years ago, I remember a woman cleaner coming in and nonchalantly cleaned the floor around another bloke and me using the facilities. I was a bit startled at the time, but on reflection, why do we really get worked about privacy in something which we all do several times a day?
I don’t know about you but I do not go to the loo in front of strangers at all, let alone several times a day, and I most certainly do not want men coming into the ladies’ loos or changing rooms. If necessary, create some neutral loos/changing rooms etc.
But being a woman is not some sort of identity you can just put on just like that, just by announcing it. Womanhood is something real - not simply an identity. By denying that, the very real and different experiences of being a woman are being dismissed and marginalised. It sometimes feels awfully like another version of male bullying masquerading under a faux concern for trans people. It ought to be possible to protect the position of people who are transitioning to become women without denying the rights of women. Instead, it’s being done at their expense.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
Have members of the Royal Family routinely been using Buckingham Palace (and other buildings) for private commercial purposes as a matter of course?
If so, I'm staggered and to me it would be the biggest scandal ever regarding the Royal Family - I would actually say it would be reason to end the Monarchy.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
So. He put in 489.82 (100% of his stake). You put in 401.66 (82% of his stake). The bookie is holding £891.48 (£489.82+£401.66). If he wins, he will get £891.48 back, which is his stake of 489.82*1.82, and you will get nothing. If you win, you will get £891.48 back and he would get nothing.
If I have misunderstood, please say
Your understanding is right (just edited after re-reading your post).
If Boris wins 340 seats:
He wins £401 off me.
If Boris wins 339 seats:
I win £489 (minus commission) and I get my potential liability stake back of £401 for a total return of £890.
The members at Hampstead Ladies Pond voted by quite a big majority to allow transgenders to frequent the facility on Hampstead Heath. It hasn't been an issue, probably because transgender users are rare. A friend did see one recenlty, and he/she did have a beard. Looked a bit odd apparently, but nobody fainted.
I went into the Ladies' by mistake last year in an up-market area, thinking it was unisex - the two women there glanced at me, paused, and I think quite visibly thought "Ah, this must be one of those trans people we read about, we must be tolerant", smiled vaguely and looked away.
In Moscow a few years ago, I remember a woman cleaner coming in and nonchalantly cleaned the floor around another bloke and me using the facilities. I was a bit startled at the time, but on reflection, why do we really get worked about privacy in something which we all do several times a day?
But being a woman is not some sort of identity you can just put on just like that, just by announcing it. Womanhood is something real - not simply an identity. By denying that, the very real and different experiences of being a woman are being dismissed and marginalised. It sometimes feels awfully like another version of male bullying masquerading under a faux concern for trans people. It ought to be possible to protect the position of people who are transitioning to become women without denying the rights of women. Instead, it’s being done at their expense.
Has the abortion issue been cleared up yet? was it some sort of oversight in the manifesto? I can't believe they would genuinely make abortion legal up to the birth, has anyone ever argued in favour of that before? The UK already has some of the longest limits for abortions in the world.
I can't find any source other than the Catholic Herald article.
I quoted upthread an article in the Independent and the relevant parts of the Labour manifesto.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
without wishing to go full-on 4 yorkshiremen, we had the same advent calendar throughout our childhood.
So did we. Every year we closed up all the windows ready for next year.
Actually, we have the same calendars now. My wife, who does crafts, made some a few years ago and we fill them up with chocolates from tins of celebrations. Living in Yorkshire now, we are too poor to pay the inflated price for chocolate calendars.
nice one.
when choc ones did come in, we got one for our team at work. each person had a guess at the shape of the choc behind the window (star, santa etc). the winner got the choc. if nobody was right it was a rollover until someone did.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
He basically needs to go away until he clears his name, if he can.
Clears his name from what exactly? He hasn't been charged with anything.
Other than
1 - being a pompous twit when dealing with ordinary people (which seems to be true from personal accounts I have heard, but is no crime), and
2 - having a walk on part perhaps just for colour in a rape claim against Epstein back in 2015, which text was aiui expunged from the claim document with prejudice by the trial judge.
And being the target of a "who can be the most sanctimonious" competition amongst some media types jumping up and down on the outrage bus.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
Refreshing we agree on something for once, which surprises me given your politics.
Maybe there is hope.
Well I'm a Hard Left Social Democrat. Something for everyone there.
What about sufferers of dementia tax.
So amongst this gumpf of labour’s so called radical manifesto (where they caved in to union barons on everything including trident) what are they saying about sorting out problem with dementia tax. Because remember Theresa didn’t propose a dementia tax, it’s already default, she proposed a solution to help people who are losing their life long savings to it. What’s in labour’s manifesto, something as controversial as Mays solution, or are they ignoring it, like every list they put out ignores renewing trident.
I understand they expect dementia sufferers to pay upto £100,000 each to their care from the sale of their homes
I understand Boris is about to announce noone will have to use their home to pay for dementia care, no doubt making it a NHS continuing care issue. I think the 6 billion he secured from the cancelled corporation tax cut will be used and a cross party committee mandated to agree a solution
Need to wait for the manifesto unless he says something tonight
Sounds at first hearing a strong policy from Boris, and good position from which to attack labour
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
Cider, gin, beer: anything goes in advent calendars now. Popular with 5% households are the beauty products ones eg Jo Malone, Molton Brown or even Boots. I've just ordered a jam advent calendar for a friend.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
Have members of the Royal Family routinely been using Buckingham Palace (and other buildings) for private commercial purposes as a matter of course?
If so, I'm staggered and to me it would be the biggest scandal ever regarding the Royal Family - I would actually say it would be reason to end the Monarchy.
I think the public would be outraged.
Andrew needs to retire fully from public life at this point. If Pitch at the Palace is worth doing then another Royal can take it on. And it goes without saying that no Royal should benefit personally from it.
Honestly, this is common-sense stuff. How hard is it for the Royal flunkies to tell Andrew to stop being an arse. And if they won’t I will - for a modest fee.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
Cider, gin, beer: anything goes in advent calendars now. Popular with 5% households are the beauty products ones eg Jo Malone, Molton Brown or even Boots. I've just ordered a jam advent calendar for a friend.
Is there any reason why the murderer of the student in NZ "can't be identified"?
A second trial?
New Zealand law says either side can remain anonymous until the final sentencing. There may of course be more reasons (such as a second case) for the defendant to remain anonymous but the main one is personal choice.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
Cider, gin, beer: anything goes in advent calendars now. Popular with 5% households are the beauty products ones eg Jo Malone, Molton Brown or even Boots. I've just ordered a jam advent calendar for a friend.
Don't forget Lego.... the perfect size for those windows.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
Have members of the Royal Family routinely been using Buckingham Palace (and other buildings) for private commercial purposes as a matter of course?
If so, I'm staggered and to me it would be the biggest scandal ever regarding the Royal Family - I would actually say it would be reason to end the Monarchy.
I think the public would be outraged.
Andrew needs to retire fully from public life at this point. If Pitch at the Palace is worth doing then another Royal can take it on. And it goes without saying that no Royal should benefit personally from it.
Honestly, this is common-sense stuff. How hard is it for the Royal flunkies to tell Andrew to stop being an arse. And if they won’t I will - for a modest fee.
The point is that this might well be far, far bigger than Prince Andrew.
If Andrew has been using the Palace for his own commercial activities, what about the other royals? Are they doing it too?
If Yes, forget Prince Andrew, he's an irrelevance.
To my mind it would / should be the end of the Royal Family period.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
Have members of the Royal Family routinely been using Buckingham Palace (and other buildings) for private commercial purposes as a matter of course?
If so, I'm staggered and to me it would be the biggest scandal ever regarding the Royal Family - I would actually say it would be reason to end the Monarchy.
I think the public would be outraged.
Andrew needs to retire fully from public life at this point. If Pitch at the Palace is worth doing then another Royal can take it on. And it goes without saying that no Royal should benefit personally from it.
Honestly, this is common-sense stuff. How hard is it for the Royal flunkies to tell Andrew to stop being an arse. And if they won’t I will - for a modest fee.
The point is that this might well be far, far bigger than Prince Andrew.
If Andrew is using the palace for his own commercial activities, what about the other royals? Are they doing it too?
If Yes, forget Prince Andrew, he's an irrelevance.
To my mind it would / should be the end of the Royal Family period.
Is there any suggestion they have been using it as such in the past? It was only going to be a private commercial activity since he has been booted out of the firm, effectively.
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
Have members of the Royal Family routinely been using Buckingham Palace (and other buildings) for private commercial purposes as a matter of course?
If so, I'm staggered and to me it would be the biggest scandal ever regarding the Royal Family - I would actually say it would be reason to end the Monarchy.
I think the public would be outraged.
Andrew needs to retire fully from public life at this point. If Pitch at the Palace is worth doing then another Royal can take it on. And it goes without saying that no Royal should benefit personally from it.
Honestly, this is common-sense stuff. How hard is it for the Royal flunkies to tell Andrew to stop being an arse. And if they won’t I will - for a modest fee.
Or even some nice porcelain cappuchino cups, with the Royal Crest on.....
If Prince Andrew can continue to host events "on a commercial basis" at Buckingham Palace, can any member of the public hire the same rooms at the Palace on the same commercial basis?
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
Have members of the Royal Family routinely been using Buckingham Palace (and other buildings) for private commercial purposes as a matter of course?
If so, I'm staggered and to me it would be the biggest scandal ever regarding the Royal Family - I would actually say it would be reason to end the Monarchy.
I think the public would be outraged.
Andrew needs to retire fully from public life at this point. If Pitch at the Palace is worth doing then another Royal can take it on. And it goes without saying that no Royal should benefit personally from it.
Honestly, this is common-sense stuff. How hard is it for the Royal flunkies to tell Andrew to stop being an arse. And if they won’t I will - for a modest fee.
The point is that this might well be far, far bigger than Prince Andrew.
If Andrew is using the palace for his own commercial activities, what about the other royals? Are they doing it too?
If Yes, forget Prince Andrew, he's an irrelevance.
To my mind it would / should be the end of the Royal Family period.
Is there any suggestion they have been using it as such in the past? It was only going to be a private commercial activity since he has been booted out of the firm, effectively.
No, I don't think so.
It's being said that historically Prince Andrew has had a PRIVATE interest in the Pitch at Palace venture.
wonder how many other Labour MPs will do something like this.
It's a nice touch, and even I find it refreshingly positive, but if a Conservative voter was nodding along to all that he would never have been a Conservative voter in the first place.
I suspect Tory > Labour switchers in this election will be as close to zero as to be practically zero.
Christmas trees in November?! Boris has a word for that....
I put up my mini led tree today.
*Shakes head in sad 'what-is-the-world-coming-to' way.*
It's my birthday on Monday, decs go up the weekend nearest it!
In that case I'll let you off! In the office at work this week every vertical surface has been covered in tinsel and every horizontal surface has a Xmas (sic) tree on it. And the Advent calendars have already been raided of anything containing chocolate and/or alcohol. I'm sure Dante has a place for the people who do that.
We are a few days into our advent calendars. We are going away at Christmas and are having a Christmas Dinner in mid December instead, so have started eating the chocolate early as well.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
Cider, gin, beer: anything goes in advent calendars now. Popular with 5% households are the beauty products ones eg Jo Malone, Molton Brown or even Boots. I've just ordered a jam advent calendar for a friend.
So they can have jam today, and Jam tomorrow
I had a cheese advent calendar last year, which was fine, and have received a Scented Tea Light one this year - from relative who may end up strangled on Holy Innocents Day.
Comments
I can only imagine it was a good slice of Remainers who would otherwise never vote Labour that made the difference for Labour in 2017, because the referendum was still raw and Labour looked to them like a chance to reverse it. If that bloc gives Labour the benefit of the doubt again, history could repeat itself, but I don't think it will.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/471542-poll-finds-sharp-swing-in-opposition-to-impeachment-among-independents
As I said yesterday, my guess is that these proceedings mean that Trumps is evens or slightly better for reelection, although it will be a bloodbath for the GOP in both House and Senate.
Decorations still don't go up until December though.
There is some very keen money there at the moment but I can't see anything on twitter to be giving encouragement to that sort of backing.
You can get cider ones
https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/lilleys-cider-advent-calendar-christmas-3553461
I've also got a lay on Con Maj at an ave of 1.65 for £520 with a liability of £337. I won't be adding to this one.
I think we all know the rules of the game here!
So amongst this gumpf of labour’s so called radical manifesto (where they caved in to union barons on everything including trident) what are they saying about sorting out problem with dementia tax. Because remember Theresa didn’t propose a dementia tax, it’s already default, she proposed a solution to help people who are losing their life long savings to it. What’s in labour’s manifesto, something as controversial as Mays solution, or are they ignoring it, like every list they put out ignores renewing trident.
One of my vain hopes is that once we have left the EU, the Lib Dems will give up their Europhile lunacy and concentrate on being a proper UK liberal party.
https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1197717846937276416
I understand Boris is about to announce noone will have to use their home to pay for dementia care, no doubt making it a NHS continuing care issue. I think the 6 billion he secured from the cancelled corporation tax cut will be used and a cross party committee mandated to agree a solution
Need to wait for the manifesto unless he says something tonight
https://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-massey/news/article.cfm?mnarticle_uuid=6C7BABF0-4945-4347-9730-5E4EAD251E3D
1) you put in £400 with the hope of getting £500 back if you win (stake=400, profit=100, return=400+100=500), or
2) you put in £400 with the hope of getting £900 back if you win (stake=400, profit=500, return=400+500=900)
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/e1hcjlt1lq/Internal_AgeGE_Nov19_v2.pdf
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7714279/Grace-Millanes-killer-Jesse-Kempson-tissue-lies-fuel-sex-obsession.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/22/labours-silence-election-fraud-hardly-inspires-confidence-partys/
https://twitter.com/ClaireCoutinho
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7706289/Jeremy-Corbyns-closest-aide-Seumas-Milne-demanded-bases-Britain-CLOSED.html
Option 1.
Taking the actual figures on my account:
Ave backers odds: 1.82
Backers stake: £489.82
Liability: £401.66
https://clarketinwhistle.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Kazoos-black-gold-silver-v1-hi.jpg
https://twitter.com/hilarybennmp/status/1197930244042350592?s=20
I've been told that in Thailand (or was it Vietnam) that women squat to pee in toilets open to the other users, like men's urinals.
Either win £489 or lose £401
Duh, back to exchange school for me.
My profit would be £489 (minus commission).
The total returned on settlement would be the £401 liability plus the £489 stake.
If not, then a building being funded at massive cost to the taxpayer (renovation cost £350m over 10 years I believe) is being used for PRIVATE commercial gain by a member of the Royal Family.
How can this possibly be acceptable?
It is surely completely outrageous and Parliament should put a stop to it.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/prince-andrew-refuses-to-give-up-pitch-at-palace-as-it-emerges-he-can-take-a-cut-of-every-deal/ar-BBX8Vqw?ocid=spartanntp
So. He put in 489.82 (100% of his stake). You put in 401.66 (82% of his stake). The bookie is holding £891.48 (£489.82+£401.66). If he wins, he will get £891.48 back, which is his stake of 489.82*1.82, and you will get nothing. If you win, you will get £891.48 back and he would get nothing.
If I have misunderstood, please say
Actually, we have the same calendars now. My wife, who does crafts, made some a few years ago and we fill them up with chocolates from tins of celebrations. Living in Yorkshire now, we are too poor to pay the inflated price for chocolate calendars.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7715549/Prince-Andrew-resigns-Pitch-Palace-project-mounting-pressure.html
It’s likely that the man convicted will appeal, on the grounds that he never intended to kill the lady, so he’s guilty of no more than manslaughter.
If his testimony is accurate, he’s also a victim of a game that went wrong.
But being a woman is not some sort of identity you can just put on just like that, just by announcing it. Womanhood is something real - not simply an identity. By denying that, the very real and different experiences of being a woman are being dismissed and marginalised. It sometimes feels awfully like another version of male bullying masquerading under a faux concern for trans people. It ought to be possible to protect the position of people who are transitioning to become women without denying the rights of women. Instead, it’s being done at their expense.
I can't find any source other than the Catholic Herald article.
But surely the whole concept and the use of the Palace should go down with the ship.
Have members of the Royal Family routinely been using Buckingham Palace (and other buildings) for private commercial purposes as a matter of course?
If so, I'm staggered and to me it would be the biggest scandal ever regarding the Royal Family - I would actually say it would be reason to end the Monarchy.
I think the public would be outraged.
If Boris wins 340 seats:
He wins £401 off me.
If Boris wins 339 seats:
I win £489 (minus commission) and I get my potential liability stake back of £401 for a total return of £890.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/23/canadian-transgender-woman-loses-case-against-beauticians-refused/
Has Seamus "Stalin was misunderstood" Milne changed his mind?
Some of its (now former) MPs? Not so much.
when choc ones did come in, we got one for our team at work. each person had a guess at the shape of the choc behind the window (star, santa etc). the winner got the choc. if nobody was right it was a rollover until someone did.
Other than
1 - being a pompous twit when dealing with ordinary people (which seems to be true from personal accounts I have heard, but is no crime), and
2 - having a walk on part perhaps just for colour in a rape claim against Epstein back in 2015, which text was aiui expunged from the claim document with prejudice by the trial judge.
And being the target of a "who can be the most sanctimonious" competition amongst some media types jumping up and down on the outrage bus.
7pm Corbyn
7.30pm Sturgeon
8pm Swinson
8.30pm Boris
Honestly, this is common-sense stuff. How hard is it for the Royal flunkies to tell Andrew to stop being an arse. And if they won’t I will - for a modest fee.
Might need to nip out and buy a bottle of red.
If Andrew has been using the Palace for his own commercial activities, what about the other royals? Are they doing it too?
If Yes, forget Prince Andrew, he's an irrelevance.
To my mind it would / should be the end of the Royal Family period.
It's being said that historically Prince Andrew has had a PRIVATE interest in the Pitch at Palace venture.