The ND of 2012-14 and the Syriza of 2015 - compete with each other in North Koreanism, betting and horse racing.
Taxes on the one hand, complete abolition of laws protecting players from arbitrary actions on the other.
Could ;
In previous years, the issue of the 10% tax that Karamanlis wanted to introduce in 2009 had somewhat entered the political debate.
Pasok said "no tax on hope" and triumphantly won the elections.
He would definitely win them, but would he win them by a smaller margin if he took another position?
There is no other case with a pre-election gambling issue.
Of course, Pasok did not treat us well afterwards.
He put - practically - half the tax and later, in 2011, famously said "we succeeded to reduce the payout" regarding OPAP which was state-owned at the time.
In other words, think about the day after tomorrow with pensions if Tsipras comes to the parliament and instead of saying "the pensions are not reduced" or "unfortunately despite our efforts they are reduced", he should say "we succeeded to reduce the pensions". It will be the night of Saint Bartholomew!
But in any case it is true that in the summer of 2009 Pasok took the right position saying "no tax on hope". We don't have any metrics that say this helped an "a" or "b" percentage but the big electoral victory he achieved then is a historical fact beyond dispute.
I know the objections.
One is that the ... people will vote for the great socialist revolution regardless of what the ... great socialist revolution thinks about the bet.
Another objection is that the people will vote for appointments only.
Still another objection is that the people will vote according to which member of parliament each has a relative.
Agreed, all this, but do they cover 100%? I don't know that and neither do Mr. of ... the socialist revolution, etc. What I know is that one in four Greeks plays something between gambling-lottery-horse racing.
My opinion is that anyone who condemns "North Korean" practices will only profit.
Taxes on the one hand, complete abolition of laws protecting players from arbitrary actions on the other.
Could ;
In previous years, the issue of the 10% tax that Karamanlis wanted to introduce in 2009 had somewhat entered the political debate.
Pasok said "no tax on hope" and triumphantly won the elections.
He would definitely win them, but would he win them by a smaller margin if he took another position?
There is no other case with a pre-election gambling issue.
Of course, Pasok did not treat us well afterwards.
He put - practically - half the tax and later, in 2011, famously said "we succeeded to reduce the payout" regarding OPAP which was state-owned at the time.
In other words, think about the day after tomorrow with pensions if Tsipras comes to the parliament and instead of saying "the pensions are not reduced" or "unfortunately despite our efforts they are reduced", he should say "we succeeded to reduce the pensions". It will be the night of Saint Bartholomew!
But in any case it is true that in the summer of 2009 Pasok took the right position saying "no tax on hope". We don't have any metrics that say this helped an "a" or "b" percentage but the big electoral victory he achieved then is a historical fact beyond dispute.
I know the objections.
One is that the ... people will vote for the great socialist revolution regardless of what the ... great socialist revolution thinks about the bet.
Another objection is that the people will vote for appointments only.
Still another objection is that the people will vote according to which member of parliament each has a relative.
Agreed, all this, but do they cover 100%? I don't know that and neither do Mr. of ... the socialist revolution, etc. What I know is that one in four Greeks plays something between gambling-lottery-horse racing.
My opinion is that anyone who condemns "North Korean" practices will only profit.
Last edited: