Fancy Boots

If you don't, you're shit.

Funniest shit I've read in days

Why the fuck would you keep that first clip in the video after watching it yourself? Like, it's actually terrible. less than 15seconds in and you fuck up a 3way like 4 times in a row. Accidental staffbashes. Delayed blitz/barrages, pokes with DDS. X4 melee without fakies. + Nearly plank to a Dscim slash. 4way main bridding. Get's spec'd on robes by a delayed DDS. Wasted 2 brew doses. Kept switching into tank armour to run at mage. I'm Dumbfounded. Only redeeming factor in this entire video are the boots you wear for your outro. Honestly, if this quality of PK'ing and videomaking can make youtuber rank, then there's hope for all of us. Obviously.

This is actually mad. So many nice clips it's insane and that edit at 3:15... Cream worthy. Keep at it fam, making me want to pull out camtasia. <3

Great variety. Great clips. Great bridding. Nothing but progression and improvement. 10/10 lad, good work. Keep it up!

Peace lad. Sorry + been inactive with irl shit. Chat on discord for millennia.

"dead for max" Lol.

Thanks for reply! Here we go! Labour coming to power isn't what is going to cause an "Economic Castastrophe". What is causing that is the UK leaving the EU, which by the way was a National wide REFERENDUM. Now, we have Theresa May's cowardice trying to repeal this action, even though the british public voted in majority for it to happen. It's like "We hate Trump, We hate Trump!" But yet half of America voted for him. Hmm.... The tax is high, true. But The Labour Party is only looking to increase this marginally on INDIVIDUALS earning over 80k per annum. https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/814161/Labour-Party-manifesto-2017-tax-Jeremy-Corbyn-raise-taxes-garden-tax-election This is simply untrue. If you think that people are going to jump ship on their country due to monetary gain, I genuinely believe you're mistaken. Let's weigh up the pro's and con's. 1). Have to guarentee the job in a designated location abroad to start with. 2). Have to move there. 3). Have to get Citizenship there to be able to live and work within that country. 4). Have to sell your home in the UK, because as you said, the NHS workers are oh so struggling for money. And many more reasons. Transportation of items. It's all a massive hassle. People simply don't do it. It's said in jest a lot, but it doesn't occur. Why move to a foreign country simply to start all over instead of climbing the ladder that you currently work in? Yeah. I'm not going to call bullshit, but bullshit. If you have relatives that're working in the NHS, there is honestly no reason why they would be opposed for the Labour Party to come to power. You're believing hear-say from word of mouth instead of doing research for yourself. Read their manifesto for healthcare, it's nothing but positives the NHS is otherwise being neglected from. https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/healthcare-for-all/ Again, no they wouldn't. By "Firm" I'm assuming you mean "Business". Imagine if it's a pain in the fucking arse just to move country, imagine this: All of that, along with a business. With the added incentive that that business may fail abroad and the individual being in financial ruin. It's a rare occurrence when it does happen. "As companies would operate in lowered taxed countries or trading blocs like the EU." Ummm...? They already do lmfao. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4303030/The-major-firms-avoiding-corporation-tax.html https://www.ft.com/content/00de4f00-b754-11e7-8c12-5661783e5589 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/microsoft-avoids-paying-100m-a-year-in-uk-corporation-tax-a7089931.html http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/google-facebook-amazon-ebay-apple-7251746 And, FYI, Corporation Tax is dealt similarly, not identically however, to Personal tax. It's mostly based on Profitable margin's per annum and whatnot. I don't own my business, but obviously Mcdonalds isn't getting the same tax as your kebab shop down the road. No they don't go to "Nursing School". They go to "University". And Nursing can be a "Degree", which completely nullifies your argument of "Why would people go through all the effort of training to be a nurse when there is such wage-reward for the work, when there are options to get a degree and earn more?" https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/nursing/studying-nursing True, they do start on a low wage. However, to be "Fully qualified", they only take a 2 year course. You know, it's funny that you bring Nurses' pay into the question when fully qualified doctors, fresh from medical school have to have done a minimum of 5 years, however only start 1 payband higher. https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/doctors/why-study-medicine https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/doctors/pay-doctors Also, Nurses, Midwifes and Paramedics have been promised a "Pay Award" from the Autumn Budget in 2017. You don't research yourself as we've already discovered, so you wouldn't know this. https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/nhs-budget And, if you want to talk about pay, you can check this article that explains how pay is slowly increasing for NHS staff yearly. http://content.digital.nhs.uk/article/5057/NHS-pay-statistics-published. "I know this from expert advice" but doesn't provide a source. Hmm.... Regardless... It's not only the "Lack of nursing" that's causing the healthcare to fail. The NHS is within the top 5 employers worldwide. If you're going to bring in the lack of nursing and the pay-scale being the main issue because of this, wouldn't pumping loads of money into the NHS solve this? And this isn't the sole reason why the NHS is dying. A nurse is paid minimally due to the skills that they bring. For instance, a newly qualified nurse that took the 2 year diploma are unable to cannulate. Cannulation is an important and crucial skill that allows IV entry to a patient. But what about: Junior Doctors, Surgeons, Paramedics, Ambulance Technicians, Waiting times in the NHS, the NHS waiting list, Lack of hospitals, Walk-in centres, GP's, Sexual Health Clinics, Overworked and overtired staff, staff who're inept of certain necessary skills on a daily basis within a hospital, misdiagnosis or missing something completely, NHS consistently being sued, and many more. There's a great strain on the NHS, a lack of Nurses isn't the sole reason. As I said above, lack of staff are being worked on. There's been a 62.5% influx of students on my University course that're going to be joining the NHS. This is similar for universities nationwide. £8,000 being the top end of the cost. When stating costs in regards to arguments, state the price bracket if it's influential to your point. Otherwise it makes you look manipulative. A Gastric Band generally costs £4,000 to £8,000, rounded. This means that a gastic band could cost 50% of what you originally stated. Also, since you're sticking to this point of a gastric band, a 20 very hard, gruelling, mind boggling search of a mere 20 seconds found me out some interesting points. Such as, there's criteria for a gastric band. This being: - A BMI of >40 and a serious condition posing threat to health. - The individual trying many / all other weight loss method - Agreeing to follow up care and treatment after the surgery, such as healthy lifestyle choices and regular check-ups with the GP. - They've been receiving or received treatment from a specialist obesity team. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/weight-loss-surgery/who-can-have-it/ But let's think for a minute however. It's a lifestyle choice? Okay, we'll go along with that. If that's the case, why would be potentially bankrupt or withdraw treatment and healthcare to someone who potentially desperately needs it because of a financial problem? Without this surgery, these people have a much higher chance of dying from their disease. Withdrawing that from them or charging someone who is seeking treatment goes against what the NHS stands for. They need this treatment, and you're charging them for it. It's like withholding insulin from a diabetic or Ventolin from an asthmatic. On about the cost: The NHS had roughly £116.4B from 2015-2016. https://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx http://www.nhsconfed.org/resources/key-statistics-on-the-nhs £8,000 of this to someone who needs it isn't a big deal, or a problem because of "Taxpayers money". True, they knew that it was bad for them, but you've kind of answered your own question here. "You should have to pay" "Why should the taxpayers fund your treatment". Short answer: Because they, statistically, also pay tax. So in essence, they are paying for their own treatment. The entirety of your argument is completely nullified because of this. Let's assume a scenario. Good old Bill, who's an engineer who earns £73,563 a year and is super taxed has paid tax all of his life. Good old Bill has also smoked for the past 15 years. Well, he's paying tax. A portion of that goes towards the NHS so it's unfair to also charge him for a self-inflicted disease which requires treatment when he's essentially been paying for it. So, either treat him, or treat him and charge him, and now he doesn't have to pay tax because he's been faux'ed out of it. But if he's not paying tax, the next person wont want too. Now because of this, there's uproar and a massive decline in the amount the government is able to spend yearly via tax alone. Oh, and also: "This could also help discourage unhealthy lifestyles, furtherly putting less stress on the NHS, and also could help decrease tax rates." No it wont help reduce tax rates. Not at all. That money would just be spent somewhere else where it's needed within the NHS. Solution? People that don't pay tax should be charged. Problem with that? Majority of people who don't get taxed earn less £11,500 per annum. https://www.gov.uk/income-tax-rates These individuals simply can't afford treatment for smoking, or £4,000-£8,000 for a Gastric Band. This is why the NHS exists. Summary of all of this. You ignored a lot of my main points. You don't do research for yourself or provide links. You are generally close-minded. You're lazy and I personally don't think you know genuinely how the NHS works and functions. Anyhow, hope I've helped demonstrate why you're wrong. Many thanks, Fancy Boots.

Okay, reading through this was a disaster with the amount of spelling mistakes but regardless, I'll make a full fledged reply. True, the taxing that goes towards the NHS pretty much does pay for everything within the NHS, speaking broadly. However, funding still is an issue. This is a major reason why people have voted to leave the EU for the money it would bring that the NHS desperately needs. Hopefully the labour party is brought to power and can help this happen, the true question is though, would the NHS really receive £350M a week? That's a different discussion. A lot of the problems that the NHS is currently having is caused via funding. Not having enough funds for healthcare buildings, such as walk-in General Practices, Hospitals, the fact that the Air Ambulance is completely ran off of charity despite how many countless lives it saves yearly, staff, equipment, drugs and many more. In the west midlands, if you've had a serious neck or head injury, you're blue-lighted to Stoke. This is because Stoke has a specialised Neck and Head ward that is genuinely leagues above other hospitals. Why? I don't know. The standards of care and speciality differ from hospital to hospital and this therefore creates lots of demand in some areas than others. Funding would help tackle this issue. Same goes for inner-city hospitals. They're much more inclined in dealing with things such as RTC's, alcohol-induced injuries, assaults, life-threatening injuries, ect. It's a whole can of worms. Funding is the issue. Maybe tax isn't, but funding most definitely is. These aren't the only problems that the NHS is having. No where near. Nurses are a major part of the NHS, true, but regardless of this these aren't the only job role within the Health Service that is lacking. For instance, and speaking from experience, the university and course that I'm attending increased the amount of students in the course by 62.5%, and this is a job role that is specifically made for the NHS. People aren't going into the NHS because in regards to other jobs, they're not that well payed for time and effort put in. For instance, an IRL mate is currently undergoing an apprenticeship with Business and Finance with a company for 2 years, which they're providing financially and after he completes it will be on $52k Annually. However, going into the actual topic... What would define fine-able though in this category? There's a lot of different things that can affect weight. In regards to this, would you also be fining people who are class 2 diabetic? As Diabetes can possibly be self-inflicted due to diet. There's too much of a wide scope in regards to what is fine-able or what isn't. Too many grey areas and not enough time or necessity for this to start happening. There's a lot different "Weight related healthcare" out there currently, along with this there are many different things that can promote weight gain, not strictly diseases. For one example, childbirth. It's incredibly broad-minded to simply state that you're able to lose weight after a baby is born. Yes, strictly this is true, but there are many different factors to think of when a woman child bears. They struggle to exercise whilst pregnant. This can and usually does lead to weight gain. And then once going through labour, they have "baby-weight". This is difficult for a woman to lose due to a number of things. Poor / lack of diet, lack of sleep, lack of exercise, and physical exhaustion to name a few. These will all promote weight gain, and they'll all happen to a mother once they have a child to look after as well. https://www.fitpregnancy.com/exercise/postnatal-workouts/5-reasons-youre-not-losing-your-baby-weight Again with the tax. This is something I wholeheartedly agree with, but again, it's hard to prove that someone has a disease strictly due to smoking. COPD, Cancers of the mouth, lungs and throat, dental care (This is privatised but the point still stands) and so many other respiratory diseases. Although primarily; they are caused by smoking. However, not in every case. This therefore makes it hard to fine on because the hospital would have to prove it was caused because of that. Reading this one pissed me off the most. Alcohol consumption is such a broad scope of practice that healthcare professionals have to deal with on a daily basis. Along with this, there are many different reasons why people drink. To start with, alcoholism. Alcohol is a drug, and through daily use causes an addiction. An addiction is widely accepted as a "disease" so to speak. You stated above that people with diseases shouldn't be fined so does this go along with that? https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-heart-addiction/201112/is-addiction-really-disease Another thing is mental health. Mental health is closely correlated to alcohol consumption, although not dependently caused and in a large amount of cases not what occurs or is a contributing factor. Mental Health is disgustingly under-appreciated in the UK, under-funded and usually underestimated. A large quantity of alcoholism can be correlated to mental health. Does that mean people who're drunk but have mental health issues are to be fined? People who have mental health issues often have them but aren't diagnosed or receiving correct treatment. Then, to top it off, someone with schizophrenia who drank and is emitted into hospital now has to pay a massive fine because of it. How do you honestly think that would impact someone in such a vulnerable position? What if someone falls over, breaks a leg and is emitted into hospital. Then, upon being brought in is found to be under a fractional amount of alcohol. Well, it's in their system, they had an injury, and are in hospital requiring treatment, so fine them!? It's not as broad-termed as that. That might not of been the cause of it. What if their shoelace is untied? Which takes me on to my next point. What about fining someone because of stupid-ass decisions or mistakes? For instance, I personally was in attendance less than 2 weeks ago to a fucking idiot that thought it would be a wise decision to cement his fucking head into a microwave. I was apart of the second crew on-scene, and it came through as a Category 1 call. Then you have to ask, yes it was self-inflicted but he was in genuine life-threatening danger. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-birmingham-42288252/prankster-defends-cementing-head-in-microwave What about people who drive cars? Driving a car increases you chance of being put at-risk by an absurdly amount. Due to that, should the NHS fine people who're injured when they're travelling in a vehicle? I mean, "It's a lifestyle choice and a luxury people should have to pay for. What about people that self-harm. Teenagers? Kids? Vulnerable people? Should we really fine a 13 year old for self-harming because they're being bullied by half the school? What age do we begin fining at? Do we fine the protective guardian if they're under that age? There's so many questions and different things that people should, or could be fined for and it's too broad of a question to start fining different aspects of the NHS or treatment due to certain issues or problems. So no, they shouldn't. We should leave the EU and the NHS should receive 350m a week and that would help for starters. Thanks, Fancy Boots.

Imagine fighting in a max account with Adamant, Water Battlestaff / Staff of water & Xercian...

Ooooo nice vid again. Keep it up man, these are looking great. amazing advertisement on the server too. Hopefully it brings in some new players. Good work as always.

Oh shit! Just seen these from you. Amazing work, videos are incredible and you're setting a great standard vid-pk wise. Keep it up lad. !

Oh wow awesome. Goodluck to everyone, looking forward to see who wins!

20k a month is a bit low considering people want to watch PK'ers in max and whatnot and if you die once you've lost your monthly payment.

Considering you're still learning and lack of F-keys, this is pretty good man. Nice.