Reply With QuoteThis thread is more suited to the BP. Can't believe the nastiness.
This is a non-event. She's your typical breeder.
This thread is more suited to the BP. Can't believe the nastiness.
What does that mean? Are you using "breeder" in the context of "heterosexual"?Originally Posted by bobbyboy
I think we should sell the royals to the Americans with a huge finance deal that will see any deficit wiped out over the next 10 years, they will do well over there as they celebrate the pointless/talentless and excessive wealth celebrity even more than we do.
The birth of another over privileged sprog that will never want for anything and the accompanying celebration and fawning just reinforces the inequalities in our society and how it is run by birthright not merit.
It’s time for a meritocracy not aristocracy.
The French had the right idea.
Great idea Mr Smith as you say the septics do love all that nonsense.
I like the royal family.
"A man of little significance"
Tanks, Crusader.
F.T.F.A.
Everyone does. Even the people who like to moan to compensate for their own personal shortcomings. Makes it more palatable when you blame someone else.
The fact is that while it's a bizarre thing to have in the modern world, it's this oddball tradition that does more than anything else to promote our little islands on he world stage and brings far more to us than they take.
What nonsense.
You are paying for the Royal Family to do a job, which is represent the Country, however I imagine any payment you are making is more than offset in the revenue they bring into the country.
As for having an opinion, I could of course agree, however in this case it would just make both of us wrong.
But if you want to get sniffy about paying for other people childrens there are plenty of other "families"you can target.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
I dont. Can't abide them and struggle to understand how they're even applicable in our society anymore.
Dont get it, never have and never will, sorry if that goes against anything but that's my opinion of course.
They are there by birthright and an entrenched aristocracy not by merit, that system doesn’t belong in the modern world.You are paying for the Royal Family to do a job, which is represent the Country, however I imagine any payment you are making is more than offset in the revenue they bring into the country.
"Merit". Would that be the "Meritocracy" that produced Presidents Reagan, Bush Jr and Donald Trump?
If so, I'll stick with the Royal Family.
Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.
Oh for goodness sake. Their role is purely as figureheads for the country. They cost tax payers about 50p a year, but are expected to provide excellent pubic services and perform huge amounts of charity and good works - which they do. They have to live in a permanent bubble and receive criticism whilst being deigned a platform to respond. Must be all shits and giggles.
But I suppose you would rather the head of the country be part of an economic or political elite instead and we throw out a thousand years of history and one of the things that makes us British. Plus this person will need to get changed every 5 years thus ensuring zero continuity between generations. Wonderful. I also imagine all this efforts would still cost tax payers more that 50p and year.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
You are welcome to them, keep tugging that forelock!
Can't believe that they only cost the UK 15 mil, you sure you have your figures right there?
The last thing I read was that the treasury give queenie about 80 mil a year alone.
And we're thankayou
Fas est ab hoste doceri
What’s so important about continuity between generations? Plenty of other countries manage without (and not just the US).
Are the leaders of France, Germany or Ireland, for example, part of a political elite?
Yes!!!
Germany = https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank-Walter_Steinmeier
France = https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_France
Ireland = https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Higgins
DOH!
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Don't let the mouth breathers get you down Andy!
Rotherham Comp. Didn't know that...
Lol, but what worries me that these enlightened ones have a vote and worst still might have children of their own. Tragic and terrifying at the same time.
But saying that I used to have similar views when I was about 12.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Yes, obviously those countries have presidents - and if being elected makes them a political elite so are MPs and the PM, unlike the royal family who are born elite.
And you didn't answer my other question BTW.
Funny you should say that, I was all gooey eyed about the queen until I was 12.
I bet you love reading OK magazine don't you?
Err nope, but what has OK magazine got to do with anything? Or are you suggesting that the Royal Family sell their stories or wedding photos to them and make a profit? Nope, thought not.
BTW i am not "gooey eyed" about the Royals - I have never even seen one in the flesh,but I have an appreciation for what they do as well as an understanding of the alternatives available. President Blair for example.
oh yes, dont forget that without the Royals, things like DOE awards, the Princes Trust, the Invictus Games, etc, etc, would not exist. Try looking past your baseless bigotry and dogma, and look at the bigger picture.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
You do post utter b####ks. Why would someone as unpopular as Tony Blair be elected president?
No I just assumed you sounded like the type who would read Hello or OK magazines. A little like a teeny reading the latest about Justin Bieber or Joey Essex. Of course they wouldn't sell their pics to Hello or Ok, they'd get a far better price with Vogue or Country Living
No bigotry from me, just don't see the point of them however, if your justification is based on DOE and the Invictus games then fair play to you.
Im pretty certain there's hundreds of organisations and sporting events that have naff all to do with the monarchy that do pretty well.
Last edited by Franky Four Fingers; 25th April 2018 at 22:22.
You will note that all of these people were life long professional politics, who spent much of their lives pursuing power and influence. But if you cannot spot the difference with a professional politian and a member of the Royals, then we are wasting each other's time.
Ref your question - Google is your friend
https://www.gov.uk/government/public...s-2016-to-2017
but don't forget the millions which goes to the government from the Crown Estates, hence makes the calculation quite tricky.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
You're answering something else here but carry on. I asked about continuity...
Then your assumption would be incorrect. The fact that you do not see the point of them is your problem not mine. But if "not seeing the point" is your best argument for your comments, well, kudos to you. Very considered and thought out
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
I don’t understand why people are comparing the royals as some better alternative to an elected head of government? That was started in the 17th century with a constitutional monarchy and further restrictions in the following century.
They don’t need to be replaced with anything, an alternative doesn’t need to be sought.
I could well same the same for you what with the DOE and Invictus games.....Kudos returned.Then your assumption would be incorrect. The fact that you do not see the point of them is your problem not mine. But if "not seeing the point" is your best argument for your comments, well, kudos to you. Very considered and thought out
Seriosly though.....I barely raised a smile when my brother kicked another sprog out, why would the media expect me to want to buy a paper celebrating the fact that someone else I have no connection with has managed it also?
Last edited by Franky Four Fingers; 25th April 2018 at 23:05.
But, but, who would open Parliament?
Aren’t you paid to do that?
Dude, you're on fire tonight!
Fas est ab hoste doceri
Ant and Dec?
You mean Dec.
The people get what the people want.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
I don’t think the media would expect you to buy the paper. There are though a lot of people who like the Royal family who will.
Except it doesn't.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/how-d...l?guccounter=1
Oh, a bit like the Chinese system? Where you get families murdering their babies, as not to get fined by the government.
Except that the Duchy of Cornwall was established by the King (Edward III) appropriating manors for his son. Yes, long time ago but they haven't exactly earned their wealth/income.
Oh no, how very dare they inherit wealth.
Also not the point, the point was they aren't on the taxpayer's coin. In fact Liz-II Plc makes money for the country through Crown Estates.
Inheritance not the point here. It's where that wealth has come from.
Well my point is that aren't on the taxpayers coin because they have created their wealth at the expense of others.
So have most wealthy families / individuals whether themselves or from previous generations. So what's the point?
Also thinking about it, legal / illegal, moral / immoral, everyone makes money off someone else, that's how it works.
Since your taxes also support those who are unemployed do you think they should be limited to a certain number of children as well?
Frankly I couldn’t give a sh** about the royal baby and given I don’t know the parents personally, why should I?
Because as a subject Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith its expected you take an interest in the progeny of the ruling classes.
The French did in 1789 :-)
B
The funny thing is that I very much doubt she does. Just another great grand child.
Actually it's the press and media who publish all this stuff on the Royals, because huge numbers of the general public is interested in it and are willing to part with their hard earned to see pictures and read stuff. Just like most men are interested in cars, sport and naked women.
However the fact that you are not interested in it is a massive so what. Lots of people aren't interested in watches for example, even more so expensive vintage watches, but according to you logic, because some people (lots) are not interested should we stop buying them and publishing our "incoming" on a website.
Why not just accept that they do no harm and a new life has entered the world in to a happy family.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Indeed - they replaced the King with an Emperorwho plunged Europe into a war that cost over 1,000,000 lives. Much better having Liz, Charlie and Willy. No need to fix something that isn't broken.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Posting Permissions
