Queen to Abdicate?

[DaveShoelace]

I was offended Kmac. Horrible suggestion.

Wind yer neck in. 

There are far more extreme ways to get rid of them. 

Entitlement by birth right is so wrong on many levels and it is no wonder the country is in the shit when we prop this lot up with handout after handout, then add to that all their elitis friends who wouldn't know a hard days graft if it bit them in the arse, all the while pensioners are struggling to eat and heat their homes through no fault of their own other than corporate greed.  The disabled and unemployed are scapegoated and struck by austerity measures whilst that twat William makes a profession out of being unemployed. 

To be fair, he does have a full time job as an air ambulance pilot at Cambridge airport. From what I can tell he gets some decent holiday entitlement.

Correct.

The salary is circa £40,000, which he donates to the Air Ambulance Charity.

Doesn't he start next spring?   

Quite possibly, I just know it was made known earlier this year. The point is the same, of course.

It's not really though is it?  He pays no tax/NI at the moment gets loads of jolly's at the expense of ordinary working men and woman and yet makes some shit gesture like 40k a year to charity.  Why not pass up the 1.5 mill refurb give that to charity and use the 40k to do up his free house. 

40k would barely do the kitchen up in his house to be fair, it's pretty big.

Well get a house you can afford to buy/rennovate. 

Being as they are from London they would probably need that 1.5 million then, its pretty hard for a young couple with a kid to get on the property ladder. Or they could get a council house I suppose.

Or they could both get paying jobs, save some dough and get a mortgage. Instead of sponging off the rest of us.

Well we've already established that Wills has a job and Kate is currently pregnant, so she might struggle to get a job right now, especially as she already has another kid right now. I suppose they could move in to Clarence House with Prince Charles for a year or so while they save up a deposit, but that's quite a lot to ask of Charles and Camilla when their will be two toddlers running around. Hardly seems fair imo.

[TightEnd]

kmac just google the civil list, royal family costs and benefits etc etc

you really do have a one eyed approach that diminishes any point you make on this matter

"The monarchy costs 69p a year for every person in Britain, or £1.33 per taxpayer. In return, besides the Crown Estate profits, there is the unquantifiable, but enormous, tourist revenue it generates."

was one quote, for example, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

net net the royal family costs the taxpayer nothing, and generates cash that is spent in other areas

Must be true then because the Civil Service is most impartial.

but you don't address the point, just come back with a half arsed cynical counter

so wrapped up in your ideology that you are unprepared to accept the facts

[ripple11]

kmac just google the civil list, royal family costs and benefits etc etc

you really do have a one eyed approach that diminishes any point you make on this matter

"The monarchy costs 69p a year for every person in Britain, or £1.33 per taxpayer. In return, besides the Crown Estate profits, there is the unquantifiable, but enormous, tourist revenue it generates."

was one quote, for example, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

net net the royal family costs the taxpayer nothing, and generates cash that is spent in other areas

Must be true then because the Civil Service is most impartial.

but you don't address the point, just come back with a half arsed cynical counter

so wrapped up in your ideology that you are unprepared to accept the facts

beat me to it Tighty....also like this bit from it:

The German presidency costs about the same as the Queen, but how many tourists line the streets of Berlin to catch a glimpse of – er – what is his name?

[Kmac84]

I was offended Kmac. Horrible suggestion.

Wind yer neck in. 

There are far more extreme ways to get rid of them. 

Entitlement by birth right is so wrong on many levels and it is no wonder the country is in the shit when we prop this lot up with handout after handout, then add to that all their elitis friends who wouldn't know a hard days graft if it bit them in the arse, all the while pensioners are struggling to eat and heat their homes through no fault of their own other than corporate greed.  The disabled and unemployed are scapegoated and struck by austerity measures whilst that twat William makes a profession out of being unemployed. 

To be fair, he does have a full time job as an air ambulance pilot at Cambridge airport. From what I can tell he gets some decent holiday entitlement.

Correct.

The salary is circa £40,000, which he donates to the Air Ambulance Charity.

Doesn't he start next spring?   

Quite possibly, I just know it was made known earlier this year. The point is the same, of course.

It's not really though is it?  He pays no tax/NI at the moment gets loads of jolly's at the expense of ordinary working men and woman and yet makes some shit gesture like 40k a year to charity.  Why not pass up the 1.5 mill refurb give that to charity and use the 40k to do up his free house. 

40k would barely do the kitchen up in his house to be fair, it's pretty big.

Well get a house you can afford to buy/rennovate. 

Being as they are from London they would probably need that 1.5 million then, its pretty hard for a young couple with a kid to get on the property ladder. Or they could get a council house I suppose.

Or they could both get paying jobs, save some dough and get a mortgage. Instead of sponging off the rest of us.

Well we've already established that Wills has a job and Kate is currently pregnant, so she might struggle to get a job right now, especially as she already has another kid right now. I suppose they could move in to Clarence House with Prince Charles for a year or so while they save up a deposit, but that's quite a lot to ask of Charles and Camilla when their will be two toddlers running around. Hardly seems fair imo.

Well if she returns to work then most mortgage companies will attempt to go for a reference and confirm her post maternity salary and will lend on that basis. 

She does have a job right?

[Kmac84]

kmac just google the civil list, royal family costs and benefits etc etc

you really do have a one eyed approach that diminishes any point you make on this matter

"The monarchy costs 69p a year for every person in Britain, or £1.33 per taxpayer. In return, besides the Crown Estate profits, there is the unquantifiable, but enormous, tourist revenue it generates."

was one quote, for example, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

net net the royal family costs the taxpayer nothing, and generates cash that is spent in other areas

Must be true then because the Civil Service is most impartial.

but you don't address the point, just come back with a half arsed cynical counter

so wrapped up in your ideology that you are unprepared to accept the facts

beat me to it Tighty....also like this bit from it:

The German presidency costs about the same as the Queen, but how many tourists line the streets of Berlin to catch a glimpse of – er – what is his name?

He was elected to his position right, unlike the German Queen of England.

[DaveShoelace]

kmac just google the civil list, royal family costs and benefits etc etc

you really do have a one eyed approach that diminishes any point you make on this matter

"The monarchy costs 69p a year for every person in Britain, or £1.33 per taxpayer. In return, besides the Crown Estate profits, there is the unquantifiable, but enormous, tourist revenue it generates."

was one quote, for example, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

net net the royal family costs the taxpayer nothing, and generates cash that is spent in other areas

Must be true then because the Civil Service is most impartial.

but you don't address the point, just come back with a half arsed cynical counter

so wrapped up in your ideology that you are unprepared to accept the facts

beat me to it Tighty....also like this bit from it:

The German presidency costs about the same as the Queen, but how many tourists line the streets of Berlin to catch a glimpse of – er – what is his name?

He was elected to his position right, unlike the German Queen of England.

But she would get voted in, if there were an election for that sort of thing, I think that's one thing we can all agree on.

[DMorgan]

As for stamps, if you still use them more fool you but I'd suggest we have an elected 2nd chamber and then perhaps use the images of people who have actually contributed to society on Stamps.  

What do you use instead?

I don't post anything.  Welcome to the modern world. 

Can you imagine my shock when I was told by the TV Licensing people that I had to write them a letter to have the name on the license changed because there wasn't an email address for it?

Nearly fell off my chair

The bloody BBC, eh? Lets hang them too

[booder]

I was offended Kmac. Horrible suggestion.

Wind yer neck in.  

There are far more extreme ways to get rid of them.  

Entitlement by birth right is so wrong on many levels and it is no wonder the country is in the shit when we prop this lot up with handout after handout, then add to that all their elitis friends who wouldn't know a hard days graft if it bit them in the arse, all the while pensioners are struggling to eat and heat their homes through no fault of their own other than corporate greed.  The disabled and unemployed are scapegoated and struck by austerity measures whilst that twat William makes a profession out of being unemployed.  

I agree with a huge part of your overall sentiment but I think the patriotism the Royal Family provide as a whole as well as the tourism benefits far outweigh any expenditure. If we didn't have the Queen what national anthem would we sing? Who would our Armed Forces fight for? No way I want to lick the back of David Camerons head whenever I send a letter. There are many problems with our economic/political system and I understand the Royal Family are representative to some degree of that, but we have to live a little as a country. God Save The Queen.

The tourism factor is vastly overrated imo.  

Why do your armed forces have to fight for anyone?  Why not have a defence force that protects its people and borders rather than having them fight for war mongerers.  

As for stamps, if you still use them more fool you but I'd suggest we have an elected 2nd chamber and then perhaps use the images of people who have actually contributed to society on Stamps.  

What do you use instead?

I don't post anything.  Welcome to the modern world.  

Can't help thinking that not posting anything would have been an improvement.  

Too good Doobs.

[The Camel]

I don't really think the cost or benefit the Royal Family bring is the point.

(I don't buy the fqact they attract tourists. The tourists would still come and gawp at Buckingham Palace. Possibly more so when they would the chaance to tramp through all the rooms they are denied entry to currently. "And this the room where Micheal Fagan saat on the queens bed and offered her a fag...")

It's the fact in the 21st Century that people in power/authority are there by birthright, not elected.

[edgascoigne]

What about Thatcher, she was a right un wasn't she?

Has anyone called the police?

Worse than hitler.

Have you tried turning it off an on again?

Fuck you AmayaStars.

Ignore whatever [Mantis (or Arboy if its a Liverpool thread)] said, he is just trolling.

Christ it's got clicky here these days, not as good as it used to be.



There you go, brought the thread to it's natural conclusion a day in advance. Enjoy your free evening everyone.

POTY

[Skippy]

I don't really think the cost or benefit the Royal Family bring is the point.

(I don't buy the fqact they attract tourists. The tourists would still come and gawp at Buckingham Palace. Possibly more so when they would the chaance to tramp through all the rooms they are denied entry to currently. "And this the room where Micheal Fagan saat on the queens bed and offered her a fag...")

It's the fact in the 21st Century that people in power/authority are there by birthright, not elected.

QFT.

More people visit the palace in Versailles than Buckingham Palace by a long way, and they've not had any actual royals for ages. We might even get more visitors if we kick the monarchy out so it can be open 24x7.

Besides I'm not sure we should be using our system of government as a tourist attraction.

[tikay]

I don't really think the cost or benefit the Royal Family bring is the point.

(I don't buy the fqact they attract tourists. The tourists would still come and gawp at Buckingham Palace. Possibly more so when they would the chaance to tramp through all the rooms they are denied entry to currently. "And this the room where Micheal Fagan saat on the queens bed and offered her a fag...")

It's the fact in the 21st Century that people in power/authority are there by birthright, not elected.

Disliking the system is fine, I can understand that.

Hating on anyone simply because of their birthright is not something I could ever grasp.

[Jon MW]

kmac just google the civil list, royal family costs and benefits etc etc

you really do have a one eyed approach that diminishes any point you make on this matter

"The monarchy costs 69p a year for every person in Britain, or £1.33 per taxpayer. In return, besides the Crown Estate profits, there is the unquantifiable, but enormous, tourist revenue it generates."

was one quote, for example, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

net net the royal family costs the taxpayer nothing, and generates cash that is spent in other areas

Must be true then because the Civil Service is most impartial.

but you don't address the point, just come back with a half arsed cynical counter

so wrapped up in your ideology that you are unprepared to accept the facts

beat me to it Tighty....also like this bit from it:

The German presidency costs about the same as the Queen, but how many tourists line the streets of Berlin to catch a glimpse of – er – what is his name?

He was elected to his position right, unlike the German Queen of England.

so you're saying someone born in Britain with British Nationality isn't really British because one of their Great Great Grandparents were foreign?

Have you considered a job with UKIP?

[DaveShoelace]

kmac just google the civil list, royal family costs and benefits etc etc

you really do have a one eyed approach that diminishes any point you make on this matter

"The monarchy costs 69p a year for every person in Britain, or £1.33 per taxpayer. In return, besides the Crown Estate profits, there is the unquantifiable, but enormous, tourist revenue it generates."

was one quote, for example, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

net net the royal family costs the taxpayer nothing, and generates cash that is spent in other areas

Must be true then because the Civil Service is most impartial.

but you don't address the point, just come back with a half arsed cynical counter

so wrapped up in your ideology that you are unprepared to accept the facts

beat me to it Tighty....also like this bit from it:

The German presidency costs about the same as the Queen, but how many tourists line the streets of Berlin to catch a glimpse of – er – what is his name?

He was elected to his position right, unlike the German Queen of England.

so you're saying someone born in Britain with British Nationality isn't really British because one of their Great Great Grandparents were foreign?

Have you considered a job with UKIP?

If so, I hope he is not relying on postal votes.

[Kmac84]

kmac just google the civil list, royal family costs and benefits etc etc

you really do have a one eyed approach that diminishes any point you make on this matter

"The monarchy costs 69p a year for every person in Britain, or £1.33 per taxpayer. In return, besides the Crown Estate profits, there is the unquantifiable, but enormous, tourist revenue it generates."

was one quote, for example, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

net net the royal family costs the taxpayer nothing, and generates cash that is spent in other areas

Must be true then because the Civil Service is most impartial.

but you don't address the point, just come back with a half arsed cynical counter

so wrapped up in your ideology that you are unprepared to accept the facts

beat me to it Tighty....also like this bit from it:

The German presidency costs about the same as the Queen, but how many tourists line the streets of Berlin to catch a glimpse of – er – what is his name?

He was elected to his position right, unlike the German Queen of England.

so you're saying someone born in Britain with British Nationality isn't really British because one of their Great Great Grandparents were foreign?

Have you considered a job with UKIP?

I'm not.