pablo Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 I have seen the derelict castles and grand houses that have been left to the people why would you want the buildings given up? The derelict castles you talk of have been like that for hundreds of years,hardly the same as well maintained properties like she owns in Westminster is it? Oh and did you know the queen owns 33 trillion acres of land, who would look after that should we become a republic, cos I know for a fact I ain't mowing it!!! Read back the last cpl of pages,see where i've suggested we become a republic,where? All the land doesn't need mowing,a lot of it is prime city real estate,can you tell me why they should have or need sole use of all this land and property?,some of which probably isn't used from year to year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletchaman Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 Yes,i know what you meant,im asking the relevance? They have a choice, work and pay or don't work and don't pay, on another note I would like to know how much the state and federal senates would cost a year to run in comparison. The president alone costs the US £0.8 Billion a year US$1.4 Billion, and they only own one big White House!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 They have a choice, work and pay or don't work and don't pay, on another note I would like to know how much the state and federal senates would cost a year to run in comparison. The president alone costs the US £0.8 Billion a year US$1.4 Billion, and they only own one big White House!! So your first post was about footballers and their cars,second about the unemployed,this one about the unemployed,still dont see any relevance to the argument,just an obvious right winger focusing on their favourite targets,with nothing at all to do with the thread. The presidents budget would be a bit bigger wouldn't it?,seeing as he's running the worlds biggest economy,and all the infrastructure needed to manage that economy,again,what is the relevance to a country tiny in comparison to the USA like the uk?and again, who said we should be a republic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletchaman Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Read back the last cpl of pages,see where i've suggested we become a republic,where?All the land doesn't need mowing,a lot of it is prime city real estate,can you tell me why they should have or need sole use of all this land and property?,some of which probably isn't used from year to year To be fair most of it is in Papua New Guinea, and I never said you wanted a Republic I am just giving my view on what they are worth to the country and what would happen should all the land and houses be given back, we will still have to upkeep them so will still have to pay taxes for them or allow them to fall into disrepair, like so many other beautiful buildings. I then asked a question of what a republican state would actually cost in comparison to a monarchy, I never once thought you were a republican maybe a Labour supporter but never a republican :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletchaman Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 So your first post was about footballers and their cars,second about the unemployed,this one about the unemployed,still dont see any relevance to the argument,just an obvious right winger focusing on their favourite targets,with nothing at all to do with the thread. The presidents budget would be a bit bigger wouldn't it?,seeing as he's running the worlds biggest economy,and all the infrastructure needed to manage that economy,again,what is the relevance to a country tiny in comparison to the USA like the uk?and again, who said we should be a republic? My point is we all moan about the cost to us of things be it footballers wages causing us to pay more at the gates, taxes to subsidise the unemployed or the Monarchy, and in my opinion the Monarchy in comparison is good value for money for what they give back to the Commonwealth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 To be fair most of it is in Papua New Guinea, and I never said you wanted a Republic I am just giving my view on what they are worth to the country and what would happen should all the land and houses be given back, we will still have to upkeep them so will still have to pay taxes for them or allow them to fall into disrepair, like so many other beautiful buildings. No,thats wrong,we pay for the properties now because they are crown estate properties,they would still be paid for by the crown estate as conference centres,state managed hotels,just the tax payer gets some financial recompense,instead of the royals using it once a year I then asked a question of what a republican state would actually cost in comparison to a monarchy, I never once thought you were a republican maybe a Labour supporter but never a republican :wink: I said we wont become a republic,not that i wasn't a republican:smile:,touche and gnite:wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 My point is we all moan about the cost to us of things be it footballers wages causing us to pay more at the gates, taxes to subsidise the unemployed or the Monarchy, and in my opinion the Monarchy in comparison is good value for money for what they give back to the Commonwealth And they could be just as good value to the commonwealth if they all lived in one big palace,tara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletchaman Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 I said we wont become a republic,not that i wasn't a republican:smile:,touche and gnite:wink: Gnite d'Artagnan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Gnite d'Artagnan Yes,outside of the group,that would be me Athos... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starlight7 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Why does the queen keep hanging on- isn't it time she retired? She is too old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted July 26, 2014 Author Share Posted July 26, 2014 Why does the queen keep hanging on- isn't it time she retired? She is too old. Seems to me that she is still doing her 'job' i.e. bludging off the taxpayer according to some. But aren't you being 'ageist'? People do not HAVE to retire, and of course, as long as she keeps working, she's not drawing her pension!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starlight7 Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Well that's true about the pension- never thought of that. Just think she should give old Charlie a shot before he shuffles off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikey Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 Just to bring the whole argument back to basics.....imagine u r a kid. Look at that picture in the OP. That crown with all the jewels. That throne. The fact that the Queen is real and alive and about to supercede Victoria's reign. Amazing. Kids love it. Sometimes it's good to see things through kid's eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikey Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 My own POV is this..... it really pees me off that football is out of my price range - the shirts, the TV matches and the cost of seeing a game. Pathetic. Some of the players are sexist revolting people who let the fame go to their heads. Some of the top ones are no role model to kids. Queeny on the other hand is hard working and responsible. I couldn't ask for more from my Queen. What a woman. I am not particularly PRO but I just think it works so leave it alone. I wouldn't want to be her in a million years. And if u want to address the class system then I think time is better spent looking at education and housing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted August 5, 2014 Author Share Posted August 5, 2014 I noticed that in Belgium at one of the WW1 commemorations, the Belgian Royal Family was there too, and maybe the king of Spain. So, it's not just Britain that continues to have a monarchy. In times of war and other major events, most people seem to look to the Royals. For me, it's the 'step into the unknown' that I don't like. If we get rid of our constitutional monarchy, what will replace it? Will it be better/cheaper, however you want to measure it? There have been time in the past when Britain could have got rid of the monarchy - did in fact, after the Civil War, although brought it back - and usually we change things to keep enough of the old, whilst moving forward. So, why change for something that could be worse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikey Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 I noticed that in Belgium at one of the WW1 commemorations, the Belgian Royal Family was there too, and maybe the king of Spain. So, it's not just Britain that continues to have a monarchy. In times of war and other major events, most people seem to look to the Royals. For me, it's the 'step into the unknown' that I don't like. If we get rid of our constitutional monarchy, what will replace it? Will it be better/cheaper, however you want to measure it? There have been time in the past when Britain could have got rid of the monarchy - did in fact, after the Civil War, although brought it back - and usually we change things to keep enough of the old, whilst moving forward. So, why change for something that could be worse? yes she has no real power anyway so it is the best compromise we can have anyway.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikey Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 Slightly off topic but.... all the supermarkets sell organic milk. It is all homogenised (they do something to it to stop the cream seperating) but how "organic" milk can be homogenised is beyond me. It is probably because it is a process not a chemical. Anyway, the only milk I can find that isn't is Duchy (Charlie's lot). Yes it's expensive but I like the way he is outspoken about doing things properly and he probably pays the farmer properly as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted August 5, 2014 Author Share Posted August 5, 2014 There is NO 'off topic' on any thread i start! In fact I am more offended if other people stay ON topic! In any case, you were thinking about the royals, thinking about Charles, thinking about his organic farms, thinking about his organic milk. It's all good, one thing leading to another, (or in the case of 'history' thinking about that play 'The History Boys' 'What is history? 'Just one ****ing thing after another?') Or was it one thing after a ****ing nother? That does not sound right? Where does the 'a' go? One of the few plays I went to and enjoyed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletchaman Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 Oh and by the way for all you who believe we waste our money on the Monarchy, just a little fact. Every Medal Great Britain won in the Olympic Games cost the taxpayer £4.5 million!!! thats per medal, the Commonwealth Games cost the taxpayer just short of £1 million per medal :eek: And we all also had to pay Sky to watch it!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.