Printable View
Watched a documentary where they traced the dna of the real King from some centuries ago to some dude who was unknown,lives in wales or something. By dna tests they proved he is the rightful and legal heir to to the throne of England and that the ones there now simply stepped in at a convenient time.Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
The real King doesnt want to know about it :cool: Cool dude.
HAha you have ring ins running your country. Oh Crap,that means we do too :mad:
Aussie Mike the true King of England - National - theage.com.au
Oh fuk, I just looked its worse than Wales ;D he is Australian!
I want this bloke. Free beer!
haha no, sorry a slip of the tongue. I'm still a burden to you all. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG HYou got off your lazy arse and actually got a job then?Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboQuote:
Originally Posted by milesI'm glad I'm not there or I would be ranting more.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
I bet the press is all about the excitement of the prospects of a Royal wedding rather than about the reality of what a hoax the entire concept of the Royal family is in an age of so called democracy.
The Royal family is the biggest welfare scam that there is.
:vd: Yup that 61 pence a year is an outrage.
We pay an outrageous £37 million a year to them. It's a scandal.
Meanwhile only 2 billion pounds is available for legal aid annually including a paltry £21 million last year given to convicted prisoners to appeal. I can see why you are so angry with the royals.
Maybe we should pay them by the hour for the work they do? or the engagment?
Tony Blair recently got paid £273,000 to go on a quick three hour tour of a Chinese housing estate. He got another £50,000 for a 40 minute lecture at a toilet manufactur convention.
So how much should the queen get for a 5 day trip to the gulf. On that rate at least a couple million. Let's multiply that by a full year, and add in Charles, the boys and other head royals.
It seems to me that us taxpayers don't have it so bad.
;D QualityQuote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
Joke post much? The Royal family own the most of the land in the world by a huge margin. They are almost at the very top of the elites.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboYeah because republics have proven to be so much better eh :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
The monarchy is a fantastic institution. People who argue against it are generally completely clueless regarding the facts in my experience, and argue just out of prejudice and ignorance.
Do you even know how wealthy they are?
Prince William, our future king for example is worth less than Jenson Button and Michael Owen.
The queen isn't amongst the top 100 richest people in Britain let alone the world.
Unlike the modern breed of vaccous celebrity, greedy industrial magnate, hedge funder or oil baron, the royal family have to work and justify the money we give them.
The queen does a tremendous amount for this country, as, strangely enough does Prince Charles, although the media always like to distort what he does.
Right now the queen is currently over in the Gulf Arab states being an ambassador for us and helping to build cordial relations over there. She's like 82 and she's still working, nearly 20 years after the average commoner thinks about retiring.
Nobody does more for this country than the queen. Who would replace her with exactly? Who would be YOUR head of state?
It really pisses me the ignorance of the country. People moaning about poor tax payers paying for Williams wedding, when they take it for granted they will be able to watch it on tv.
If they want them treated like private people, then William and Kate can charge the media for being there, and all the money generated from this event should go to them. They would make far far more than the wedding will cost.
Also the royal family forgoe any rent on the buildings they own which are used by the government. The crown estate is worth around £6 billion and if the royal family actually charged rent on everythign they would make far far more in income than the annual stipend they get now.
Because they are paid for by tax payers money makes them the most scrutinised family in the country as regards their finances.
The BBC paid Johnathon Ross £18 million over three years for fuck's sake, in comparison £37 million a year for the Royal family, who actually then actually spend their entire lives in the public eye, and are bound to attend endless tedious engagements and functions until they eventually die.
If we got rid of them the country would be financially far worse than now, as we would have to replace them with something else. Also we'd have to pay rent for the property in the crown estate which would likely run into hundreds of millions, although I suppose you would be in favour of forceably taking away their possessions as well?
Is it surprising that Bilbo has a distorted view of what 'work' is? ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by KelJoke post much? The Royal family own the most of the land in the world by a huge margin. They are almost at the very top of the elites.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboYeah because republics have proven to be so much better eh :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
The monarchy is a fantastic institution. People who argue against it are generally completely clueless regarding the facts in my experience, and argue just out of prejudice and ignorance.
Do you even know how wealthy they are?
Prince William, our future king for example is worth less than Jenson Button and Michael Owen.
The queen isn't amongst the top 100 richest people in Britain let alone the world.
Unlike the modern breed of vaccous celebrity, greedy industrial magnate, hedge funder or oil baron, the royal family have to work and justify the money we give them.
The queen does a tremendous amount for this country, as, strangely enough does Prince Charles, although the media always like to distort what he does.
Right now the queen is currently over in the Gulf Arab states being an ambassador for us and helping to build cordial relations over there. She's like 82 and she's still working, nearly 20 years after the average commoner thinks about retiring.
Nobody does more for this country than the queen. Who would replace her with exactly? Who would be YOUR head of state?
It really pisses me the ignorance of the country. People moaning about poor tax payers paying for Williams wedding, when they take it for granted they will be able to watch it on tv.
If they want them treated like private people, then William and Kate can charge the media for being there, and all the money generated from this event should go to them. They would make far far more than the wedding will cost.
Also the royal family forgoe any rent on the buildings they own which are used by the government. The crown estate is worth around £6 billion and if the royal family actually charged rent on everythign they would make far far more in income than the annual stipend they get now.
Because they are paid for by tax payers money makes them the most scrutinised family in the country as regards their finances.
The BBC paid Johnathon Ross £18 million over three years for fuck's sake, in comparison £37 million a year for the Royal family, who actually then actually spend their entire lives in the public eye, and are bound to attend endless tedious engagements and functions until they eventually die.
If we got rid of them the country would be financially far worse than now, as we would have to replace them with something else. Also we'd have to pay rent for the property in the crown estate which would likely run into hundreds of millions, although I suppose you would be in favour of forceably taking away their possessions as well?
Yes, and that is my point which you have clearly missed.
The crown, do own an enormous amount of property, over 6 billion pounds in assets. This is not the property of an individual family member however, so the queen for example does not own Buckingham Palace, but rather it's part of the Crown Estate.
Therefore it doesn't count towards any royal's individual wealth which is why none of the immediate royal family are in the top 100 richest people in Britain.
However as a collective they do own all of that property. All of the profits from renting and leasing the property however goes not to the Royal family but to the exchequer, i.e government.
It's a trade off. The royals get an annual allowance, of around £37 million, in exchange the government basically uses of all their property rent free.
If you want to treat the royal family as ordinary private people then it's not going to be the royal family who would be out of pocket, but the government and the taxpayers of this country as all of a sudden they would be paying rent to the crown for almost half of London! It would BANKRUPT the nation!
It's frustrating that people have no idea of history but still slag off the royal family with completely uninformed views.
Currently however plans are underfoot to use the crown offshore waters to build hundreds of offshore windturbines all around the British coast. The royal family will be allowed to charge rent and claim the profits of this and the annual government allowance will be reduced accordingly.
People just don't seem to understand that the royal family are exceptionally good value for money. They are better value than any bbc television presenter, or producer, better value than any sportsman, film star etc etc.
If the royals were to fund themselves they would be raking in hundreds of millions a year and this is why it just baffles me people like Miles who have some weird ideological objection to our proudest institution.:confused:
If the Royal family have a right to be subsidised with millions of pounds a year of taxpayers money and live in some of the finest buildings in the country, then every other person born as a British citizen should have those same privileges too. My views are not particularly unorthodox or radical in this particular instance. I have a fair enough grasp of what the monarchy is and how it has evolved over hundreds of years, but that in no way means that I think they should have the privileges that that they have continued to hold, despite us having a parliamentary model that wields most of the power in the UK.
On a moral level I see no justification for a Royal family in a so called free and open democracy. It is a relic of a bygone time in our nations history and should be eradicated. If they are to be granted such privileges then so should you and so should I. As it stands I don't believe that I am owed anything by the British tax payer and so neither should they. Sure, if they can't find a job then they should recieve the same support that every other citizen can claim, but millions of pounds and never needing to cook a meal of their own? That is just not justified.
Attachment 1851Attachment 1850
Attachment 1849
KATE MIDDLETON............... You know you would ;D
Looking fit as in the Bikini pic!!!
Notice i found the royal gash shot ;)
Smash, love those up skirt shots
Miles you're one of my favourite posters and all but your views are so uniformed and idiotic at times.Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
The rule family OWN the properties that they live in and a whole lot more besides. It forms the crown estate. It is not the governments, or the taxpayers property, it is THEIRS.
When David and Victoria Beckham pass on should all of their wealth be taken by the government rather than going to their children because it's unfair that they be born into such privilege?
The rule family would be better off if they were just private people, you're really such a moron regarding this. The crown estate is worth over £6 billion pounds. If they were treated as private people they would be due rent on all of the property and land currently occupied, totalling hundreds of millions of pounds.
So what it sounds like, is you want them treated like private citizens, but then have their property forceably stolen from them by the government and them disinherited?
This is your democracy?
You're an idiot blinded by hates and prejudices.
You always talk about people on here needing to read more. Then please examine the history regarding the crown estate here. http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/abou...ur_history.htm
They accumulated their lands and wealth through centuries of dictatorship. All that wealth and land should have been stripped at least 300 years ago as parliamentary power began to take hold. I have never heard of the leading members of a dictatorship to be able to keep all of their aquired lands having been usurped by a more democratic process. And yet this is precisely what happened when it came to the Royal family. It is mindboggling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMiles you're one of my favourite posters and all but your views are so uniformed and idiotic at times.Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
The rule family OWN the properties that they live in and a whole lot more besides. It forms the crown estate. It is not the governments, or the taxpayers property, it is THEIRS.
When David and Victoria Beckham pass on should all of their wealth be taken by the government rather than going to their children because it's unfair that they be born into such privilege?
The rule family would be better off if they were just private people, you're really such a moron regarding this. The crown estate is worth over £6 billion pounds. If they were treated as private people they would be due rent on all of the property and land currently occupied, totalling hundreds of millions of pounds.
So what it sounds like, is you want them treated like private citizens, but then have their property forceably stolen from them by the government and them disinherited?
This is your democracy?
You're an idiot blinded by hates and prejudices.
You always talk about people on here needing to read more. Then please examine the history regarding the crown estate here. Our History
My views are not clouded by hate nor prejudice. My views are informed by a sense of right and wrong and a sense of equality. The Royal family is put on a pedestal and I just don't think that it is justified. It is privilege based on the accident of birth and that is something that I am very much against.
Dictatorship???? What the fuck, before democracy the monarchy was the model system of rule around practically the entire world. Sure, we've progressed and moved on since then, but a fair and DEMOCRATIC society would never seize by force property and assets belonging to the former governence. If it did it would become a DICTATORSHIP.Quote:
Originally Posted by milesThey accumulated their lands and wealth through centuries of dictatorship. All that wealth and land should have been stripped at least 300 years ago as parliamentary power began to take hold. I have never heard of the leading members of a dictatorship to be able to keep all of their aquired lands having been usurped by a more democratic process. And yet this is precisely what happened when it came to the Royal family. It is mindboggling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboMiles you're one of my favourite posters and all but your views are so uniformed and idiotic at times.Quote:
Originally Posted by miles
The rule family OWN the properties that they live in and a whole lot more besides. It forms the crown estate. It is not the governments, or the taxpayers property, it is THEIRS.
When David and Victoria Beckham pass on should all of their wealth be taken by the government rather than going to their children because it's unfair that they be born into such privilege?
The rule family would be better off if they were just private people, you're really such a moron regarding this. The crown estate is worth over £6 billion pounds. If they were treated as private people they would be due rent on all of the property and land currently occupied, totalling hundreds of millions of pounds.
So what it sounds like, is you want them treated like private citizens, but then have their property forceably stolen from them by the government and them disinherited?
This is your democracy?
You're an idiot blinded by hates and prejudices.
You always talk about people on here needing to read more. Then please examine the history regarding the crown estate here. Our History
My views are not clouded by hate nor prejudice. My views are informed by a sense of right and wrong and a sense of equality. The Royal family is put on a pedestal and I just don't think that it is justified. It is privilege based on the accident of birth and that is something that I am very much against.
:vd:
This is seriously the most insane argument I've ever heard on here. Youobject to the monarchy taking power by conquest a thousand fucking years ago, and so would now 1000 years later like to see justice happen by the democractic government seizing by conquest their lands and property now. I thought Nameless had some weird points of view but this is actually hilarious.
I didnt intend a philosophical debate about the rights and wrongs of hereditary royalty .... i just think she's well fit.
http://www.platinum-celebs.com/model...3216890525.jpg
http://www.platinum-celebs.com/model...3216890524.jpg
http://www.platinum-celebs.com/model...3216890523.jpg