PDA

View Full Version : Money for the Queen...



Haselsh1
30-06-2009, 07:46
Apparently the Queen wants more money...! Apparently, last year she had to draw on an extra six million pounds to cope with the year. Well; I want more money...! I work six days a week for my own business and all I get for it is three hundred and fifty pounds a month. I can't cope and I want more money... six million pounds should just about do. Where am I going to get mine from...?

Steve Toy
30-06-2009, 13:34
She'd better get off her arse and earn it then like the rest of us!

Royalty are scum.

Marco
30-06-2009, 13:48
Yep, they're well past their sell-by date - a meaningless extravagance in today's society we unfortunately have to pay for!

Marco.

DaveK
30-06-2009, 14:34
Shame on you Marco, - I can only assume as a visitor to this great country of ours (mine), for which fact you should be eternally grateful and appreciative of the monarch being relaxed about you settling here, that you (falsely) take this view to boost your Sottish credentials - shameful !! :lolsign:

Steve Toy
30-06-2009, 14:50
Marco is not Scottish. Viva la Reppublica.

Dr. Flicker
06-08-2009, 10:33
Just curious...are Brits as clueless about constitutional monarchies as much as Canadians are? Or are you guys just more obsessed with the tabloid "personal" lives as opposed to the function?

Canadians don't seem too concerned about the personal lives of the "royals", but then again, only the Queen herself has any Canadian status....and we don't pay her a cent.

The Vinyl Adventure
06-08-2009, 13:44
all the monachy is to me is a waste of money i dont have any other feelings towards them it bugs me how much money is wasted on them, but not as much as how much money is wasted on some other things the government talk about funding. eg:
replacing the nuclear weppons ... completely pointless waste of money and to top it of mind blowingly hypocritical
etxra police to do extra paper work
an integrated computer system for the nhs the they never got to work
scotland.... ;)
merchant bank wankers
bridges for duck ponds, guilted drain covers etc

all this and they cant find the money to support the the impoverished and elderly

this country is run by bent, corupt, immoral, clueless capatalist idiots

the monachy should be down graded from thier status to what the actually are... a tourist atraction... if the queen wants more money she should sell some of her art collection (reputedly one of the biggest in the world) of which most of is in storage and not even on display for us to enjoy

Dr. Flicker
06-08-2009, 16:14
all the monachy is to me is a waste of money

Without a monarch, you can't have a constitutional monarchy system of government. And all other forms of government structure are inferior. Not to mention switching and maintaining a different government structure would cost as much, if not more.


this country is run by bent, corupt, immoral, clueless capatalist idiots


All the more reason to have a real monarch as head of state. The government uses the power, but does not hold it. The monarch holds the power, but does not use it.

If you don't like the government, put the blame where it belongs...voters....you chose them. But nobody chooses the monarch...and that's the whole point.



the monachy should be down graded from thier status to what the actually are... a tourist atraction

Well, I like to separate the "celebrity" of monarch, from the actual function...which is the vessel in which the ultimate power of the people is placed, away from the taint of partisan politics. The Queen really isn't a person, so to speak.

And how exactly would one "downgrade" the position of monarch? In Canada, to remove the monarchy would require the unanimous consent of the federal and all provincial governments...in other words...next to impossible.



if the queen wants more money she should sell some of her art collection (reputedly one of the biggest in the world) of which most of is in storage and not even on display for us to enjoy

Well, if the "office" of the Queen requires more funds to operate, then I guess it's a matter of deciding if it does. Perhaps it does...or perhaps it can be run more efficiently...at any rate, I don't quite understand the dividing line between personal and official business. Is this art collection personal belongings of the Queen as a private individual...or is it state assets? I don't think selling state treasures is a very brilliant way to fund state affairs.

The Vinyl Adventure
06-08-2009, 16:46
i was mearly ranting thoughtlessly in a jovial way but..

i fundamentaly diagree with most of what you say... the queen has no real power over the decitions that get made by the govenment anyway, these days its just ceremonial - she has to sign legislation but she has no power to say no.. it would just be over ruled by parliament! we do live in 2009 not 1709 dont forget!

i certainly wouldnt say that other systems of government are inferior.. just different

as for the queen needing more money and it just being decided so.. that in its self is a major flaw in this type of governmental system

oh and i do blame the voters... this country is full of apathy ..but, we have become disinterested in our political partys because they just say what we want to hear with no real regard for thier suposed political veiws ... look at jacky smith... she is suposed to be labour which are suposed to be our left wing option ... shes about as left wing as the the bloody daily express!!(not very)




as a separate note i would just like to say welcome to aos dr.flicker please dont be put off the site by this / me ... im an alright person until it come to politics and then and only then im a basterd and i will throw the toys out the pram and or stamp my feet like a child when talking about the subject .. we obviously have different political views please dont let that effect your view of me as a person or take anything i say as personal attack :) just thought i better say that as your new here>>>

Mike
06-08-2009, 16:49
All the more reason to have a real monarch as head of state. The government uses the power, but does not hold it. The monarch holds the power, but does not use it.


I'm not entirely sure thats the right way round! Also I think one of those words should be prefixed with 'ab'. :D

The Vinyl Adventure
06-08-2009, 17:06
in my previous post i said "we do live in 2009 not 1709 dont forget!" i should have said 1609 because it was actually the 1689 Bill of Rights that established the power of parliament over the king

i just checked :)

REM
06-08-2009, 18:27
What a treasonous bunch you lot are. Anyone should be more than 'appy to bung her Madge a bob or two if she's a bit short fer the leccy meter or odd tin of corgi food. I mean it's not like it's simple or anything 'avin to get up every mornin' 'an ruule all bleedin' day, every day like, not even any rest at the bleedin' weekend is, not that you bleedin' lot of ungrateful plebs even realise all the hard werk that goes into makin' sure that you get ruled, I mean do yer, any of yer? No didn't think so, now just remember 'ow lucky you all are to live in the best cuntry in the world and get back to werkin' so you can all pay more taxes and tithes to keep our gracious ruling classes in the manner to which we would all like to become accustomed;);)

StanleyB
06-08-2009, 20:38
Dunno if the queen is short of a bob or two. Every time I handle money or buy a stamp the ol' lady has her copyrighted image on it. Must be worth something to her.