|
Post by foster on May 17, 2022 19:42:16 GMT
Damn girl, look at you with the passive aggressive personals Listen mate, I don't see how celebs in London has anything to do with the Royals so can you just stop bringing it up. Quite frankly, it's just tedious and boring now. It wasn't exactly rivetting to start with really and it never rose much above that at any point Fair enough. It was Metalhead Kitson who brought that point up originally, so I guess we can all blame him In any case, I doubt there's going to be any serious debate on this topic. You're either for or against the royals. A bit like Brexit where neither side tend to listen or agree with one another. My personal view is that the Royals are not really worth a debate, but more of a give your opinion and move on. The environment, Ukraine, or something along the lines of attitude towards the Police is far more pressing.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 17, 2022 20:42:56 GMT
It wasn't exactly rivetting to start with really and it never rose much above that at any point Fair enough. It was Metalhead Kitson who brought that point up originally, so I guess we can all blame him In any case, I doubt there's going to be any serious debate on this topic. You're either for or against the royals. A bit like Brexit where neither side tend to listen or agree with one another. My personal view is that the Royals are not really worth a debate, but more of a give your opinion and move on. The environment, Ukraine, or something along the lines of attitude towards the Police is far more pressing. Possibly discussions for another day. In the meantime, given the widespread positivity displayed on the other board towards the young lad from Blackpool recently are you absolutely *sure* that schoolboy homophobia is a good look for your avatar
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 17, 2022 20:51:11 GMT
Fair enough. It was Metalhead Kitson who brought that point up originally, so I guess we can all blame him In any case, I doubt there's going to be any serious debate on this topic. You're either for or against the royals. A bit like Brexit where neither side tend to listen or agree with one another. My personal view is that the Royals are not really worth a debate, but more of a give your opinion and move on. The environment, Ukraine, or something along the lines of attitude towards the Police is far more pressing. Possibly discussions for another day. In the meantime, given the widespread positivity displayed on the other board towards the young lad from Blackpool recently are you absolutely *sure* that schoolboy homophobia is a good look for your avatar Man on man, woman on woman, man on woman, or trans on whoever. It's all good and not something I concern myself about. Good on the lad from Blackpool though. I've assumed you're a bloke though, so if I'm wrong then let me know and I'll update the pic accordingly
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on May 17, 2022 21:15:51 GMT
Possibly discussions for another day. In the meantime, given the widespread positivity displayed on the other board towards the young lad from Blackpool recently are you absolutely *sure* that schoolboy homophobia is a good look for your avatar Man on man, woman on woman, man on woman, or trans on whoever. It's all good and not something I concern myself about. Good on the lad from Blackpool though. I've assumed you're a bloke though, so if I'm wrong then let me know and I'll update the pic accordingly Yes, that much is evident
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 18, 2022 9:19:41 GMT
First thing she's paid for since bailing out her nonce son. Lovely little touch by Edward to tell the commoner to step back a bit. All perfectly normal
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 18, 2022 10:37:40 GMT
First thing she's paid for since bailing out her nonce son. Lovely little touch by Edward to tell the commoner to step back a bit. All perfectly normal Needless snipe there. 1) It's the Queen (and frail) so obviously needs to be protected 2) I guess you missed the whole COVID pandemic thing
|
|
|
Post by wrighter on May 18, 2022 10:50:59 GMT
no doubt she will be fit to attend all 5 days at Royal Ascot
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on May 18, 2022 10:54:05 GMT
First thing she's paid for since bailing out her nonce son. Lovely little touch by Edward to tell the commoner to step back a bit. All perfectly normal politely unlike some that wouldn’t do it so nicely.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on May 18, 2022 10:56:27 GMT
First thing she's paid for since bailing out her nonce son. Lovely little touch by Edward to tell the commoner to step back a bit. All perfectly normal Needless snipe there. 1) It's the Queen (and frail) so obviously needs to be protected 2) I guess you missed the whole COVID pandemic thing A guaranteed seat though …and all in comfort with first class table service immediately whilst the rest who are frail take their chances if they are got enough to use the usual standard rail service covid or no covid It’s absolute bollocks
|
|
|
Post by tommycarlsberg on May 18, 2022 10:56:46 GMT
First thing she's paid for since bailing out her nonce son. Lovely little touch by Edward to tell the commoner to step back a bit. All perfectly normal Needless snipe there. 1) It's the Queen (and frail) so obviously needs to be protected 2) I guess you missed the whole COVID pandemic thing That avatar isn't funny, I laughed at the first one.
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 18, 2022 11:06:47 GMT
Needless snipe there. 1) It's the Queen (and frail) so obviously needs to be protected 2) I guess you missed the whole COVID pandemic thing A guaranteed seat though …and all in comfort with first class table service immediately whilst the rest who are frail take their chances if they are got enough to use the usual standard rail service covid or no covid It’s absolute bollocks I guess people see what they want to see. I just don't find poking fun at people unfairly amusing. Especially old people and whether it's the Queen or not.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on May 18, 2022 11:09:26 GMT
A guaranteed seat though …and all in comfort with first class table service immediately whilst the rest who are frail take their chances if they are got enough to use the usual standard rail service covid or no covid It’s absolute bollocks I guess people see what they want to see. I just don't find poking fun at people unfairly amusing. Especially old people and whether it's the Queen or not. I certainly wasn’t poking fun mate far from it and even though I’m not a royalist she’s still 96 and remarkable for it What gets my goat is the other frail 96 year olds who wouldn’t get that type of service on public transport Anyway enjoy your day
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 18, 2022 11:24:53 GMT
I guess people see what they want to see. I just don't find poking fun at people unfairly amusing. Especially old people and whether it's the Queen or not. I certainly wasn’t poking fun mate far from it and even though I’m not a royalist she’s still 96 and remarkable for it What gets my goat is the other frail 96 year olds who wouldn’t get that type of service on public transport Me too, but since when has life been fair. I dislike how politicians get preferential treatment (chauffeurs, guaranteed parking, police escorts to skip through traffic, elaborate expenses, etc.). Plus they're all self obsessed lying twats. Celebs and sports personalities get ridiculous wages. Why do these seemingly never get questioned? How about a wage cap on footballers that allows fans to buy merchandise for less than the extortionate prices we're charged now. Then you've got these no talent kids that are born into privilege and living off their parents wealth. Then the mega rich like that twat Elon Musk that uses twitter to impact the stock market and enlarge his wealth. So many examples of unfairness that go far beyond the Royal family in my opinion. At least the Royals give something back to society. Edit: I wasn't accusing you of poking fun mate.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on May 18, 2022 11:54:07 GMT
I certainly wasn’t poking fun mate far from it and even though I’m not a royalist she’s still 96 and remarkable for it What gets my goat is the other frail 96 year olds who wouldn’t get that type of service on public transport Me too, but since when has life been fair. I dislike how politicians get preferential treatment (chauffeurs, guaranteed parking, police escorts to skip through traffic, elaborate expenses, etc.). Plus they're all self obsessed lying twats. Celebs and sports personalities get ridiculous wages. Why do these seemingly never get questioned? How about a wage cap on footballers that allows fans to buy merchandise for less than the extortionate prices we're charged now. Then you've got these no talent kids that are born into privilege and living off their parents wealth. Then the mega rich like that twat Elon Musk that uses twitter to impact the stock market and enlarge his wealth. So many examples of unfairness that go far beyond the Royal family in my opinion. At least the Royals give something back to society. Edit: I wasn't accusing you of poking fun mate. Seriously mate….sports players ( especially footballers) wages are always getting questioned!!!….whilst the royal family get away with it I’d argue sports give a lot more back to society …..opinions eh 😊
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 18, 2022 12:36:09 GMT
Me too, but since when has life been fair. I dislike how politicians get preferential treatment (chauffeurs, guaranteed parking, police escorts to skip through traffic, elaborate expenses, etc.). Plus they're all self obsessed lying twats. Celebs and sports personalities get ridiculous wages. Why do these seemingly never get questioned? How about a wage cap on footballers that allows fans to buy merchandise for less than the extortionate prices we're charged now. Then you've got these no talent kids that are born into privilege and living off their parents wealth. Then the mega rich like that twat Elon Musk that uses twitter to impact the stock market and enlarge his wealth. So many examples of unfairness that go far beyond the Royal family in my opinion. At least the Royals give something back to society. Edit: I wasn't accusing you of poking fun mate. Seriously mate….sports players ( especially footballers) wages are always getting questioned!!!….whilst the royal family get away with it I’d argue sports give a lot more back to society …..opinions eh 😊 It's for another thread I suppose, but for all the 'questioning' I don't see footballers wages going down, but rather the contrary. Prem players get more in a month than most of us will get in a lifetime. On top of that the clubs rip off their fans as a result. That irks me a hell of lot more than the 1.50 quid (approx) we all pay per annum towards the Royals.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 18, 2022 13:24:35 GMT
Seriously mate….sports players ( especially footballers) wages are always getting questioned!!!….whilst the royal family get away with it I’d argue sports give a lot more back to society …..opinions eh 😊 It's for another thread I suppose, but for all the 'questioning' I don't see footballers wages going down, but rather the contrary. Prem players get more in a month than most of us will get in a lifetime. On top of that the clubs rip off their fans as a result. That irks me a hell of lot more than the 1.50 quid (approx) we all pay per annum towards the Royals. We all have a choice as to whether we contribute towards footballers wages though, I think. Don't buy Sky or BT, don't buy over-priced stuff from the club shop, don't go to the games if you object to the prices, they're all voluntary and their absence would force obscene wages down, you would presume? As consumers, we all prop up the cash cow, and make it attractive to sponsors, don't we? We don't appear to have a choice about contributing to the royals, nor the unquestioning deference they are forever treated with. I'd be quite happy if we gave them nothing, they lived off their enormous land acquisitions and businesses, and did much less by way of national engagements or representation in return.
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 18, 2022 13:44:08 GMT
It's for another thread I suppose, but for all the 'questioning' I don't see footballers wages going down, but rather the contrary. Prem players get more in a month than most of us will get in a lifetime. On top of that the clubs rip off their fans as a result. That irks me a hell of lot more than the 1.50 quid (approx) we all pay per annum towards the Royals. We all have a choice as to whether we contribute towards footballers wages though, I think. Don't buy Sky or BT, don't buy over-priced stuff from the club shop, don't go to the games if you object to the prices, they're all voluntary and their absence would force obscene wages down, you would presume? As consumers, we all prop up the cash cow, and make it attractive to sponsors, don't we? We don't appear to have a choice about contributing to the royals, nor the unquestioning deference they are forever treated with. I'd be quite happy if we gave them nothing, they lived off their enormous land acquisitions and businesses, and did much less by way of national engagements or representation in return. I'm not sure we really have much choice here. What do you expect people to do? Not watch football or not buy their kids the strips they want. Football is an integral part of society and you can't just forget about it as it has an emotional attachment. Clubs know they can milk common people and they do.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 18, 2022 15:21:38 GMT
We all have a choice as to whether we contribute towards footballers wages though, I think. Don't buy Sky or BT, don't buy over-priced stuff from the club shop, don't go to the games if you object to the prices, they're all voluntary and their absence would force obscene wages down, you would presume? As consumers, we all prop up the cash cow, and make it attractive to sponsors, don't we? We don't appear to have a choice about contributing to the royals, nor the unquestioning deference they are forever treated with. I'd be quite happy if we gave them nothing, they lived off their enormous land acquisitions and businesses, and did much less by way of national engagements or representation in return. I'm not sure we really have much choice here. What do you expect people to do? Not watch football or not buy their kids the strips they want. Football is an integral part of society and you can't just forget about it as it has an emotional attachment. Clubs know they can milk common people and they do. That's true, and emotional ties are very strong, but they're still voluntary, unlike the contribution we make to the royals. I don't go to rugby matches, I don't buy the shitty music I'm encouraged to buy, loads of digital channels I don't bother with, etc etc. You're right in that it'd be pretty shit as a footie fan and Stoke fan to deny yourself the 'enjoyment' (used as loosely as possible in the context of supporting Stoke!) of being involved, but you do have a choice as to how much you spend and therefore contribute - not the same choice with the royals. It'd be very interesting to see what level of funding the royals received if it was an optional contribution that every person was allowed to make. Quite a good idea in fact. Royalists can contribute as much as they like, non-royalists nothing. Let's find out!
|
|
|
Post by foster on May 18, 2022 15:52:43 GMT
I'm not sure we really have much choice here. What do you expect people to do? Not watch football or not buy their kids the strips they want. Football is an integral part of society and you can't just forget about it as it has an emotional attachment. Clubs know they can milk common people and they do. That's true, and emotional ties are very strong, but they're still voluntary, unlike the contribution we make to the royals. I don't go to rugby matches, I don't buy the shitty music I'm encouraged to buy, loads of digital channels I don't bother with, etc etc. You're right in that it'd be pretty shit as a footie fan and Stoke fan to deny yourself the 'enjoyment' (used as loosely as possible in the context of supporting Stoke!) of being involved, but you do have a choice as to how much you spend and therefore contribute - not the same choice with the royals. It'd be very interesting to see what level of funding the royals received if it was an optional contribution that every person was allowed to make. Quite a good idea in fact. Royalists can contribute as much as they like, non-royalists nothing. Let's find out! Yeah, I'd be up for that. Let's say a voluntary contribution of 10 quid a year and in exchange you get to have a pint with the Queen.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 18, 2022 19:43:52 GMT
That's true, and emotional ties are very strong, but they're still voluntary, unlike the contribution we make to the royals. I don't go to rugby matches, I don't buy the shitty music I'm encouraged to buy, loads of digital channels I don't bother with, etc etc. You're right in that it'd be pretty shit as a footie fan and Stoke fan to deny yourself the 'enjoyment' (used as loosely as possible in the context of supporting Stoke!) of being involved, but you do have a choice as to how much you spend and therefore contribute - not the same choice with the royals. It'd be very interesting to see what level of funding the royals received if it was an optional contribution that every person was allowed to make. Quite a good idea in fact. Royalists can contribute as much as they like, non-royalists nothing. Let's find out! Yeah, I'd be up for that. Let's say a voluntary contribution of 10 quid a year and in exchange you get to have a pint with the Queen. Or take her for a trip on a bus to keep warm.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on May 18, 2022 19:56:06 GMT
I cannot believe the vitriol on here towards a 96 year old woman who is clearly vulnerable, on her last legs and has served this country with grace and dignity for the best part of 70 years for getting up, getting dressed up and visiting a train station for a photo opportunity to show she’s still doing it. She’s 96 FFS. I really don’t get the hatred🤷🏻♂️
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on May 18, 2022 20:00:11 GMT
We all have a choice as to whether we contribute towards footballers wages though, I think. Don't buy Sky or BT, don't buy over-priced stuff from the club shop, don't go to the games if you object to the prices, they're all voluntary and their absence would force obscene wages down, you would presume? As consumers, we all prop up the cash cow, and make it attractive to sponsors, don't we? We don't appear to have a choice about contributing to the royals, nor the unquestioning deference they are forever treated with. I'd be quite happy if we gave them nothing, they lived off their enormous land acquisitions and businesses, and did much less by way of national engagements or representation in return. Interesting. Where do you stand on the BBC TV licence?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 18, 2022 20:04:13 GMT
I cannot believe the vitriol on here towards a 96 year old woman who is clearly vulnerable, on her last legs and has served this country with grace and dignity for the best part of 70 years for getting up, getting dressed up and visiting a train station for a photo opportunity to show she’s still doing it. She’s 96 FFS. I really don’t get the hatred🤷🏻♂️ You sure you're not conflating anti-monarchism with disliking the queen as an individual?
|
|
|
Post by swampmongrel on May 18, 2022 20:07:52 GMT
The first 2 lines of your post i quoted.... Kinda exactly what you did in the first place really "Losing the argument so just make up another criteria to suit one's own purpose" You're anti-monarchy mate, we get it. I pointed out London was more popular than New York. Then someone replied saying Paris was more popular (due apparently to the fact that they have no monarchy), so I pointed out Bangkok was more popular, which in itself is still a weak argument. I was just pointing out that using Paris as an example was inconclusive. Anyway, the palace residency thing was never bought up by me. Merely that the Royals aid tourism, which is an undeniable fact. Paris would be ace if they got rid of all the French people.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on May 18, 2022 20:10:56 GMT
I cannot believe the vitriol on here towards a 96 year old woman who is clearly vulnerable, on her last legs and has served this country with grace and dignity for the best part of 70 years for getting up, getting dressed up and visiting a train station for a photo opportunity to show she’s still doing it. She’s 96 FFS. I really don’t get the hatred🤷🏻♂️ You sure you're not conflating anti-monarchism with disliking the queen as an individual? I’ve read plenty on here making disparaging remarks about the Queen so no I’m not “conflating”. I’m no royalist but I have the utmost respect for our Queen. The trouble with you sanctimonious crusaders is you have an extremely blinkered view on right and wrong. There is no in between, it’s all black and white and you can’t bring yourselves to admit when you’ve overstepped the mark.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 18, 2022 20:16:00 GMT
We all have a choice as to whether we contribute towards footballers wages though, I think. Don't buy Sky or BT, don't buy over-priced stuff from the club shop, don't go to the games if you object to the prices, they're all voluntary and their absence would force obscene wages down, you would presume? As consumers, we all prop up the cash cow, and make it attractive to sponsors, don't we? We don't appear to have a choice about contributing to the royals, nor the unquestioning deference they are forever treated with. I'd be quite happy if we gave them nothing, they lived off their enormous land acquisitions and businesses, and did much less by way of national engagements or representation in return. Interesting. Where do you stand on the BBC TV licence? Good question. No strong feelings really. If contributing to the monarchy should be voluntary, maybe the same should apply to the BBC. My main feeling about the BBC is enjoyment that it's advert free. The main reason for selling off C4 and getting shot of the licence fee seem to be based around the fact that they're not compliant enough politically, (although that's definitely changing as far as the Beeb is concerned), which doesn't seem a convincing reason for change, but it's the way it's heading by the looks of it.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 18, 2022 20:27:14 GMT
You sure you're not conflating anti-monarchism with disliking the queen as an individual? I’ve read plenty on here making disparaging remarks about the Queen so no I’m not “conflating”. I’m no royalist but I have the utmost respect for our Queen. The trouble with you sanctimonious crusaders is you have an extremely blinkered view on right and wrong. There is no in between, it’s all black and white and you can’t bring yourselves to admit when you’ve overstepped the mark. Really? Can't say I've seen that many having a go at her personally, lots at the institution itself though.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 19, 2022 9:26:26 GMT
Whoever was in charge of entertainment for the Queens Jubilee bash has clearly got a sense of humour, either that or off their tits on Class A drugs.......
|
|
|
Post by riverman on May 19, 2022 9:31:38 GMT
Whoever was in charge of entertainment for the Queens Jubilee bash has clearly got a sense of humour, either that or off their tits on Class A drugs....... Would never have put Brenda down as a fan of Napalm Death or Dumpy's Rusty Nuts. That's a pisser of a line up!
|
|
|
Post by cheadlepotter on May 19, 2022 9:32:12 GMT
Whoever was in charge of entertainment for the Queens Jubilee bash has clearly got a sense of humour, either that or off their tits on Class A drugs....... You’ve never seen the Queen singing along to Hot Dog by Limp Bizkit then?
|
|