|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 19, 2023 7:47:15 GMT
All those thousands of slaughtered bears (now hats) out on that parade eh?
Disgusting.
|
|
|
|
Post by str8outtahampton on Jun 19, 2023 8:57:46 GMT
Wouldn't be cheaper and less demeaning to have Pandas? At the very least the Royal Family could be funded on a subscription basis - those that are into that sort of thing could contribute and the rest of us can get on living our lives as citizens rather than subjects and ignore the ridiculous medieval charade. Yes it might be cheaper but somehow I don't think pandas would be very effective patrons of scores of charities the royals do, or wonderful life changing organizations like the Duke of Edinburgh Award or Prince's Trust. Or patronising scores of cultural and environmental organizations. Or being a point of leadership for the Commonwealth. They do a brilliant job keeping politicians out of heading such organizations. Our royal heritage is a lot older than medieval times, maybe you should have posted "dark ages" charade? But in actual fact the royals keep up with the times and Charles for example was an environmentalist long before any politicians jumped on the band wagon. The monarchy generates huge income for this country and provides a huge amount of employment. On balance I don't believe it actually costs the country a penny. They really do keep up with the times. What could be more current than handing titles to family members? If they lived on Bentilee or Abbey Hulton, the Daily Mail and Express would call them what they really are. Benefit scroungers. |
|
|
|
Post by stiggerstackle on Jun 19, 2023 10:01:29 GMT
All those thousands of slaughtered bears (now hats) out on that parade eh? Disgusting. Synthetic these days. |
|
|
|
Post by stiggerstackle on Jun 19, 2023 10:05:58 GMT
I watched every minute of the Trooping The Colour and thoroughly enjoyed it. Great free entertainment! I was most impressed by the cut-away articles on the armed forces and their families and their dedication to defending this country and sacrifices they have made for us. It was "their day" and high point of their careers. There were lots of interviews with the spectators that included many from all over the world. One Australian family said they had planned their whole visit to the UK around yesterday's event. Clearly a huge amount of foreign revenue was accrued, as was the case with the Coronation: www.visitbritain.org/millions-plan-domestic-break-coronation-weekend-bringing-estimated-ps12-billion-economic-boostIt terms of the cost, it was pointed out that the UK is one of the few countries in the world that does not have a "national day" and the official birthday of the monarch is this countries national day. So if we didn't have a monarch how much would we spend on a National Day? Just like having a President instead of a monarch, a lot of the costs, such as parades, bands, and security, would equally apply. The US and French governments spend huge amounts on celebrating 4th July and Bastille Day. One of the joys of yesterday was there was hardly a politician in sight, although the camera did cut to Sunak and his family sat in the crowd. I was down there for a gig, and thought whilst in the vicinity we'd pop over and have a look - mixed and mingled with people in pubs / on the Mall (great view of the fly-over - really impressive). What can I say, it was a lovely atmosphere, and I was gobsmacked by how many Americans, Australians, Japanese and tourists from all corners of the world were there enjoying it. The military parade was really something to behold - I don't see why we need to be ashamed of being a sovereign nation. |
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 19, 2023 10:13:06 GMT
Yes it might be cheaper but somehow I don't think pandas would be very effective patrons of scores of charities the royals do, or wonderful life changing organizations like the Duke of Edinburgh Award or Prince's Trust. Or patronising scores of cultural and environmental organizations. Or being a point of leadership for the Commonwealth. They do a brilliant job keeping politicians out of heading such organizations. Our royal heritage is a lot older than medieval times, maybe you should have posted "dark ages" charade? But in actual fact the royals keep up with the times and Charles for example was an environmentalist long before any politicians jumped on the band wagon. The monarchy generates huge income for this country and provides a huge amount of employment. On balance I don't believe it actually costs the country a penny. I just don't understand why you are so dead set on leaving the EU because of the sovereignty issue and at the same time happy with living in what in effect is a feudal society. For me genuine "sovereignty" is sovereignty of the individual - being an equal among equals, not the subject of an unelected monarch. Whether the monarchy is a net contributor or a drain on the public purse is irrelevant to me and I'm not going to accept being a subject because the Royal family are a great tourist attraction - it's a ridiculous reason to use as a justification for subservience. For me your post Brexit vision of the UK is awful - Brexit has achieved nothing in terms of empowering the people of the UK and any "sovereignty" gained as a result has just been handed over to institutions over which we have no more control than we did when we were in the EU. If you were genuinely interested in "sovereignty" you'd be questioning the suitability of the hereditary principle as a mechanism for choosing the head of state not telling us subjects to just look at the lovely costumes and forget about the fact you are a second class citizen in your own country. The whole thing is a ridiculous pantomime where you don't even have the option not to buy a ticket. Thank you for your reply. The sovereignty I refer to is the sovereignty of the state or in the case of the UK the House of Commons, who can make any law it wishes, including of course to hand over sovereignty to the EU or as we have done withdraw from the EU. I believe sovereignty should remain with those people the British people have elected, even a flawed electoral system. People are free to vote for a political party to get rid of the monarchy if they wish. Or indeed start a campaign of their own. The monarch may be the "sovereign" but has no power and is under the control of government who have in the past chosen to remove a monarch or change the rules of accession. The monarch is in effect a government appointment. I'm confident that if an unsuitable royal was imminently in line to become monarch they would be removed from the line of succession. I am not talking about sovereignty of the individual, whatever that might be. You do have the option of not buying a ticket and taking no notice of what the monarch does. |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 19, 2023 10:15:29 GMT
All those thousands of slaughtered bears (now hats) out on that parade eh? Disgusting. Synthetic these days. Apparently not, it was suggested but refused I understand. |
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Jun 19, 2023 10:22:15 GMT
I just don't understand why you are so dead set on leaving the EU because of the sovereignty issue and at the same time happy with living in what in effect is a feudal society. For me genuine "sovereignty" is sovereignty of the individual - being an equal among equals, not the subject of an unelected monarch. Whether the monarchy is a net contributor or a drain on the public purse is irrelevant to me and I'm not going to accept being a subject because the Royal family are a great tourist attraction - it's a ridiculous reason to use as a justification for subservience. For me your post Brexit vision of the UK is awful - Brexit has achieved nothing in terms of empowering the people of the UK and any "sovereignty" gained as a result has just been handed over to institutions over which we have no more control than we did when we were in the EU. If you were genuinely interested in "sovereignty" you'd be questioning the suitability of the hereditary principle as a mechanism for choosing the head of state not telling us subjects to just look at the lovely costumes and forget about the fact you are a second class citizen in your own country. The whole thing is a ridiculous pantomime where you don't even have the option not to buy a ticket. Thank you for your reply. The sovereignty I refer to is the sovereignty of the state or in the case of the UK the House of Commons, who can make any law it wishes, including of course to hand over sovereignty to the EU or as we have done withdraw from the EU. I believe sovereignty should remain with those people the British people have elected, even a flawed electoral system. People are free to vote for a political party to get rid of the monarchy if they wish. Or indeed start a campaign of their own. The monarch may be the "sovereign" but has no power and is under the control of government who have in the past chosen to remove a monarch or change the rules of accession. The monarch is in effect a government appointment. I'm confident that if an unsuitable royal was imminently in line to become monarch they would be removed from the line of succession. I am not talking about sovereignty of the individual, whatever that might be. You do have the option of not buying a ticket and taking no notice of what the monarch does. The monarch still retains statutory powers, whether they use them or not. |
|
|
|
Post by stiggerstackle on Jun 19, 2023 10:39:29 GMT
Apparently not, it was suggested but refused I understand. I retract my statement Sir! Just done a quick google - apparently Busby's are now synthetic but Bearskins area exactly that - 100 Canadian pelts per year sourced by the British Army. No idea what the difference is between the 2 hats... Gobsmacked, I thought it was really widely reported during the Queen's funeral last year that they had no gone fully synthetic. |
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Jun 19, 2023 11:21:25 GMT
I just don't understand why you are so dead set on leaving the EU because of the sovereignty issue and at the same time happy with living in what in effect is a feudal society. For me genuine "sovereignty" is sovereignty of the individual - being an equal among equals, not the subject of an unelected monarch. Whether the monarchy is a net contributor or a drain on the public purse is irrelevant to me and I'm not going to accept being a subject because the Royal family are a great tourist attraction - it's a ridiculous reason to use as a justification for subservience. For me your post Brexit vision of the UK is awful - Brexit has achieved nothing in terms of empowering the people of the UK and any "sovereignty" gained as a result has just been handed over to institutions over which we have no more control than we did when we were in the EU. If you were genuinely interested in "sovereignty" you'd be questioning the suitability of the hereditary principle as a mechanism for choosing the head of state not telling us subjects to just look at the lovely costumes and forget about the fact you are a second class citizen in your own country. The whole thing is a ridiculous pantomime where you don't even have the option not to buy a ticket. Thank you for your reply. The sovereignty I refer to is the sovereignty of the state or in the case of the UK the House of Commons, who can make any law it wishes, including of course to hand over sovereignty to the EU or as we have done withdraw from the EU. I believe sovereignty should remain with those people the British people have elected, even a flawed electoral system. People are free to vote for a political party to get rid of the monarchy if they wish. Or indeed start a campaign of their own. The monarch may be the "sovereign" but has no power and is under the control of government who have in the past chosen to remove a monarch or change the rules of accession. The monarch is in effect a government appointment. I'm confident that if an unsuitable royal was imminently in line to become monarch they would be removed from the line of succession. I am not talking about sovereignty of the individual, whatever that might be. You do have the option of not buying a ticket and taking no notice of what the monarch does. The monarch is not appointed by the government in fact it is the opposite - the monarch, by convention, appoints the Prime Minister and has the power to dismiss them. The monarchy does have power but again purely by convention don't exercise it. As Head of State they represent the country despite the fact that we haven't had any say in the matter. Our political system is an undemocratic mess and the monarchy is inexorably wrapped in it. It's long overdue root and branch reform - we need a modernised written constitution. I find our relationship with our Head of State to be profoundly inappropriate. I am nobody's subject and I feel under no obligation to enter into that sort of subservient relationship with anyone - hereditary or otherwise. The state currently defines me as a subject. Any new constitution has to start with the principle that we are all fundamentally equal citizens - including whoever happens to be the Head of State. I bear members of the royal family no ill will - it's their role on public life that's the issue. Not my king - no-one is. By the way it's a pleasure to engage with you - we may fundamentally disagree but I have every respect for the way you argue. |
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Aug 10, 2023 8:23:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Aug 10, 2023 8:27:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by str8outtahampton on Aug 11, 2023 8:43:54 GMT
You really should give a toss. The new coin has the following inscription. I mean, it’s in Latin, but this is the rough translation. “I’d Like To Be Where Your Tampon is”. Pure class. |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Aug 11, 2023 9:13:07 GMT
You really should give a toss. The new coin has the following inscription. I mean, it’s in Latin, but this is the rough translation. “I’d Like To Be Where Your Tampon is”. Pure class.  |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Aug 11, 2023 19:38:07 GMT
You really should give a toss. The new coin has the following inscription. I mean, it’s in Latin, but this is the rough translation. “I’d Like To Be Where Your Tampon is”. Pure class. Id velut ubi tuum Tampon est |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Aug 11, 2023 19:46:47 GMT
What a bizarre bunch you lefties are. The mind boggles as to how you were brought up😀
|
|
|
|
Post by longdistancekiddie on Aug 11, 2023 21:36:37 GMT
Hopefully he will be the last.
Republic needed as soon as possible
|
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Mar 31, 2024 18:24:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Mar 31, 2024 18:34:07 GMT
Let’s hope he kicks cancers ass |
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Mar 31, 2024 22:44:42 GMT
What has this talentless man, or any of his parasitic family, done to deserve the adjective “great”? |
|
|
|
Post by atillathehoneybee on Apr 1, 2024 5:17:58 GMT
What has this talentless man, or any of his parasitic family, done to deserve the adjective “great”? A life of public service, served in the military,helped create thousands of jobs through The Princes Trust, apart from that fuck all, have you done anything for your country. |
|
|
|
Post by roylandstoke on Apr 1, 2024 8:00:07 GMT
What has this talentless man, or any of his parasitic family, done to deserve the adjective “great”? A life of public service, served in the military,helped create thousands of jobs through The Princes Trust, apart from that fuck all, have you done anything for your country. A life of public service, paying tax. Most would see serving in forces and The Prince’s Trust as forms of public service. |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 1, 2024 9:09:42 GMT
Let’s hope he kicks cancers ass He has a far better chance than his "subjects". |
|
|
|
Post by atillathehoneybee on Apr 1, 2024 9:16:41 GMT
Let’s hope he kicks cancers ass He has a far better chance than his "subjects". Why. |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 1, 2024 9:22:17 GMT
He has a far better chance than his "subjects". Why. Because he will get the best treatment, that's just a fact |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Apr 1, 2024 9:26:05 GMT
What has this talentless man, or any of his parasitic family, done to deserve the adjective “great”? A life of public service, served in the military,helped create thousands of jobs through The Princes Trust, apart from that fuck all, have you done anything for your country. He never saw a day's active combat. He wouldn't need a charity if he didn't hoard his wealth and paid his taxes. Getting chauffeured to a few meet and greets and ribbon cuttings isn't the kind of public service I'm interested in. |
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 1, 2024 9:31:21 GMT
He has a far better chance than his "subjects". Why.  Here's why. |
|
|
|
Post by atillathehoneybee on Apr 1, 2024 9:34:40 GMT
Because he will get the best treatment, that's just a fact My Step Father had bowel cancer 15 years ago, and had the same treatment and chemo as the guy who's family own Gawsworth Hall in cheshire, multi millionaire and a knight of the realm. They became real close friends. My step dad survived , the other bloke didnt, maybe the nurses got the treatment mixed up. FFS Rich people die of this terrible disease, just as poor people survive. Steve Jobs had a few quid, but it killed him. So put all your anti royal prejudices aside and wish the chap well. |
|
|
|
Post by atillathehoneybee on Apr 1, 2024 9:36:19 GMT
Because he will get the best treatment, that's just a fact So did Steve Jobs.. THATS ALSO A FACT |
|
|
|
Post by atillathehoneybee on Apr 1, 2024 9:40:43 GMT
A life of public service, served in the military,helped create thousands of jobs through The Princes Trust, apart from that fuck all, have you done anything for your country. He never saw a day's active combat. He wouldn't need a charity if he didn't hoard his wealth and paid his taxes. Getting chauffeured to a few meet and greets and ribbon cuttings isn't the kind of public service I'm interested in. What a shame there wasnt a war on for him. Prince Harry saw active service, ir does that not suit your anti royal narrative. |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Apr 1, 2024 9:56:52 GMT
He never saw a day's active combat. He wouldn't need a charity if he didn't hoard his wealth and paid his taxes. Getting chauffeured to a few meet and greets and ribbon cuttings isn't the kind of public service I'm interested in. What a shame there wasnt a war on for him. Prince Harry saw active service, ir does that not suit your anti royal narrative. And William? He just pissed around the UK coastline flying helicopters  |
|
