The monarchy

PostRe: The monarchy by **Fatal Exception** » Tue May 05, 2015 9:36 pm

He never said we did. But we need to get rid of the banana splits.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Death's Head** » Thu May 07, 2015 9:33 am

No, they should go. It is utter BS in this day and age that we have a "royal" family because some distant ancestor killed someone and made it so.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Herdanos** » Thu May 07, 2015 12:04 pm

Regardless of what you think, the tourism argument doesn't hold up. Our ancient buildings aren't going to vanish if they're no longer owned by a family that is officially superior to us plebs.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Nibble** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:07 pm

It's the assumed divine right to rule bit that really gets on my tits. The sheer strawberry floating arrogance of it.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Moggy** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:16 pm

Nibble wrote:It's the assumed divine right to rule bit that really gets on my tits. The sheer strawberry floating arrogance of it.

Unless you think that Charles I is still on the throne, that is not really an issue anymore.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Qikz** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:16 pm

Dan. wrote:Regardless of what you think, the tourism argument doesn't hold up. Our ancient buildings aren't going to vanish if they're no longer owned by a family that is officially superior to us plebs.

Won't they still technically own the buildings and wealth even if they're not the monarchy anymore? I'm not entirely sure if places like Windsor Castle are state owned or owned by their family.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Errkal** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:17 pm

They are owned by the family I do believe a long with a strawberry float tonne of other property that currently rent from goes to the treasury but if they were abolished it would go to them and the country would loose the income.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Herdanos** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:21 pm

Qikz wrote:
Dan. wrote:Regardless of what you think, the tourism argument doesn't hold up. Our ancient buildings aren't going to vanish if they're no longer owned by a family that is officially superior to us plebs.

Won't they still technically own the buildings and wealth even if they're not the monarchy anymore? I'm not entirely sure if places like Windsor Castle are state owned or owned by their family.

They're owned by the monarchy. If we pass legislation to state that there is no monarchy, why would the Windsor Family suddenly inherit all that property?

Errkal wrote:They are owned by the family I do believe a long with a strawberry float tonne of other property that currently rent from goes to the treasury but if they were abolished it would go to them and the country would loose the income.

Not if they had to pay their fair share of tax :slol:

PostRe: The monarchy by **Errkal** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:23 pm

Dan. wrote:
Not if they had to pay their fair share of tax

Would still be considerably smaller an amount than now.

Additionally, would the abolishment not effect the other common wealth countries that have the Queen as head of state and so their votes would need to be part of it too, as ending the monachy would kill the common wealth would it not? I don't know what the brings in terms of benefits but yeah.

PostRe: The monarchy by **That's not a growth** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:24 pm

I thought most of it wasn't owned by them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

PostRe: The monarchy by **Herdanos** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:28 pm

That's not a growth wrote:I thought most of it wasn't owned by them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

Boom. There you go then.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Moggy** » Thu May 07, 2015 1:33 pm

That's not a growth wrote:I thought most of it wasn't owned by them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

Q12. Does The Queen own Buckingham Palace?

A. Occupied Royal Palaces, such as Buckingham Palace, are not the private property of The Queen. They are occupied by the Sovereign and held in trust for future generations.

There are two categories of Royal residences: the occupied Royal Palaces and the unoccupied Royal Palaces.

The former comprises Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, the Palace of Holyroodhouse, St. James’s Palace, Kensington Palace (excluding the State Apartments) and Clarence House, and are used by members of the Royal Family and their Households.

The latter are no longer used as residences by the Sovereign and comprises Hampton Court, the Tower of London, the State Apartments at Kensington Palace, the Banqueting House at Whitehall, and Kew Palace with Queen Charlotte’s Cottage.

Buckingham Palace is not only the London home of The Queen; The Duke of Edinburgh, The Duke of York, The Earl and Countess of Wessex, The Princess Royal and Princess Alexandra also have private offices and apartments located within the Palace.

The Queen privately owns two properties, Balmoral Castle and Sandringham House, which are not publicly funded.

http://www.royal.gov.uk/FrequentlyAsked ... tions.aspx

PostRe: The monarchy by **Moggy** » Mon May 18, 2015 2:02 pm

Prince Harry thinks we should bring back national service because he had a great time in the army. I wonder if he would have enjoyed it as much if the military had been full of kids that didn't want to be there. Or if he had had the exact same treatment as any other kid that joined up...

PostRe: The monarchy by **That** » Mon May 18, 2015 2:11 pm

I have a friend who did national service in the Cypriot army. He reckons it just isn't conducive to having an effective fighting force, not least because huge numbers of actual career soldiers end up having to essentially babysit teenagers who would literally rather be anywhere else.

The Army should be about defending our borders - and maybe, at a push, defending human rights abroad - not about giving 19 year olds something to do.

Proper national work placement programs would be better. Offer paid internships and/or apprenticeships to any kid that doesn't go to Uni. But I don't think it's necessarily helpful to force anyone into it - opting-out should be an option.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Dowbocop** » Tue May 19, 2015 12:53 am

I think revealing his Captain Wales codename was a mistake, because now nobody will be surprised when he shows up in Phase Three.

PostRe: The monarchy by **RichardUK** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 1:34 pm

i was so happy to see you have a monarchy thread, my happiness didn't last how ever once i started to read the comments

PostRe: The monarchy by **Meep** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 1:41 pm

RichardUK wrote:i was so happy to see you have a monarchy thread, my happiness didn't last how ever once i started to read the comments

I know, it's awful.

Don't worry, though. We'll get rid of them one of these days.

PostRe: The monarchy by **BID0** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 1:44 pm

I used to be for it but the more I've looked in to it I realise they serve no purpose. Which was fine when we had a lot of money, but it's a joke that services are being sold off, people ending up homeless/hungry while we spend money to keep a Monarchy in place.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Captain Kinopio** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 2:19 pm

Moggy wrote:Prince Harry thinks we should bring back national service because he had a great time in the army. I wonder if he would have enjoyed it as much if the military had been full of kids that didn't want to be there. Or if he had had the exact same treatment as any other kid that joined up...

Nice way to belittle what he actually did.

As I understand it he did officers training at Sandringham, fair enough that place is hardly a shining example of wealth equality but it seems pretty clear he wasn't given any special treatment.

PostRe: The monarchy by **Return_of_the_STAR** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 2:24 pm

Captain Kinopio wrote:
Moggy wrote:Prince Harry thinks we should bring back national service because he had a great time in the army. I wonder if he would have enjoyed it as much if the military had been full of kids that didn't want to be there. Or if he had had the exact same treatment as any other kid that joined up...

Nice way to belittle what he actually did.

As I understand it he did officers training at Sandringham, fair enough that place is hardly a shining example of wealth equality but it seems pretty clear he wasn't given any special treatment.

Yeah from all reports I've seen he wasn't given special treatment, the only difference was that he would get released for royal engagements. Which u would expect really.

The monarchy

Should the UK keep the monarchy?

Who is online

Affiliates