|
Post by jamo on Apr 2, 2004 20:47:14 GMT 1
Seeing the Princess Royal in the Sloppy Star tonight as got me wondering about other peoples opinions about the "royals" I despise them myself and think that they are a total waste of space. They are not relevant to my life and in my opinion are just a bunch of german freeloaders clinging to a past life of luxury and privilage. The sooner this country grows up and elects it's head of state the better. Up the Republic.
|
|
|
Post by telfordSHREWS on Apr 2, 2004 20:53:48 GMT 1
The Royal Family.. best British ski'ers around, and polo players ......and hunting team...........and boozers......and ....
|
|
|
Post by evo16 on Apr 2, 2004 21:04:12 GMT 1
your sister is your mother your father is your brother you only sh@g each other the royal family ;D
|
|
the peoples republic of shrops
Guest
|
Post by the peoples republic of shrops on Apr 2, 2004 21:13:46 GMT 1
welcome aboard brothers.
|
|
|
Post by Red Blue and Amber on Apr 2, 2004 21:15:36 GMT 1
Yeah cant wait to have Tony Blair as President for Life!
|
|
|
Post by ratcliffesghost on Apr 2, 2004 21:18:58 GMT 1
I have the dubious honour of telling Zara Phillips to "Knob off and stop interupting!" while her then boyfriend Richard Johnson was giving me his views of the runners in the Tote Gold Trophy
|
|
|
Post by Cuy Blue as Guest on Apr 2, 2004 22:46:36 GMT 1
While wholeheartedly agreeing with the sentiment, they are a huge tourist attraction. As a real life, Disneyesque, attraction, they may be tolerated. Blair for life, the thought of Dubya for another 4 years is even worse
|
|
|
Post by ratcliffesghost on Apr 2, 2004 22:52:38 GMT 1
Wouldent have minded a night on the P*SS with Princess Margaret. From books about her she sounds an absolute gin guzzeler who did a turn or two after a few. Remember when she burnt the bottoms of both of her feet jumping in the bath. What a girl, she was 54 at the time bless her!
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Apr 2, 2004 22:59:05 GMT 1
I don't think that they are the attraction. No tourist see's them when they visit a royal palace the Windsor's make sure they are well out of the way, all those palaces and castles would still be there for people to visit only we would have better access and a greater chance of seeing national treasures that are denied us now At least with an elected head we can eventually get rid of them even if it seem's an eternity at the time One more thing, it's the royals that keep the asitocracy in place and they are the people that have real power and influence over our lives.
Up the republic
|
|
Cuy Blue as a Roundhead
Guest
|
Post by Cuy Blue as a Roundhead on Apr 2, 2004 23:16:10 GMT 1
Yes I agree to a huge extent, but the palaces and castles of a reigning monarchy are marketed as being a lot more worthwhile of a visit. Whether this is actually the case and whether any additional revunue is generated is dubious. As I said, it's all very "Disneyesque" - if it came to a vote, I'd be with the Roundheads
|
|
|
Post by MRJPSHREW on Apr 3, 2004 0:05:49 GMT 1
I have for ages been an anti-royalist. Loathe most of em
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2004 0:20:25 GMT 1
The royals make a lot of money for the country but how much do they cost the country?
In much the same vein that it's difficult to know the exact figures in the smoking debate i.e. how much smokers cost the NHS vs how much tax the Govt makes from them.
|
|
|
Post by Trewbloo on Apr 3, 2004 0:38:56 GMT 1
Oh there is no debate on the smoking issue, smokers more than pay for there NHS treatment, don't forget they also pay there usual taxes and national insurance like everyone else. That is of course unless your a scrounging student And I agree with Jamo on the Republic thing, the quicker the better.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2004 0:41:50 GMT 1
Oh there is no debate on the smoking issue, smokers more than pay for there NHS treatment, don't forget they also pay there usual taxes and national insurance like everyone else. I've yet to see any figures supporting this argument Phil...
|
|
|
Post by Trewbloo on Apr 3, 2004 1:10:05 GMT 1
"It is true that NHS costs are lower than tobacco tax revenues. Tobacco taxation amounts to £10.5 billion per year whereas a figure for NHS spending on tobacco related disease is £1.7 billion. "
Taken from the ASH website, they are anti smoking by the way. ;D
|
|
|
Post by BelleVueShrew on Apr 3, 2004 1:25:57 GMT 1
Round up the foxes and hunt the Royals I say
|
|
|
Post by somersetshrew on Apr 3, 2004 10:22:32 GMT 1
The queen mother was lovely god rest her soul.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Apr 3, 2004 11:39:42 GMT 1
Oh there is no debate on the smoking issue, smokers more than pay for there NHS treatment, Not according to the British Medical Association who say there is a shortfall of over £500 million in revenue compared to the costs of treatment
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 3, 2004 12:28:41 GMT 1
I'm a big royalist, big time...always have been, always will be...I'm very proud of being English, very proud of my country and for me the Royal family is an integral part of that and should continue to be...
If your after a republic you should go and join those Frenchie type people over the channel you proletarian, low life, common scum!!
God save the Queen!!!
|
|
the peoples republic of shrops
Guest
|
Post by the peoples republic of shrops on Apr 3, 2004 14:30:24 GMT 1
I'm a big royalist, big time...always have been, always will be...I'm very proud of being English, very proud of my country and for me the Royal family is an integral part of that and should continue to be... If your after a republic you should go and join those Frenchie type people over the channel you proletarian, low life, common scum!! God save the Queen!!! ooh some good points there - name calling is always the best way to put your point across.
|
|
|
Post by Trewbloo on Apr 3, 2004 18:40:53 GMT 1
Throb said " Not according to the British Medical Association who say there is a shortfall of over £500 million in revenue compared to the costs of treatment" I'm afraid that is because of what they get given off this goverment, I will repeat the facts as stated on the ASH website "It is true that NHS costs are lower than tobacco tax revenues. Tobacco taxation amounts to £10.5 billion per year whereas a figure for NHS spending on tobacco related disease is £1.7 billion. " It is not smokers at fault for the amount of that tax that is ploughed back into the NHS, you have to look at your Labour goverment for that. Sorry Throb for once you are wrong
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Apr 3, 2004 19:07:02 GMT 1
ooh some good points there - name calling is always the best way to put your point across. Thank you, I've always thought so myself...
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Apr 3, 2004 20:43:30 GMT 1
I'm a big royalist, big time...always have been, always will be...I'm very proud of being English, very proud of my country and for me the Royal family is an integral part of that and should continue to be... If your after a republic you should go and join those Frenchie type people over the channel you proletarian, low life, common scum!! God save the Queen!!! Stutty, why do you confuse people who are anti monarchist with people who are unpatriotic. I'm as proud to be English as anyone and i will defend my country to the end, i just wish we would grow up as a nation and join the real world. A possible solution though given where you live is to invite all the Windsors back to the fatherland from where they came. You could set them up in a castle in Stuttgart and invite thousands of fat Americans to come and stare at them through the gates. That way everyone's a winner, you get your royal family and we get a democracy that is fair and just and representative of the people.
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Apr 3, 2004 20:56:39 GMT 1
This debate has and will go on forever. No one has the bottle to even seriously suggest getting rid of them. To many people go all gooey when you mention princess di and the queen mum ( gawd bless er guv ).
The country is stuck in the past. As a nation, we dont like change. Still think we are a global power when infact, we are fast becoming a small fish in the proverbial big pond. That doesnt bother me at all but some people still think that the words rule brittania, brittania rules the waves is as true today as it was 200 years ago.
|
|
the peoples republic of shrops
Guest
|
Post by the peoples republic of shrops on Apr 4, 2004 4:08:36 GMT 1
Anyone heard the tracks on Chumbawambas tubthumping?
|
|