BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:39 AM

Well, there is a very strong anti-Monarchy feeling in the country but when is that voice heard?
Well, hardly ever, is the answer!
The truth is that the public's view of the Monarchy is generally shaped by the media, and the media is constantly telling the Queen's subjects how wonderful the Monarchy is( The media, of course, love the royals because they sell newspapers!- lots of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:52 AM

And, shamefully, 'tis the Beeb who seem to be the main cheerleaders these days. Not only do they lavishly "do" all the royal events, commentated on routinely by bunches of cheerily-inane sycophants, but they do lots of extra programmes about 'em too. Why, there was another one on only last night about "William at 30" or something which was about as buttock-clenching as you could wish for (at least, the five-minute chunk of it that I actually saw was). Speaking of the Beeb and buttocks, the former has a "royal correspondent", Nicholas Witchell, who appears to permanently reside up the Queen's latters.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:58 AM

How do you know there is a large majority? Guess?

No.
Reliable opinion polls.
Also, a million people stood in the freezing rain and wind on Sunday to see a load of unremarkable boats and the Queen.
The Republican protest at Tower Bridge could only raise sixty sad sacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:01 AM

the British public's support for the country remaining a monarchy is at a record high level according to Ipsos MORI's special Diamond Jubilee poll. Eight in ten (80%) British adults favour Britain remaining a monarchy compared to 13% that want to see it becoming a republic.

Support for the monarchy is highest among older generations, with almost nine in ten (88%) of those aged 55+ saying Britain should remain a monarchy. Conservative supporters are most likely to be monarchists – 96% prefer Britain to have a monarch rather than become a republic compared to three-quarters (74%) of Labour supporters and 84% of Liberal Democrats.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Stu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:14 AM

"The Monarchy is not paid for by taxes."

Well, according to the ever-reliable wikipedia: "Only the Queen officially receives direct funding from the Civil List. The Queen's consort (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh) receives £359,000 per year. The Queen, as head of state, receives £7,900,000 from the Civil List to defray some of the official expenditure of the monarchy."

Er, isn't this funded by the Treasury? It looks like Gideon is about to give the poor, cash-strapped old dears a bit more too.


Keith: The boats were excellent (as I said earlier), and funded privately. Wonderful sight. Thanks for the Mori poll figures. Just wondered how you knew. I didn't see the republican display, I was at our village street party, doing my bit. Were you involved at all?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:20 AM

A million Brits stood in the rain and wind. Fifty-nine million Brits did not. Far more than that number stood in the cold to protest against the impending Iraq war in the spring of 2003, yet I remember pro-war commentators at the time making the exact same point as I just have. A million turned up to see the pope in Ireland too. Cor.

But yes, the royals are enjoying popularity at present. They always get a bit more popular when they have a wedding or jubilee shindig (boosting their popularity is the whole point of such functions, lest we forget. The pyramid of privilege must be maintained!) But it's a slightly dangerous game, projecting, even implicitly, from favourable polls that the royals are A Good Thing. 74% of Brits are in favour of the death penalty. Hmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:34 AM

I don't know - of course - how many Americans might be following this current debate, but would any of them wish to have a monarchy?
To be a subject of a king or queen rather that a citizen of a democracy?
To bow down to someone who is "clearly better/superior" to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 10:50 AM

To be a subject of a king or queen rather that a citizen of a democracy?
We are both!
To bow down to someone who is "clearly better/superior" to you.
No-one has to. They do it out of respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 11:45 AM

To Keith: Both? Speak for yourself!

And what exactly has Her Maj ever done to earn my respect? She owns land that her ancestors stole from my ancestors, and, to add insult to injury, keeps me off most of it. She spends my tax money (not to speak of the Beeb wasting my licence fee on her bloody ceremonial nonsenses!) on a massive four-day jolly. Like all unelected monarchs and dictators the world over, she is rich beyond our wildest dreams by dint of the impoverishment of other people, either by landlordism or via her crooked ancestry. There's no other way of getting to be that rich.

Note that the monarchy will not foot the bill for the latest shindig. We taxpayers gave her a cool extra million towards it. The GLA spent 600 grand on stewards and big video screens. The police and military provided massive support (not to speak of all that ceremonial nonsense) which must have cost the taxpayer millions (but you try finding out how much and who pays!) Those Red Arrows used more than a gallon or two as well, I'll be bound. Then there's the extra bank holiday. Another cool billion. ATOS will have to up their game robbing the sick to make that lot up! Oh yes, it costs us dear to help the royals maintain their popularity all right. Do they deserve respect for that? They do not in my book. Do I resent the cost? Yep, every single penny!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 12:08 PM

Among many strong arguments against monarchism, it's definitely better for a nation's head of state to be examined and voted in - AND out when the process of ageing, etc., means that another can easily do better; thus, as suggested above, it's disappointing the way American Republicans and Democrats hypocritically support the Windsors.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: BrendanB
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 12:10 PM

I don't have any strong feelings for or against the monarchy but one or two thoughts occur. The last time this country tried going without a monarchy it didn't last very long before the restoration took place but perhaps things would be different if we tried again, different folks, different strokes as they say. However, I seem to recall that it wasn't long before Oliver Cromwell was requiring more money from Parliament than Charles I had ever done.
We need a head of state if our version of democracy is to continue. I suspect that an elected head of state would be driven by ambition (even greed) which could place his or her wishes over the best interests of the country. We only have to look at recent revelations about our politicians to see that. S/he could also demand greater powers because of the popular mandate inherent in having been elected. A hereditary monarch can make no such claim.
I don't know much about the way the monarchy is funded but I have a gut feeling that too much money is spent on royals who contribute little or nothing to the country. Where that money comes from I don't know but IMO people like Prince Andrew and Prince Edward really should be earning their own money rather than receiving handouts. Apart from anything else it would set an example which I believe is one of the things we can expect of the royal family (I did say expect, even if we don't get it).

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 12:46 PM

From an article I reead, very little got paid to stewards, accomodation under London Bridge, and provided food consisting of a sandwich in a paper bag - and no wages. It would be nore appropriate to complain about the money paid to the company that provided the stewards

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 01:27 PM

I don't have any strong feelings for or against the monarchy

Why not?


We only have to look at recent revelations about our politicians to see that.

Well yes, a minority of MPs fiddled their expenses claims because a very lax system allowed them to do so. I once claimed overnight meals and accommodation and rail fares for an interview I attended, which I drove to and back from on the same day, taking a flask and sandwiches. The claim form was a no-questions-asked-no-receipts job. What a naughty boy I was! I was very annoyed about those MPs, just like everybody else, but let's not get carried away. We taxpayers have just cheerfully handed over God knows how many more times that amount so that the richest woman in the world can have a four-day party and embed herself even more deeply in the affections of the gullible. If you don't feel strongly about the royals, you sure as hell can't be feeling too strongly about those politicos either.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 01:36 PM

a."there is a very strong anti-Monarchy feeling in the country but when is that voice heard?" ~~ Tunesmith

b. "The media, of course, love the royals because they sell newspapers!- lots of them." ~~ ditto: later same post

.,.,

If 'a', then why 'b'? Where are the anti-monarchist papers that sell millions to those who hold the 'very strong feeling' ref'd to in 'a'?

I think you & your lot might just be a teenyweeny itsybitsy bit confused, Tunesmith dear.

Nezza mind; dear dear; diddums!

〠☺〠~M~〠☺〠

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 02:30 PM

Hope - Nepal, a monarchy when I visited, is now the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Tunesmith
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 03:17 PM

MthGM, well, it's simple - but just for you - I'll spell it out nice and plainly.

In Britain we have dozens of celeb mags and they sell like crazy.

Why? Probably because lots of people feel celebrities lead a far more exciting life than them and want a glimpse into - what they perceive as - their rich glittering world.

And, I've no doubt, these "celeb lovers" bathe warmly in the reflected glow of these "super people".

Right, got it so far? Celebrity sells!

Now the Queen is the biggest celebrity in the country.
Are you still with me?

Now - this bit might challenge you, but hang in there!

So the papers feed their readers lots of glamorous stories of the Queen and her wonderful family.

Still there MthGM?

The public gobble it up and want more and more.

And, boy do they get more.

If we got rid of the Queen, how would all people get their "fantasy fixes"?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:05 PM

This business about "I want to be a citizen not a subject" really is a bit of a bore. If you're British,you're a British Citizen. The fact that the country has a hereditary monarchy is irrelevant. If the monarchy were to be abolished tomorrow they'd still be citizens - and if the monarchy were restored the next day, they'd still be citizens.

The same applies to Australians and Canadians and so forth. All citizens of their respective countries.

There are arguments for dispensing with the hereditary monarchy - but stuff about citizens and subjects are completely irrelevant and just get in the way of any sensible discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:23 PM

"A million Brits stood in the rain and wind. Fifty-nine million Brits did not."

Ah so you accept the same argument as being equally indicative with regard to the anti-war protesters do you Steve?

"Well, according to the ever-reliable wikipedia: "Only the Queen officially receives direct funding from the Civil List. The Queen's consort (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh) receives £359,000 per year. The Queen, as head of state, receives £7,900,000 from the Civil List to defray some of the official expenditure of the monarchy."

Er, isn't this funded by the Treasury?"

It WAS funded by the Treasury - a Treasury that receives £242million from "The Crown Estate"; "The Duchy of Lancaster" & "The Duchy of Cornwall" now tell me how much you contributed through your taxes to the £7.9million??

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:40 PM

And what exactly has Her Maj ever done to earn my respect?
As I said Steve, no-one has to bow.
People who do, do it because they want to.
You are free not to Steve, so what is your point?
Would you make it an offence to show respect to the Queen?

You are a sad man Steve.
To favour a republic is a perfectly respectable view, but you are obsessed.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:41 PM

"Treasury that receives £242million from "The Crown Estate..."

Really? Are you saying that they pay taxes? More taxes than the receive in "income" from the public coffers?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:45 PM

No I do not. I take the manifestation of the point as made by Keith to be the mark of a double standard. Keith may well have opposed the invasion of Iraq - how would I know - but people just like Keith would have taken the one-million-out vs. 59 million stay-at-homes as evidence that we wanted that war. That's all. Anyone wishing to take the one million on the banks of the Thames (police estimate: 50,000 ;-))as a sure sign that the whole nation wants the monarchy had better remember Red Robbo and his show-of-hands ballots in the 70s...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:46 PM

That was to Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 05:59 PM

Well, it's very nice of the Crown to contribute £242 million to the Treasury. But the Crown Estate, and all the other royal holdings, belong to the nation, if you care to go back far enough. They were all stolen from the ordinary people of this country by the ancestors of those who hold them now, and are now used, landlordistically, to further fleece the people they were stolen from. Tell us what proportion of the total income of the Crown Estate et al. £242 million is. That would be quite revealing - and quite small. But you'll never be able to find out. Ask yourself why. Then calculate what the take would be if the Crown Estate et al. were fairly divided among ordinary, hard-working, honest, tax-paying people who couldn't, or wouldn't, afford armies of accountants to minimise the tax take of the state. Why, we could probably pay off all of Spain's debts!

Any man who is sad because he disagrees with you is, indeed, a very happy man, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 06:26 PM

Well said, Tunesmith. Those who measure the popularity of the royals by the numbers of royalty-supporting tabloids peddled had better remember that tabloid sales also crucially depend on the amounts of naked dolly-bird titties and naked dolly-bird arses they can legally get away with portraying, as well as the number of celebrity sex scandals they can stuff their pages with. Slagging off disabled benefits claimants and the housing benefit claimant victims of avaricious London landlords also sell well. Not to speak of veiled, or not so veiled, calls to send immigrants, especially black ones, "back to where they came from" (though sending black people back to Canning Town would seem to be slightly pointless...). Oh yes, support of the royals fits very well indeed with all these other oh-so-desirable tabloid policies! Pile 'em high 'n' sell 'em cheap!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 06:32 PM

So, let me try to understand. The Queen owns everything, including the land I am typing from (if I don't pay my rent (taxes) she takes it back). She pays a shitload to the treasury and she gets little back in comparison according to posts above. She brokers contacts all over the world among royalty and elite and politicians. She gets shit done. She directs the military of Britain and other countries in support of Brit companies who dominate the world's oil and food supplies.

Seems to me... I wouldn't fuck with the "Royals". I think I would wave the flag.... and pay my taxes.

Now, is all my conjecture a load of shit? Well, I watched The Jubilee celebrations. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, eh what? Any of you detractors getting a flypast by the ROYAL Air Force? God save YOUR Queen if you don't. Piss and moan all you want... it ain't gonna change the way the world works. She owns your ass and yer lucky she does.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 06:37 PM

Pass around your smoke, old chap. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:32 PM

While you pass gas?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:35 PM

From the lower end only, old bean, unlike your good self. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 07:56 PM

""... and of course nothing can be done about it except wring our hands and weep crocodile tears...""

O.K. Will, let's assume that you are right.

When we strip the Monarchy of all their property, land and money, sell it and distribute the proceeds equally among the poor, two questions arise.

1. What will you spend your five quid on?

2. How will all the newly unemployed ex workers of the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estates avoid starvation?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:07 PM

""Without being rude, are you in a position to tell the people that live in the UK, pay part their portion of taxable income to the monarchy, who read about them every day, are taught about them in school, see them on TV virtually every day, in the papers every day, are familiar with their history both ancient and modern, hear them expound their views, follow their careers, their relationships, visit their homes, live amongst 1500 years of history that includes much strife and war, and are directly linked to that history?""

Do you know, I rather think that the answer to your question is YES! HE IS!

The reason being that he is observing the situation much more objectively than any Anti-Monarchist Brit who starts from a position of envy and inverted snobbery.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:14 PM

""Many people in the UK might disagree about the worth of the Royal Family, have various opinions about whether they should be paid for by taxes, land ownership etc, but every opinion is as valid as the next whether you like (or understand) the debate or not.""

And one or two of those people might one day, if hit sufficiently hard on the head, be able to absorb the fact that they are not paid for by taxes, but put much more tax revenue into the economy than (for reasons of cash flow and National ownership of most of the property supposed by the ignorant to be owned by them) they receive from it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: gnu
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:16 PM

God save The Queen and all who sail with her. The rest of you can find jobs in China. Don't forgrt to write home.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:24 PM

""Why, there was another one on only last night about "William at 30" or something which was about as buttock-clenching as you could wish for (at least, the five-minute chunk of it that I actually saw was).""

I had wondered how anybody spouting such asinine drivel could possibly be so totally ignorant of anything factual regarding the topic.

Now I begin to understand. The sum total of your knowledge of the Monarchy is based in five minute chunks before you change channels or switch off your TV.

Terrific!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:33 PM

Well, Don, I suppose that, instead of putting them in prison, you could have harnessed the talents of the Kray twins and generated even more revenue. I find it somewhat odd that the generation of revenue is, somehow, seen as justification for the existence of this anachronistic bunch of parasites. We could set up a massive nationalised network of prostitution and generate a ton of revenue. I'm confident that a programme of public hangings would also yield a good few quid for the Treasury, given reasonable ticket prices. The justification for the continued existence of the royals by virtue of their money-making prowess is, er, somewhat amoral, eh, Don? A bit on the expedient side, shall we say?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:33 PM

newly unemployed workers in cornwall could decide to run the posh jam business themselves, so cutting out the middlemen. or just do what the rest of those of us who have known unemployment do.....sign on and try to have a laugh while doing it. (again) are sometime unemployed, sometimes single old hippies and young idealists what make this country good? they are certainly a lot more use than city thieves, and inbred nice-but-dim types. jarvis cocker or prince andrew? eliza carthy or diana sloan? jo brand or anne widdecombe? john cooper clarke or anyone?
joe strummer or paul mccartney? john martyn or gideon osborne?(yes,i realize this is a rather bizarre choice, but you get my point.....)my son (who is great) and prince william (same age and really useless) who is a human...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:36 PM

""
"Treasury that receives £242million from "The Crown Estate..."

Really? Are you saying that they pay taxes? More taxes than the receive in "income" from the public coffers? ""

Yes Gnu, that is exactly what he is saying and it is true.

Moreover, the queen herself is legally exempt from taxation and makes her payment voluntarily.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,petecockermouth
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:40 PM

(obviously) there is nothing special or different about folk born into the royal family-they are just (very fortunate) people like the rest of us. except not quite as bright.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:40 PM

Ah, that was aimed at Don's penultimate post (I wish!), not the last one. Apropos of my watching a five-minute chunk of royal fluff on the telly, it was more than enough to see clearly enough what was going on. There wasn't actually much, er, depth there, shall we say. Actually, I think that most people who saw it would consider that watching as much as five minutes of it is worthy of a medal.   


Did you see the prog, Don? You're going to say yes, aren't you? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:44 PM

Moreover, the queen herself is legally exempt from taxation and makes her payment voluntarily.

Gosh, she's our hero then, innit! The richest woman in the world has a choice as to whether she pays her tax or not, and Don makes a virtue of it! Bwahahahaha!

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 08:58 PM

""That's all. Anyone wishing to take the one million on the banks of the Thames (police estimate: 50,000 ;-))as a sure sign that the whole nation wants the monarchy had better remember Red Robbo and his show-of-hands ballots in the 70s...""

Remember mister that the TV audience for the Thames jubilee celebrations was estimated at over One Billion (one in six, or 16.7% of the world's population).

The tribute on Friday by Prince Charles pulled in 7.27 million viewers
The "William at 30" documentary you so despise pulled 6.1 million
The Concert 17 million.

You would seem to be underestimating more than somewhat. What a surprise!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 09:10 PM

""(yes,i realize this is a rather bizarre choice, but you get my point.....)my son (who is great) and prince william (same age and really useless) who is a human...""

Do you really think your son would have the aptitude or the talent to replace that useless human....(what?) over the mountains of Snowdonia in a Sea King rescue helicopter in winter with the cloud base at 400 feet, preserving the lives of good strapping "salt of the Earth" working types who haven't the sense to stay away in bad weather?

I don't think so!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jun 12 - 11:45 PM

Stev.
(police estimate: 50,000 ;-))

Queen's Diamond Jubilee Thames pageant: A very British way to honour Her Majesty
Daily Mailý - 6 days agoBBC News - Diamond Jubilee Thames Pageant cheered by crowdswww.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18312403Cached

3 Jun 2012 – More than one million rain-soaked people have watched the Queen's 1000-boat Diamond Jubilee pageant weave its way along the Thames, ...
A Million Line The Thames For Queen's Pageant - Yahoo! News UKuk.news.yahoo.com/thames-set-host-jubilee-river-pageant-00374799...Cached

3 Jun 2012 – 'A Million Line The Thames For Queen's Pageant' on Yahoo! ... Some 1.2 million people gathered in central London to watch the pageant and ...
Anglia afloat at the Thames Pageant | Anglia - ITV Newswww.itv.com/news/anglia/2012.../anglia-afloat-at-the-thames-pageant...Cached

6 days ago – Read the latest Anglia stories, Anglia afloat at the Thames Pageant on ... It's estimated 1.25 million people watched the huge flotilla sail down ...
More than one million people expected to line the Thames today For ...www.people.co.uk/.../more-than-one-million-people-expected-to-line...Cached

►► news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16240368
2 Jun 2012
Some 1.2 million people gathered in central London to watch the pageant and cheer ...

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 12:46 AM

"Are you saying that they pay taxes? More taxes than the receive in "income" from the public coffers?"

All members of the Royal Family pay tax.

As to your other question is 242 a bigger number than 7.9 - Quite simple really and even easier to look up and get confirmed by some pretty authorative sources. None-the-less when the next discussion about the British Royal Family comes up we will get the same old "Myths" being trotted out.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 05:50 AM

Good job HM doesn't come across as repugnant as some of her detractors eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 06:11 AM

Well, Don, I turned the telly on for a little while and saw the inane bobbing up and down to the Sailor's Hornpipe, so I suppose I get counted too. And I watched the concert. Neither of those viewing experiences marks me out as a royalist, I assure you, and I doubt that I'm alone.

Yes, 242 is bigger than 7.9 (though your figure should be 32, not 7.9, but we'll let that pass for now). But the thing is that it's all our money anyway. The royals, with their 242 million, are giving us back what is already ours. Break up those vast estates and give the land to thousands of hard-working, honest individuals who don't employ massed ranks of top accountants and you'd multiply that tax take of 242 million by a good few times, I reckon. Unless you trust the royal playboys and girls over the ordinary working people of the country, of course. I know who I trust more.

HM "doesn't come across as repugnant" simply because she doesn't come across as anything at all. Or, at best, a scarcely smiling, hand-waving, white-gloved old doll.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:10 AM

don - i'm trying to point out that my son, william, you me or anyone else really are just people doing the best we can with what we have. i am sure my son would not be able to fly a helicopter as he's not had the training (he could manage the smiling and waving bits though) but would william have the ability to get by on £65 a week and still be a positive and resourceful guy, making every effort to find another job and making his own music while volunteering in the community. nor could william teach him anything about music (he worked for years in record shops) - probably we would differ about who is more useful to society as a whole. but i would take music as far more beneficial than monarchy or military.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Will Fly
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:24 AM

Don - in response to your post of a day or two ago, in which you wrote:

O.K. Will, let's assume that you are right.

When we strip the Monarchy of all their property, land and money, sell it and distribute the proceeds equally among the poor, two questions arise.

1. What will you spend your five quid on?

2. How will all the newly unemployed ex workers of the Duchy of Cornwall and the Crown Estates avoid starvation?

Don T.

This was in response to my retort to Bonzo, which went as follows:

Bonzo: The poor are out there, we feel sorry for them, but there it is.

Me: ... and of course nothing can be done about it except wring our hands and weep crocodile tears...

You obviously missed what I had written in an earlier post:

I'm with Richard [Bridge] in that a hereditary head of state, such as we have now, seems a reasonable figurehead to represent the country.

You wrongly conflated my response to Bonzo with some of the anti-monarchical, strip-the-monarchy-of its riches posts in this thread. I was merely making the point, in my riposte to Bonzo's vapid sentences, that - given the will and the humanity and the commitment - some of the inequities in our society can be changed. I'm not suggesting that we parcel out Royal property to the population as a whole. BUT - if we have the wit and the will and the intelligence and the necessary "go" to, say, wage wars in places like Iraq and Aghanistan - if we also have similar intelligence and resources for other projects which (for example) bring work to people without work - then it's possible. What's needed is the motivation and an underlying assumption that it's worth doing.

Here's a random example - probably impractical but worth a second's thought: How about giving tax incentives to firms who employ call centre staff in this country rather than places like India, thus giving work to our people and supporting a local service?

I'm not an anti-monarchist but - given the growing imbalances in our society - I would personally prefer expenditure on, say, the scale of the Swedish monarchy. Anything is possible given the will.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 08:25 AM

Wonderful photos of Jubilee events in the Telegraph magazine this weekend.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Musket
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 09:58 AM

Problem is Will, if the balance sheet for our Monarchy was the same for the Swedish Monarchy, there'd be a hell of a lot less money available for the social programs we need money for.

In times of perceived hardship, it is obvious to look for scapegoats. The growing imbalances won't be alleviated by killing the goose that lays golden eggs, (or diamond eggs as of now.)

The history of serfdom and Barons leading to today's constitutional Monarchy is an interesting one and contains much that would be abhorrent now. But we are where we are, and the wit, will and intelligence you refer to would keep this institution as a net asset.

You are not an anti monarchist, and I am not a monarchist, but on this particular debate, we need to be realists.

Subject: RE: BS: Wonderful Jubilee celebrations
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jun 12 - 10:22 AM

""probably we would differ about who is more useful to society as a whole. but i would take music as far more beneficial than monarchy or military.""

You may be right, but I'd hate to tell a casualty 2000 feet up Capel Curig that I was sending out a guitarist and a DJ to rescue him.

Unlike the detractors on this thread, I am not belittling anybody, least of all your son. I am simply trying to point out the malicious fallacy and myth, perpetrated by idiots who think that:

1. Rich=Stupid
2. Privileged=Inbred
3. Tory=Posh, avaricious and dishonest.

The answers or course are:

1. There are stupid people who are poor, and there are rich people who are highly intelligent.
2. The Royal family are not inbred, and never have been. They live under the same cultural and legal restrictions as the rest of us. The gene pool of aristocratic families throughout Europe and beyond is amply large enough for strong genetic lines and there have been insertions of new genes with various commoner marriages.
3. This is the most stupid assertion of all. It is a claim that over one third of this country's voters are Posh, avaricious and dishonest.

These fallacies amount to proof that those who diseminate them should be considered too stupid to be qualified to vote.

Don T.