Home › Forums › Chat Forum › Crossrail to be called "Elizabeth Line" ffs
- This topic has 147 replies, 57 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by grum.
-
Crossrail to be called "Elizabeth Line" ffs
-
meftyFree Member
while I wouldn’t argue with the desirability of reform to how the Head of State gets remunerated
It was in the last parliament, it is now linked to the income of the Crown Estate at a set percentage, the remainder of the income goes to the public purse. We could have a bicycling monarch like the Dutch, the only problem being they are even more expensive and have greater personal wealth.
JunkyardFree MemberI think you may have cherry picked the most expensive royal household in Europe- who only recently overtook ours- to overstate your point.
I am also not sure they are actually personally wealthier than ours. Not sure it matters as we can all agree they are al very very wealthy
SaxonRiderFree MemberAs for the actors. I dont think they deserve what they get paid but the critical difference is they get it due to their own talents rather than because who their mum and dad are.
Even if some of the children listed here[/url] have gone on to do things in their own right, I am pretty sure that their starts were made significantly easier on the basis of who their parent(s) were.
And again, whereas all these people are pretty free to make good and bad choices with their wealth, I would argue that our royalty is not. At least not in the same way. So yes, the queen’s net worth may be many many millions, but what does that even mean? She still has to live within some very strict parameters that the rest of us are free from.
Again, it may not be a perfect system, but I just don’t think the imbalance is as gross as you’re suggesting.
ransosFree MemberEven if some of the children listed here have gone on to do things in their own right, I am pretty sure that their starts were made significantly easier on the basis of who their parent(s) were.
Sure, but if you’re arguing for a meritocracy, are you in favour of 100% inheritance tax?
She still has to live within some very strict parameters that the rest of us are free from.
Again, no-one is forcing her to be Queen.
SaxonRiderFree MemberAgain, no-one is forcing her to be Queen.
She comes from a family that has been dedicated to their national duty for generations. When King Edward VIII abdicated, he was seen as a disgrace and sent into exile.
It may not be something we post-moderns think that highly of, but it is still a guiding principle to some.
retro83Free Membergrum – Member
Here you go retro83.
Wow that’s a pretty impressive disparity 😯
Considering that was just before the Olympics, hopefully there is less of a difference now, but I can’t find any data. All the articles seem to be referencing that same 2011 study.
onewheelgoodFull MemberDo all you royalists have so little imagination?
It’s an example, ffs. If we had a presidential election tomorrow, who do you think would be standing? And who would get elected? And exactly how would that make you personally better off?
I’m not a massive fan of royalty, but I really don’t see that the alternatives are any more appealing. It’s also true that the British Royal Family(TM) attracts a reasonable proportion of our tourist business – I can’t see a president doing that, whoever they were.
grumFree MemberHow about 0% inheritance tax? much better idea all round
Much better idea for the already wealthy.
Sure, but if you’re arguing for a meritocracy, are you in favour of 100% inheritance tax?
It would be shit for me personally but I think it’s the only way to have a true meritocracy.
ahwilesFree Memberransos – Member
Sure, but if you’re arguing for a meritocracy, are you in favour of 100% inheritance tax?
yeah, why not?
Why should my great grandchildren have an easy life of privilege and influence? just because i’m going to win £50million on the lottery?
JunkyardFree MemberI am pretty sure that their starts were made significantly easier on the basis of who their parent(s) were.
Do i really have to say that you pointing out multiple wrongs wont make the queen suddenly be fair.
Twothree wrong dont make a rightwhereas all these people are pretty free to make good and bad choices with their wealth, I would argue that our royalty is not.
It really sounds terrible Inheriting millions[billions of assets] must be why so many of them turn their back on it and embrace Pulp and live like the common people surviving only on their own merits/abilities.
So yes, the queen’s net worth may be many many millions, but what does that even mean?
It means she is very wealthy, somewhat privileged and lives like, prepare yourself for this, like a QUeen- What is the point of that “question?”
She still has to live within some very strict parameters that the rest of us are free from.
IIRC she hates this fact bitterly and wishes to give it all up for a simpler normal life. the proof being that she has done this 😕
Again, it may not be a perfect system, but I just don’t think the imbalance is as gross as you’re suggesting.
AYe your right its not gross[ I say unfair BTW] in the 21 st century to have hereditary monarch with multiple places and castles reigning over an entire nation.
ransosFree MemberShe comes from a family that has been dedicated to their national duty for generations.
She’s not the only person who works because of a sense of duty. The difference is that other people do it to put food on the table.
It’s an example, ffs. If we had a presidential election tomorrow, who do you think would be standing? And who would get elected? And exactly how would that make you personally better off?
It was an extreme example, and you know it. Other options are available, including employing one person to cut ribbons.
How about 0% inheritance tax? much better idea all round
If you’re not in favour of meritocracy, sure.
ransosFree MemberIt’s also true that the British Royal Family(TM) attracts a reasonable proportion of our tourist business
Versaille annual visitors: 8 million
UK royal palaces: 2.6 millionhttp://www.royalcollection.org.uk/sites/default/files/Annual%20Report%2020112012.pdf
nickcFull Memberit may as well be a monarchy, but to be honest it should be much reduced,
Monarch, immediate family and Next in Line, on the public purse, the rest can **** right off.
konabunnyFree MemberIHN – Member
I’m going to put this on my ‘essentially inconsequential things that people give far too much of f%£& about’ list.I’m going to put your inconsequential post moaning about my moany inconsequential post on my “things not evidencing any self-awareness by the author”.
Btw Crossrail is not just about reducing travel time – it’s also about adding capacity. At the moment practically all public transport in and through London is far over capacity.
What are you chippy northerners whining about anyway? You don’t want public transport, you’re constantly whining about how awful it is when you visit London, how parking is too expensive and how you like making progress in your Audi estates between your office parks and your £100,000 palaces.
konabunnyFree MemberI just find it ironic that we malign a pretty well-functioning political system for certain imperfections, when some of those same perceived imperfections are practically celebrated in other areas of society.
The government isn’t giving Jennifer Aniston free money. If some shampoo company wants to give her money and the Daily Mail wants to print her picture – it’s nothing to do with me. It’s a pretty big difference to the Royal Family.
meftyFree MemberI think you may have cherry picked the most expensive royal household in Europe- who only recently overtook ours- to overstate your point.
No I chose the one from a country where I have lived so have a reasonable idea of their relative visibility – ours is much more visible. I think they have been more expensive for some time I have been monitored it abit, but don’t forget that cost have to be borne by a much smaller country.
They are very wealthy, they have a very significant shareholding in Shell.
highlandmanFree MemberThe sooner we get a mega-tsunami that engulfs the whole greed obsessed, self-important, resource-grabbing cess pit that is London and the SE the better.
It’s also worth noting that our generous gift of cash to the royal household is only a part of the story- we also pay for their security. pay for significant transport and other facilities to be made available to them from the policed and armed forces budgets.
In a country where child poverty is commonplace and every town has a food bank, why are we spunking public money and resources on one of the richest families in Europe? They should hang heads in shame and leave quietly.
Thank you and good night.
JunkyardFree MemberNo I chose the one from a country where I have lived
In that case you got lucky – have to say the amount surprised me- but Spain is a 1/4 of us as another example. No idea how wealthy the Spanish ones are but I imagine it has , historically and eternally, been very difficult to find a poor monarch/ royal household.
SaxonRiderFree MemberNo idea how wealthy the Spanish ones are but I imagine it has , historically and eternally, been very difficult to find a poor monarch/ royal household.
You’ve go to read more Dostoyevsky. 😉
konabunnyFree MemberHow much do the French, Russian, Swiss, Austrian and Irish royal families cost their taxpayers?
JunkyardFree MemberAt the moment practically all public transport in and through London is far over capacity.
Up north not one commuter train anywhere is full to capacity and we have no traffic jams as anyone trying to enter a “Northern powerhouse” will confirm.
perchypantherFree MemberI imagine it has , historically and eternally, been very difficult to find a poor monarch
Didn’t even have a fireplace……
SaxonRiderFree MemberHow much do the French, Russian, Swiss, Austrian and Irish royal families cost their taxpayers?
Just a guess, but about the same as their presidents/chancellors? Or, in the case of the completely debauched Russian presidency*, nowhere near as much.
*A scenario that is unlikely according to our system.
kimbersFull Memberover 300 homeless people sleeping in london last night
Buckingham palace has over 750 rooms of which 250 are bedrooms…..
konabunnyFree MemberJust a guess, but about the same as their presidents/chancellors?
The answer is of course zero because they disestablished their royal families with various degrees of bloodiness.
I don’t know why you keep banging on about countries in which the head of state plays a role in the executive. I don’t see anyone suggesting the UK should adopt a presidential system of government instead of a parliamentary democracy with a formal head of state – of which there are numerous examples.
ransosFree MemberI don’t see anyone suggesting the UK should adopt a presidential system of government instead of a parliamentary democracy with a formal head of state – of which there are numerous examples.
I suggested earlier that there is a range of options, from supreme Commander-in-Chief, through to cutter-of-ribbons.
jambalayaFree MemberHow much do the French, Russian, Swiss, Austrian and Irish royal families cost their taxpayers?
No one is visiting France to see Hollande who by the way spent €500,000 per anum ln keeping his girlfriend in the Elysee whilst nipping out on a scotter to shaft the mistress
The Royal Family bring in a nially larger amountnof revenue from both Tourism and business as well as anchoring the Commonwealth and the Nation. Even the Australians voted to keep the British Monarchy
Going back to earlier point about what London cost us during the crises
Royal Bank of Scotland (Edniburgh)
Northern Rock (Newcastle)
Halifax – Bank of Scotland (Lloyds foolishly coerced into buying it)
Bradford and Bingley
Alliance and LeicesterI appreciate the Labour government and the regulator where based in London.
ransosFree MemberThe Royal Family bring in a nially larger amountnof revenue from both Tourism and business as well as anchoring the Commonwealth and the Nation. Even the Australians voted to keep the British Monarchy
Versaille visitor numbers dwarf those to our royal palaces. I posted the link upthread.
If you think Prince Andrew prostituting himself with despots is a worthwhile exercise, I suspect you’re in a small minority.
JunkyardFree MemberThe Royal Family bring in a nially larger amountnof revenue from both Tourism and business as well as anchoring the Commonwealth and the Nation.
SOURCE for the jambyfact please.
Has anyone ever actually bothered to a study to see tourism numbers for when the queen is her and when she is not- its seems unlikely they are coming just on the off chance they get to meet her. Has anyone actually asked – my google was fruitless.Clearly jamby is exempt from the request for facts.
ransosFree MemberClearly jamby is exempt from the request for facts.
One fact for you: people still flock to a Royal Palace not occupied by Royalty since 1789.
projectFree MemberWhos this elizabeth you all speak of, some elderley old dear , never worked, never been ill,and needed the nhs, and living in a huge house paid for by the public think social housing no bedroom tax and living on state benefits, then gets londons new train set named after her.
“
Thety should have called the new line “singletrack” even though its doubled.grumFree MemberImagine what a worldwide spectacle we’d create with a French-style revolution? The TV exposure would be worth billions and tourists would come flocking in.
chrismacFull MemberImagine what a worldwide spectacle we’d create with a French-style revolution? The TV exposure would be worth billions and tourists would come flocking in.
Indeed, I would pay good money to watch
The topic ‘Crossrail to be called "Elizabeth Line" ffs’ is closed to new replies.