Majestic Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 Oh fgs! You silly, silly child. Grow up! And if you don't want your parent's legacy, make sure you tell them in good time so that they can arrange to leave it someone who'll appreciate it. WOW. Just because your losing the argument, no need for RUDENESS. I am NOT a child anyhow! Explain why Charles should own anything, go on, bet you cannot. His achievements are ZERO....NIL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 WOW. Just because your losing the argument, no need for RUDENESS. I am NOT a child anyhow! Explain why Charles should own anything, go on, bet you cannot. His achievements are ZERO....NIL! why shouldn't he own things? his achievement will come when the queen passes away, then he will be king and, quite rightly, own everything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 why shouldn't he own things? his achievement will come when the queen passes away, then he will be king and, quite rightly, own everything You must be on the wind up!:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 WOW. Just because your losing the argument, no need for RUDENESS. I am NOT a child anyhow! Explain why Charles should own anything, go on, bet you cannot. His achievements are ZERO....NIL! You may not be a child, but you have childish ideas. I wasn't being rude, just stating a fact. I'm not even arguing, let alone losing it In good old Sheffield parlance your ideas are too daft to laugh at. It's irrelevant whether or not you think Bill Gates' or Mick Jagger's kids deserve to inherit from their parents, or that Russian guy's kids. The one who owns Chelsea and half the world because his Government gave him the plebs property instead of returning to the people. They will do, who else should? Or do you want to take their money away as well because they've done nothing to earn it? Is it ok for SIR Paul McCartneys kids to inherit his money, because he was born a commoner? Or is it just people you don't think are worthy, that are the targets of your class warfare? I don't mind Charles Windsor being the King, I rather look forward to it. He's a cultured, educated, caring person, who has done a lot for disadvantaged young people via the Prince's Trust and is a green campaigner and an organic farmer. What achievements do you have to make you worthy of inheriting from your parents? Very few, I'd hazard a guess. Are you intending to give your money to the Government rather than your own children? Very worthy of you, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 You may not be a child, but you have childish ideas. I wasn't being rude, just stating a fact. I'm not even arguing, let alone losing it In good old Sheffield parlance your ideas are too daft to laugh at. It's irrelevant whether or not you think Bill Gates' or Mick Jagger's kids deserve to inherit from their parents, or that Russian guy's kids. The one who owns Chelsea and half the world because his Government gave him the plebs property instead of returning to the people. They will do, who else should? Or do you want to take their money away as well because they've done nothing to earn it? Is it ok for SIR Paul McCartneys kids to inherit his money, because he was born a commoner? Or is it just people you don't think are worthy, that are the targets of your class warfare? I don't mind Charles Windsor being the King, I rather look forward to it. He's a cultured, educated, caring person, who has done a lot for disadvantagedyoung people via the Prince's Trust and is a green campaigner and an organic farmer. What achievements do you have to make you worthy of inheriting from your parents? Very few, I'd hazard a guess. Are you intending to give your money to the Government rather than your own children? Very worthy of you, I think. Awwww....don't give me that. I have all the explanation that I require now. You are a Royalist! No point in my continuing about injustice as Royalists are illogical! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Awwww....don't give me that. I have all the explanation that I require now. You are a Royalist! No point in my continuing about injustice as Royalists are illogical!hahahahaha! What about my comments about the other terribly terribly rich people? Don't you have anything to say about them and their no-hope children? Or are you just obsessed with Royalty and the landed gentry? You should go and live in China or Russia. Now, where's the pic of the big fish being landed that the late lamented viking always used to post ... * wonders what to bait the next hook with ... * You have no accomplishments that make you worthy to inherit anything, do you? You can admit it to us, we're not judgmental people here. There's no shame in being envious of the people that have it all when you have nothing, not even a talent to exploit. Not everyone can achieve success in life. Face it, you're one of the also-rans, who didn't even have the good fortune to be born to outstanding parents. Tha were born wi'nowt and tha'll dee wi'nowt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 hahahahaha! What about my comments about the other terribly terribly rich people? Don't you have anything to say about them and their no-hope children? Or are you just obsessed with Royalty and the landed gentry? You should go and live in China or Russia. Now, where's the pic of the big fish being landed that the late lamented viking always used to post ... * wonders what to bait the next hook with ... * You have no accomplishments that make you worthy to inherit anything, do you? You can admit it to us, we're not judgmental people here. There's no shame in being envious of the people that have it all when you have nothing, not even a talent to exploit. Not everyone can achieve success in life. Face it, you're one of the also-rans, who didn't even have the good fortune to be born to outstanding parents. Tha were born wi'nowt and tha'll dee wi'nowt You are so wrong in your wild accusations and assumptions. I feel that I have stirred up the Royalist illogical devil within you and you react with such venom because you resent the fact that I have done that with such ease.:hihi::cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 But if it is inherited wealth from previous generations, the children have not earned it and so it should NOT legally belong to them. They have not ACHIEVED it, like Prince Charles? His achievements are zero! Why should he own anything? Oh fgs! You silly, silly child. Grow up! And if you don't want your parent's legacy, make sure you tell them in good time so that they can arrange to leave it someone who'll appreciate it. I was born naked (though covered in hair) and without a silver spoon in my mouth. My parents didn't have much money and there was nothing to inherit. My son was born naked, also without a silver spoon in his mouth, but when I die he (or his children) will inherit everything I (if I'm #2 to go) or my wife can leave them. Everything I own I worked for. I don't see why I should be required to donate it to the state or to somebody who thinks the world owes her/him a living. I really don't give a damn how much Prince Charles has got. - I have (from time to time) been interested in him (We're pretty much the same age and we both got in a deal of sh[one]t for drinking Cherry Brandy when we were 13 but other than that we have little in common.) I do care about my kids and my grand-children. If you want a society where there is no wealth, then presumably you are prepared to accept a society where there is no ambition. Wealth isn't always money. I don't always work for money, but I never work for nothing. (Working Pro Bono is not the same as working for nothing.) Should we aspire to a society where everybody is equal? Should we strive for a society where everybody is paid the same; where nobody is wealthy and nobody is poor? That's one option, I suppose. A couple of days ago, in another thread, I wrote about a lady who was offered a house move (15 miles away) and a job. She declined the offer. That's her choice - she will still get her benefits - and although I wasn't amused, that doesn't matter either. If she can do that (and she can) then should everybody do that? I met a highly-skilled, highly-paid person yesterday. (Actually, I'd met him a week earlier when we were talking about what he was going to do to me.) - Yesterday I met him and he was wearing a mask (but he's not the Lone Ranger.) He had a busy day yesterday. He had 'office hours' from 08:30 to 12:00, then he drove to another town 45 miles away and started surgery. He finished on me at about 17:00 and called in to see me before he went home (45 miles back again) at 19:00. Long day. If he was like the lady who couldn't be bothered to take a job, wasn't prepared to work for a living and certainly wasn'teven prepared to travel 15 miles, I would have been poorly placed. I would still be waiting (but the guy he worked on first would be in a box.) - Provided somebody could be bothered to make the box. When people talk about 'equality' it seldom seems to mean moving the standards to the highest level; indeed, it usually means moving them to the lowest. If you want a society where everybody is equal, where everybody is paid the same, where nobody is allowed to be richer or poorer than anybody else, how are you going to run it? If an individual can leave school at 16, practically unable to read and write and can go into a job which pays the same as every other job, why should somebody else bother to stay on at school (and work hard) to get 'A' levels, go to university (and work hard) to get a medical degree, do Specialty training (and work very long hours) and then work for the same pay as a florist? (I've nothing against florists per se and I've no doubt most of them can both read and write - but although florist is easier to spell, I think I'm still glad I opted to have a cardiologist work on me.) In an 'everybody is equal' world there might not have been one of those available. The florist would've been able to supply flowers, though, so it would've been OK in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 If you start your politics of envy strategy with Capello and work your way through the Premier League footballers and their WAGS that'd be a good start, why not? Professional Footballers and their wives are working class people in the main. They are using their talents to obtain as much brass as they can. If people are daft enough to give it to them, they are daft enough to take it. ( to use another old Sheffieldism (word I just made up)). In reality it is only capitalism that has caused our woes' 'The running dogs of the capitalist Hyena', I always loved that quote from Chairman Mao, when he talked about the West. By God there are many of them on here today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epiphany Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 To all the parents planning to pass on their wealth to their children - I trust you will means assess them, without bias, to ensure they actually need the free handout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.