Kaimani Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 Exactly - so much for "We are all in it together" when Cameron said 'we' they meant the millionaires in their own little club. just so happened he was on TV and people thought he was talking to everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rah Rah Rah Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 I think the royal family is a bore, and a waste of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 The Royal Family are rich in their own right through owning land eg Charles' income derives almost entirely from the Duchy of Cornwall. Yes they've received much of that land through being Royal, but then the Duke of Westminster, who is I believe the biggest land owner in the UK has in herited his land and income with his title just the same. The Civil List covers the Queen's expenses for carrying out Royal duties. She covered 388 Royal engagements last year which isn't bad for an 85 year old. In addition she personally deals with state papers every day of her life, and has many other commitments. If this sounds like I am a monarchist, I'm not, but in effect if you stop the civil list payments the Queen would cease to have a job, but still have pots of land and cash. Whether it's right for the aristocracy to own land is another argument entirely and can always be sorted out with a revolution, just ask the French and Russians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 The Royal Family are rich in their own right through owning land eg Charles' income derives almost entirely from the Duchy of Cornwall. Yes they've received much of that land through being Royal, but then the Duke of Westminster, who is I believe the biggest land owner in the UK has in herited his land and income with his title just the same. The Civil List covers the Queen's expenses for carrying out Royal duties. She covered 388 Royal engagements last year which isn't bad for an 85 year old. In addition she personally deals with state papers every day of her life, and has many other commitments. If this sounds like I am a monarchist, I'm not, but in effect if you stop the civil list payments the Queen would cease to have a job, but still have pots of land and cash. Whether it's right for the aristocracy to own land is another argument entirely and can always be sorted out with a revolution, just ask the French and Russians. Exactly - all the land should belong to the people. They are, in fact, a set of very rich squatters and we are daft enough to allow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superblade1! Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Isn't it just jealosy that they have more money than you? Certain people are always going to have more money than others. Why even bother debating it when it will never change? The Queen and the Royal Family work very hard for our country and deserve to be respected. Anyway, in theory, the civil list payments are made because the monarchy gave up revenues from the Crown Estate (which profit today is £210.7 million per year) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Surely, they don't need to be rich ... any more than others need to be poor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Surely, they don't need to be rich ... any more than others need to be poor? The poor don't need to be poor, the rich need them to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 The poor don't need to be poor, the rich need them to be. Do you [not you specifically] think that if there weren't rich people, there wouldn't be poor people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 There's no need to keep the poor poor. If you run out, you can always import some more. Just keep them coming and there will be no shortage of cheap labour. Or labour voters. (Wasn't that a Labour policy which was leaked about a year ago?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Do you [not you specifically] think that if there weren't rich people, there wouldn't be poor people? I think there's enough to go round comfortably, if people weren't so greedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.