Jump to content

Buckingham palace to get 369m revamp


blackbird
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Waste of space the money could be spent on hospitals and the homeless

War veterans got nowhere to live having there money questioned when it comes to benefits for them

Bloody disgrace that these royalty lot are sponging of the tax payer

Yeah big benefit scroungers

 

You seem to hear that a lot.

 

Now I know that most people here don't believe a word that 'experts' say, but pretty much every study (apart from one made by a group who wants to abolish the monarchy) confirms that the British Royals (as a whole) are net contributors to the economy. The amount varies depending on the assumptions made, but in all studies by neutral groups, they have a contribution instead of a defecit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You seem to hear that a lot.

 

Now I know that most people here don't believe a word that 'experts' say, but pretty much every study (apart from one made by a group who wants to abolish the monarchy) confirms that the British Royals (as a whole) are net contributors to the economy. The amount varies depending on the assumptions made, but in all studies by neutral groups, they have a contribution instead of a defecit.

Very true. I think the net contribution globally is also much underestimated. The Monarchy is greatest thing the British empire still has imo. and we should ensure it remains that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A man after my own heart! 😀

It was an estimate from.a.lot of research (not done by myself) you do know her assets are around 20 billion pounds? And she is poncing hundreds of millions from the taxpayer while there are thousands of homeless children and people forced to use foodbanks? what a great example to set from a country's ruler eh? That money could house a lot of children and provide them with a hot meal every day, it's not like she actually needs it or can justify taking it with that type of wealth hanging about, I think it's immoral, selfish, greedy and disgusting
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ownership of Buckingham Palace is complicated, but it is essentially a Council House (but the Government have their finger in it and its run via the Crown Estate, so it is really a Government house, its much more complicated than that).

 

This debate will run and run as inevitably there will be many different opinions, just the same there are plenty of people who live in Council Houses that have a decent income and could easily pay for the electrics/plumbing/etc to be renewed in their Council House, but they don't, the deal generally with that sort of stuff is that the Council pays for it, just like in the case of Buckingham Palace the Government pays for it.

 

Make no mistake here, the bottom line is WE pay for it, I subsidise those who live in Council Houses and Buckingham Palace (and no doubt a lot more as well).

 

Have a nice day!

 

:good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an estimate from.a.lot of research (not done by myself) you do know her assets are around 20 billion pounds? And she is poncing hundreds of millions from the taxpayer while there are thousands of homeless children and people forced to use foodbanks? what a great example to set from a country's ruler eh? That money could house a lot of children and provide them with a hot meal every day, it's not like she actually needs it or can justify taking it with that type of wealth hanging about, I think it's immoral, selfish, greedy and disgusting

 

Why not send the children up the chimneys of the refurbed Buckingham Palace,,that way they would be warm,,could eat all the soot they wanted and best of all,,,the rest of us would hear nothing about them ever again. You may like to join them to ensure they are not let down by society,,down the chimney that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ownership of Buckingham Palace is complicated, but it is essentially a Council House (but the Government have their finger in it and its run via the Crown Estate, so it is really a Government house, its much more complicated than that).

 

This debate will run and run as inevitably there will be many different opinions, just the same there are plenty of people who live in Council Houses that have a decent income and could easily pay for the electrics/plumbing/etc to be renewed in their Council House, but they don't, the deal generally with that sort of stuff is that the Council pays for it, just like in the case of Buckingham Palace the Government pays for it.

 

Make no mistake here, the bottom line is WE pay for it, I subsidise those who live in Council Houses and Buckingham Palace (and no doubt a lot more as well).

 

Have a nice day!

 

:good:

Quite right ... I've built a great deal of social housing over the years and many of the occupants seem to have a bigger disposable income than I do...nice shiny new cars outside many, there's even one up by me with a £50K 14 plate motor home parked outside. and yet we were still employed by the local authority to put a new 7k kitchen in it.

 

Something's gone wrong somewhere.

 

Not trying to be funny but some of these anti monarchists are also supporters of a particular party advocating total public accountability of Government and Monarchy... who do they think pays for their leaders jaunts across the pond to visit the bouffanted one. ? :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an estimate from.a.lot of research (not done by myself) you do know her assets are around 20 billion pounds? And she is poncing hundreds of millions from the taxpayer while there are thousands of homeless children and people forced to use foodbanks? what a great example to set from a country's ruler eh? That money could house a lot of children and provide them with a hot meal every day, it's not like she actually needs it or can justify taking it with that type of wealth hanging about, I think it's immoral, selfish, greedy and disgusting

 

Have a look at the difference in what they get from their grant, paid for from Crown Estate assets and then see how much the treasury gets from Crown assets. The treasury gains by at least £200M each year and this figure is set to rise. Quite how this is 'poncing hundreds of millions from the taxpayer' I don't know. I'd like to know how you explain it.

 

Whether we should have an elected Head of State is another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were in one of our local Charity shops only an hour ago.

 

One occupant (mum) was on the phone (via FaceTime) to her daughter telling and showing her all the PS video games asking daughter if ******** (her son) had them.

 

Daughter, saying yes or no to each....then she says, 'Mum, please write down what you are spending so that when my loan comes through I can pay you back'

 

We had to chuckle cos all the shop occupants where privy to the conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an estimate from.a.lot of research (not done by myself) you do know her assets are around 20 billion pounds? And she is poncing hundreds of millions from the taxpayer while there are thousands of homeless children and people forced to use foodbanks? what a great example to set from a country's ruler eh? That money could house a lot of children and provide them with a hot meal every day, it's not like she actually needs it or can justify taking it with that type of wealth hanging about, I think it's immoral, selfish, greedy and disgusting

 

It was an estimate from.a.lot of research (not done by myself) you do know her assets are around 20 billion pounds? And she is poncing hundreds of millions from the taxpayer while there are thousands of homeless children and people forced to use foodbanks? what a great example to set from a country's ruler eh? That money could house a lot of children and provide them with a hot meal every day, it's not like she actually needs it or can justify taking it with that type of wealth hanging about, I think it's immoral, selfish, greedy and disgusting

Whilst I appreciate that there are a number of people who have to use foodbanks, i find it immoral selfish and greedy that a part of the population make choices that means they ponce off the rest of society without generating anything in return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh well at least I can get to shoot on the estate for free. Long may the Crown rule !!. :yes:

If it was as cut and dry as some people have said it would be to easy. The Crown Estate raises a lot of money for its own running and for other duties , the sitting parliament have there say as to how much HRH actually gets to run her house from us the tax payer, I am sure the accountants have a field day trying to sort the books out, not a bad job if you can get one especially if they charge by a percentage.

The UK becoming a republic ? it will never happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no serious problem about the public money used to repair BP , but as one of the richest people in the country at least the Queen could offer to make a contribution in a time when the country is short of money and is going to need every penny of tax the get through Brexit..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an estimate from.a.lot of research (not done by myself) you do know her assets are around 20 billion pounds? And she is poncing hundreds of millions from the taxpayer while there are thousands of homeless children and people forced to use foodbanks? what a great example to set from a country's ruler eh? That money could house a lot of children and provide them with a hot meal every day, it's not like she actually needs it or can justify taking it with that type of wealth hanging about, I think it's immoral, selfish, greedy and disgusting

I think you've mistaken me for someone who cares. Do you care enough to make a difference? Let us know how you intend to do it and how you get on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It never ceases to amaze me when people.see fit to criticise the Monarchy. "Bunch of spongers", "They cost us too much", "Money better spent on hospitals and homeless", etc, seems to be the usual cry of the ignorant and ill informed.

 

Every bit of revenue the Monarchy makes goes to the Crown Estate. In return, they get an allowance (15% from memory). The Monarchy is an institution, like the Presidency only better and with more class.

 

Sure. Ok, let's do away with them. At least we don't have them sponging off us any more, the bunch of freeloaders. So what happens then? Who heads the country? The likes of cannon on here who seem to be dead set against them? I think I'd rather stay with the status quo if it's all the same. No offence cannon, but can you honestly say that you would be prepared to live youe life in such a way that every day of your life was planned for you and you had to act in a way that meant you always thought of your country and everything it stood for before yourself. I don't know you from Adam but I sincerely doubt you would be able to pull it off. I know I couldn't.

 

So, in short, before you start crying for their blood or heads, think about what the Monarchy, and especially our present Queen, have given to country. I think you would be very surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It never ceases to amaze me when people.see fit to criticise the Monarchy. "Bunch of spongers", "They cost us too much", "Money better spent on hospitals and homeless", etc, seems to be the usual cry of the ignorant and ill informed.

Every bit of revenue the Monarchy makes goes to the Crown Estate. In return, they get an allowance (15% from memory). The Monarchy is an institution, like the Presidency only better and with more class.

Sure. Ok, let's do away with them. At least we don't have them sponging off us any more, the bunch of freeloaders. So what happens then? Who heads the country? The likes of cannon on here who seem to be dead set against them? I think I'd rather stay with the status quo if it's all the same. No offence cannon, but can you honestly say that you would be prepared to live youe life in such a way that every day of your life was planned for you and you had to act in a way that meant you always thought of your country and everything it stood for before yourself. I don't know you from Adam but I sincerely doubt you would be able to pull it off. I know I couldn't.

So, in short, before you start crying for their blood or heads, think about what the Monarchy, and especially our present Queen, have given to country. I think you would be very surprised.

Just to clear something up, she isn't my queen, and I am a firm anti-royalist. The monarchy stemmed from greed, violence and oppression of people just like you and I many years ago. Citizens of any country with a monarchy are part of the problem. They allow the royals to live luxurious lives at their expense, and are dim witted enough to think that it is a good thing. I'm a stong believer in equal rights for all, and the monarchy just doesn't fit in with those beliefs.

 

How much revenue would britain make if they turned all of the royal council houses into 5 star hotels? A pretty penny I'm sure. If having your life planned and having to act in a certain way was such a bad thing, then why would anybody do it? The reason is quite simple. You're paid very generously to do it, and have all of lifes luxuries handed to you. Cars, houses, priceless artworks for your private viewing etc.

 

How much do you pay in road tax per year on your car? Do you think the royals reach into their pockets to pay it? I don't think so, and they drive some of the most polluting vehicles on the roads.

 

The monarchy has done such a great job on brainwashing the citizens of the country, that even the national anthem is about the queen. Any other country has a national anthem about the country or nation. It's most peculiar don't you think?

 

As it stands, british citizens have accepted the status quo as a good thing. All those years ago when the farmers and paupers were killed, raped, burnt out of house and home to make way for the monarchy seem to have been forgotten. Not only that, but if you tried the same nowadays you would end up with life in prison. Up until 1998 you could still be executed for high treason. Another man made rule created to protect the greedy interests of the monarchy.

Edited by Cannon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Powerful statement there Cannon but do you think we would be any better off with a president or another dictator who are very power hungry. Although on paper she does not actually run the country we as a democracy respect her position. Just look around the world and see what deep kack some country's are in.

We might not all agree in a monarchy but it has taken us 100`s of years to get to where we are now and IMO and I believe that the majority of UK citizens do. we should continue with one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cannon, on 22 Nov 2016 - 09:28 AM, said:

Just to clear something up, she isn't my queen, and I am a firm anti-royalist. The monarchy stemmed from greed, violence and oppression of people just like you and I many years ago. Citizens of any country with a monarchy are part of the problem. They allow the royals to live luxurious lives at their expense, and are dim witted enough to think that it is a good thing. I'm a stong believer in equal rights for all, and the monarchy just doesn't fit in with those beliefs.

 

How much revenue would britain make if they turned all of the royal council houses into 5 star hotels? A pretty penny I'm sure. If having your life planned and having to act in a certain way was such a bad thing, then why would anybody do it? The reason is quite simple. You're paid very generously to do it, and have all of lifes luxuries handed to you. Cars, houses, priceless artworks for your private viewing etc.

 

How much do you pay in road tax per year on your car? Do you think the royals reach into their pockets to pay it? I don't think so, and they drive some of the most polluting vehicles on the roads.

 

The monarchy has done such a great job on brainwashing the citizens of the country, that even the national anthem is about the queen. Any other country has a national anthem about the country or nation. It's most peculiar don't you think?

 

As it stands, british citizens have accepted the status quo as a good thing. All those years ago when the farmers and paupers were killed, raped, burnt out of house and home to make way for the monarchy seem to have been forgotten. Not only that, but if you tried the same nowadays you would end up with life in prison. Up until 1998 you could still be executed for high treason. Another man made rule created to protect the greedy interests of the monarchy.

 

Are you a British subject? If the answer is yes, she's your Queen.

 

If you don't like it, leave and swap your nationality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The good friday agreement allows me to be british or Irish. My nationality is Irish, therefore your arguement is pointless.

 

On that note, are you a british subject, or a british citizen? If you see yourself as a british subject, then you are also part of the problem, and ignorant to the fact as well. By definition, a subject is a person who has been brought under control by another person or organisation, typically by forceful means. I don't know about you, but I would never allow anybody to deem me less of a person than they are through the use of belittling methods. One such method is the use of the english language by the upper class, royals and arostocrats to elevate themselves above all others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The good friday agreement allows me to be british or Irish. My nationality is Irish, therefore your arguement is pointless.

 

On that note, are you a british subject, or a british citizen? If you see yourself as a british subject, then you are also part of the problem, and ignorant to the fact as well. By definition, a subject is a person who has been brought under control by another person or organisation, typically by forceful means. I don't know about you, but I would never allow anybody to deem me less of a person than they are through the use of belittling methods. One such method is the use of the english language by the upper class, royals and arostocrats to elevate themselves above all others.

 

So an Irish national but a British citizen ?? do you hold a British passport or Irish and if you are employed are your tax`s paid to Dublin or London ? If it is London you are therefore supporting the British monarchy and of course helping the refurbishment of buck palace in a round about way. If its Dublin then you are supporting the UK by means of EU funding given to the UK, in a round about way.

 

What ever way aunti liz is quids in and so is one of the greatest and most popular and recognised buildings in the world

 

definition of a citizen quoted below.

"Citizenship is the status of a person recognized under the custom or law as being a legal member of a sovereign state. A person may have multiple citizenships and a person who does not have citizenship of any state is said to be stateless."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So an Irish national but a British citizen ?? do you hold a British passport or Irish and if you are employed are your tax`s paid to Dublin or London ? If it is London you are therefore supporting the British monarchy and of course helping the refurbishment of buck palace in a round about way. If its Dublin then you are supporting the UK by means of EU funding given to the UK, in a round about way.

 

What ever way aunti liz is quids in and so is one of the greatest and most popular and recognised buildings in the world

 

definition of a citizen quoted below.

"Citizenship is the status of a person recognized under the custom or law as being a legal member of a sovereign state. A person may have multiple citizenships and a person who does not have citizenship of any state is said to be stateless."

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Democracy sees to that. I'm not going any further with an Irish politics debate. It'll get us nowhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cannon, on 22 Nov 2016 - 12:18 PM, said:

The good friday agreement allows me to be british or Irish. My nationality is Irish, therefore your arguement is pointless.

 

On that note, are you a british subject, or a british citizen? If you see yourself as a british subject, then you are also part of the problem, and ignorant to the fact as well. By definition, a subject is a person who has been brought under control by another person or organisation, typically by forceful means. I don't know about you, but I would never allow anybody to deem me less of a person than they are through the use of belittling methods. One such method is the use of the english language by the upper class, royals and arostocrats to elevate themselves above all others.

 

Do you mean that you are a Republic of Ireland passport holder?

 

By the way, if you want to enter into a discussion of semantics - and call people ignorant - at least learn to spell...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...