Happy Birthday Ma'am...

Amsterdamage wrote:

The Queen is descended from English Kings and Queens and from memory on her fathers side the Germans, it's inescapable Graiser. She's also descended from a few Austrians. She's also married to a Greek. Go look it up.

I'm aware of that, SFD states she's descended from the Battenbergs, she's not.

History's the only thing I was a bit decent at in School!, thick as feck about everything else !

Phil the Greek is a battenberg though.

Graiser wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

The Queen is descended from English Kings and Queens and from memory on her fathers side the Germans, it's inescapable Graiser. She's also descended from a few Austrians. She's also married to a Greek. Go look it up.

I'm aware of that, SFD states she's descended from the Battenbergs, she's not.

History's the only thing I was a bit decent at in School!, thick as feck about everything else !

Them Battenbergs do make a nice cake it has to be said.

Amsterdamage wrote:

My missus watched her birthday on the telly, I read a book. I wish her well in her dotage I just wish we didn't pay for all the palaces and limos what with the austerity we have to put up with. The lighting of the birthday beacon was hilarious though.
I expect that today she will be mourning the death of her young son (conceived out of wedlock via the King of Saudi Arabia) across the pond.

Complete shite

Amsterdamage wrote:

Phil the Greek is a battenberg though.

That's correct

Elias wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

My missus watched her birthday on the telly, I read a book. I wish her well in her dotage I just wish we didn't pay for all the palaces and limos what with the austerity we have to put up with. The lighting of the birthday beacon was hilarious though.
I expect that today she will be mourning the death of her young son (conceived out of wedlock via the King of Saudi Arabia) across the pond.

Complete shite

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

Oh Jeez...  You're really on one, even for you..

So much of what you state is wrong, but anyway...
Born in the wrong country at the wrong time it seems.   Why don't you move if it bothers you that much?  

I think I know the answer

Anyway, you're avoiding answering this:

Rickler wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Often the very same people that hate her sort and their matrimonial choices ("coming over here and stealing our thrones...") with all their heart also seem to lap up to Her Maj in a manner that is entirely inconsistent with their other beliefs and opinions. I'm not expecting any thanks or explanation for pointing this out, although abuse is very likely, but if there is any I'd be interested to consider it.

Consider what?

And care to name a few examples of these "very same people"?

You've missed answering this...
Thought up an answer yet?

Third time lucky?

C'mon fran,

It's not like I'm asking you something difficult, like if you'd pick up a refugee in boat?

If you can't think up an answer, just admit it.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

You really ought to carry out some research before you put finger to keyboard, your so wrong on many counts but maybe the real facts would distort your twisted arguments.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

I'm surprised with your republican beliefs, your Avatar, old Francis was knighted by Elizabeth the first, who was also awarded 50% of the treasures that your hero pillaged from the Spanish and the Americas.

His involvement in the slave trade is never widely publicised, so just a bit hypocritical don't you think.

As a head of state I would like something or someone we could all get behind, like a talking dog or a unicorn. I don't want another good/evil politician, so I am happy to stick with the shape shifting reptilians.

I really feel we should provide a new Royal Yacht, preferably built at Devonport.

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

I'm surprised with your republican beliefs, your Avatar, old Francis was knighted by Elizabeth the first, who was also awarded 50% of the treasures that your hero pillaged from the Spanish and the Americas.

His involvement in the slave trade is never widely publicised, so just a bit hypocritical don't you think.

You lot'll be, as likely as not, banging on about Happy St George's Day in a moment and ignore the fact that he was Turkish. At the same time there'll be dire prohecies of doom should Turkey become part of the EU and general open resistance to the idea that any Turkish people at all come and live in the UK. We've all seen exactly those same points being made on these pages in the recent past.

So we have a national patron saint most of those who bang on about celebrating his day and are openly and vocally proud about doing so wouldn't even let in the country...

That is feckin hypocrisy, pal.

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

You really ought to carry out some research before you put finger to keyboard, your so wrong on many counts but maybe the real facts would distort your twisted arguments.

Go on then. Which bits are factually wrong?

Enlighten me.

St Georges Day is very important. Its another excuse to put out the bunting in the pubs and all get pithed. No matter where Phil the Greek came from he did serve in the Royal Navy and he's also a real hoot at times. ''Don't stay here too long you'll get slitty eyes''
Royal Yacht? Absolutely! Me and Seadog will take command and we'll have Freathy as PR and Communications and Graiser as 'Navy shag' officer.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

I'm surprised with your republican beliefs, your Avatar, old Francis was knighted by Elizabeth the first, who was also awarded 50% of the treasures that your hero pillaged from the Spanish and the Americas.

His involvement in the slave trade is never widely publicised, so just a bit hypocritical don't you think.

You lot'll be, as likely as not, banging on about Happy St George's Day in a moment and ignore the fact that he was Turkish. At the same time there'll be dire prohecies of doom should Turkey become part of the EU and general open resistance to the idea that any Turkish people at all come and live in the UK. We've all seen exactly those same points being made on these pages in the recent past.

So we have a national patron saint most of those who bang on about celebrating his day and are openly and vocally proud about doing so wouldn't even let in the country...

That is feckin hypocrisy, pal.

You really are a pompous prick.

What you are basically saying, but in a roundabout, cowardly way, is that anyone who likes the Queen and the Royal family, or who has the audacity to celebrate St George's Day is a stonewall racist. Unbelievable shit, even from you.

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN .....HAPPY ST GEORGE'S DAY EVERYONE .....HAPPY BIRTHDAY SHAKESPEARE

And St Patrick was apparently English/British, do you mock the Irish on their national day?

Les Miserable wrote:

And St Patrick was apparently English/British, do you mock the Irish on their national day?

and danny boy is in fact and english song too set to an irish tune

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

Not a Royalist or Republican myself, meh for me, but it does seem to be a bit of a case of double standards to complain when the royal family cost a mere £36m per annum compared to the net contribution of Britain to the EU which amounts to £9 billion. In fact, the rather emotionally blackmailing leaflets issued by the government cost £9m, which I believe you said was the equivalent of a good left back-suppose you could say that in comparative terms, the money for the royals amounts to only a marginally bigger drop in the ocean.

A good friend of mine, who happened to die halfway up the main Zambezi river, once told me there are two sorts of money. Beer money, and other money.

What about my money?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Go on then. Which bits are factually wrong?

Enlighten me.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

Why, her paying voluntarily isn't good enough?


A Memorandum of Understanding on Royal Taxation was published on 5 February 1993 and amended in 1996, 2009 and 2013. The arrangements in the memorandum are considered to be permanent and it is intended that they will be followed by the next monarch. The memorandum describes the arrangements by which The Queen and The Prince of Wales make voluntary payments to the HM Revenue and Customs in lieu of tax to compensate for their tax exemption. The details of the payments are private. The Queen voluntarily pays a sum equivalent to income tax on her private income and income from the Privy Purse (which includes the Duchy of Lancaster) that is not used for official purposes. The Sovereign Grant is exempted. A sum equivalent to capital gains tax is voluntarily paid on any gains from the disposal of private assets made after 5 April 1993. Many of the Sovereign's assets were acquired earlier than this date but payment is only made on the gains made afterwards. Arrangements also exist for a sum in lieu of inheritance tax to be voluntarily paid on some of the Queen's private assets. Property passing from monarch to monarch is exempted, as is property passing from the consort of a former monarch to the current monarch.[26]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finances_of_the_British_Royal_Family


And as for the Queen "probably" being the wealthiest woman on the planet? There's no "probably" about it She is 'definitely' not even in the top Twenty and you damn well know it! Either that or your ignorance is stupefying.

So eat crow.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'll happily agree that the Queen does a fantastic job. In fact if there was a vote to choose a monarch (a contradiction in terms, I realise) I'd probably vote for her to do it. I'm sure she's a love. I can think of nobody better.

None of which is the point because it is a job that doesn't need to be done.

It baffles me completely how people who usually espouse all the Tory values of being frugal with tax payers money, working hard, getting on, earning a crust and all the rest of it are nearly always those who stand rock solid with the monarchy because it quite simply has nothing to do with any of those things. Quite the reverse, in fact. She didn't become Queen because she was going to be best at it. Her, or anybody else's, ability or suitability to do the job don't even figure in the decision.

Everything about the monarchy is state funded: her house(s), her travel, bloody everything. To top it all despite probably being the wealthiest woman on the planet we give her even more money every year. No pay freezes for her. No austerity. Everybody else is cutting back but not her. Oh no. Have some more wedge, Your Maj!

And yet she and the leeches that hang on to her suck millions out of the state coffers every year. Compare and contrast to the howls of outrage about benefit scroungers or the cuts being imposed on to disabled people or thousands of other things that are similar. Then tally up the amount of money involved and work out how many giros could be paid for by one year's Royal List (or whatever it is called) money! And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

If ever we wanted to create an institution that completely proved the phallacy of us "all being in it together" then the monarchy is exactly it.

Everything about it is contradictory and counter-intuitive. It is a pointless sham and should abolished. Or at the very least privatised like everything else is. Let market forces prevail!

You really ought to carry out some research before you put finger to keyboard, your so wrong on many counts but maybe the real facts would distort your twisted arguments.

Go on then. Which bits are factually wrong?

Enlighten me.

Look it up, don't be so fecking lazy but Rickler does spell it out succinctly

Franny trolls for a reaction.

Yawnarama.

Again.

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Go on then. Which bits are factually wrong?

Enlighten me.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

And she should be made to pay tax on her income just like the rest of us do.

Why, her paying voluntarily isn't good enough?


A Memorandum of Understanding on Royal Taxation was published on 5 February 1993 and amended in 1996, 2009 and 2013. The arrangements in the memorandum are considered to be permanent and it is intended that they will be followed by the next monarch. The memorandum describes the arrangements by which The Queen and The Prince of Wales make voluntary payments to the HM Revenue and Customs in lieu of tax to compensate for their tax exemption. The details of the payments are private. The Queen voluntarily pays a sum equivalent to income tax on her private income and income from the Privy Purse (which includes the Duchy of Lancaster) that is not used for official purposes. The Sovereign Grant is exempted. A sum equivalent to capital gains tax is voluntarily paid on any gains from the disposal of private assets made after 5 April 1993. Many of the Sovereign's assets were acquired earlier than this date but payment is only made on the gains made afterwards. Arrangements also exist for a sum in lieu of inheritance tax to be voluntarily paid on some of the Queen's private assets. Property passing from monarch to monarch is exempted, as is property passing from the consort of a former monarch to the current monarch.[26]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finances_of_the_British_Royal_Family


And as for the Queen "probably" being the wealthiest woman on the planet?  There's no "probably" about it She is 'definitely' not even in the top Twenty and you damn well know it!  Either that or your ignorance is stupefying.

So eat crow.

I'll tell you what Ricks, look back to the rich list 30 years ago when she headed it by a couple of furlongs. Onl when it became politically expedient in the 80s did she suddenly over the course of 12 months get relegated quicker than an Argyle team captained by Jonah Fletcher. Down from 6 billion plus to £600m in the Times in 12 months. Obviously an annus uneconomicus. If you believe that sort of stuff, that's up to you.
And since you're into minute detail, and of course that's where the money is, look up what the royals were getting up to when Princess Austerity was being rolled out across the land you no longer live in. Huge swathing cuts to ordinary folk, but, hey, wait a minute, let's make up a nice little ruse to ensure we please HRM who was not happy she would not be getting a rise. "They" decided to extend her royalness's ownership of the seas and the stars outward. All of a sudden, wayleaves and rents, totaling millions every year were suddenly introduced for sea sited wind /solar/wave /experimental farms. Millions extra a year, overnight, just like that. The press stated she was having a pay freeze in line with everyone else.   You couldn't make it up. Now that's what I call an offshore haven.
I'm thinking of setting up a toll gate in Exeter St.