The Politics Thread 2019

[Ghost of Clough]

9 hours ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

Just heard on telly Prince Charles  now has a new Eco car .  The fuel it runs on is wine .   Probably not relevant to this post but had to put it somewhere in a rage .  How the other half ( or very privileged couple of hundred) live. Here's to doing bugger all and living to 98. 

Aston Martin say it runs better and is more powerful on English white wine (mixed with whey) than on petrol

[GenBr]

1 hour ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

What’s the difference between the Crown estates and Duchy of Cornwall? Are you suggesting he earned the Duchy and it wasn’t a nice pressie from his mum?

 

I'm saying the Crown Estates money goes to the government first and then a small portion of that gets doled back out to the crown with conditions on what it can be spent on. My understanding is that the Duchy of Cornwall goes straight to Charles and he can spend it with less restrictions.

Are you suggesting that you shouldn't be allowed to inherit land or wealth? His ancestors have managed to be a lot more successful than yours - nothing to be jealous about. If I become a millionaire you are damn right I will want to pass it on to any future kids I might have and so on and so forth down the family tree into the future. 

[AndyinLiverpool]

18 minutes ago, GenBr said:

I'm saying the Crown Estates money goes to the government first and then a small portion of that gets doled back out to the crown with conditions on what it can be spent on. My understanding is that the Duchy of Cornwall goes straight to Charles and he can spend it with less restrictions.

Are you suggesting that you shouldn't be allowed to inherit land or wealth? His ancestors have managed to be a lot more successful than yours - nothing to be jealous about. If I become a millionaire you are damn right I will want to pass it on to any future kids I might have and so on and so forth down the family tree into the future. 

The mistake that the right always makes is that those of us on the left are envious of the landed gentry. 

I’m not envious. It’s just wrong. We are not talking about leaving your savings to your kids. We’re talking about the vestiges of feudal society that have no place in a democratic society. We cannot claim to be democratic, or indeed, meritocratic when the head of state inherited her job from her father and will pass that job (and all sorts of goodies, not just huge tracts of land in the south west) to her children. 

Taking back control in the name of her majesty? It’s about time we joined the modern world. 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

1 hour ago, GenBr said:

I'm saying the Crown Estates money goes to the government first and then a small portion of that gets doled back out to the crown with conditions on what it can be spent on. My understanding is that the Duchy of Cornwall goes straight to Charles and he can spend it with less restrictions.

Are you suggesting that you shouldn't be allowed to inherit land or wealth? His ancestors have managed to be a lot more successful than yours - nothing to be jealous about. If I become a millionaire you are damn right I will want to pass it on to any future kids I might have and so on and so forth down the family tree into the future. 

You do know that he pays tax voluntarily on his estates and at less than half the rate you pay on your wages.  His ancestors are mostly Austro- Hungarian -his ancestors weren't successful they were given a third of the land in present's and nicked the rest .  They didn't fancy sharing it with there Russian cousins who begged them for asylum a hundred years ago so left them to it .  A lovely bunch.  Saw the balcony at the palace the other day  ( the one your spending 30 million a year repairing every year for the next decade ) it was practically buckling under the weight of the next bunch of freeloaders. 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

5 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Not sure why that would offend you so much. Think of it as a fruit based liquid undergoing a natural process. Then think about the refinery process required to convert a fossil fuel that's extracted and transported thousands of miles. Which is the expensive option now? 

And for the record, congratulations on joining the left in seeing the exorbitant luxury that the Royal family lives in and becoming enraged. 

I've always been generally left-  more right as I've got older .   The Royal family have always enraged me.  Royalist's will have you believe the Royals bring in a fortune into the  exchequer.   Sorry,  the palace of Versailles has made more revenue than any other tourist entity in Europe for years .  No ones home . 

[Ghost of Clough]

30 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

I've always been generally left-  more right as I've got older .   The Royal family have always enraged me.  Royalist's will have you believe the Royals bring in a fortune into the  exchequer.   Sorry,  the palace of Versailles has made more revenue than any other tourist entity in Europe for years .  No ones home . 

If someone was then the revenue would reduce as they would have to close it the same way Buckingham Palace is now. Open Buckingham Palace and it would most likely overtake Versailles.

[McRamFan]

44 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

I've always been generally left-  more right as I've got older .   The Royal family have always enraged me.  Royalist's will have you believe the Royals bring in a fortune into the  exchequer.   Sorry,  the palace of Versailles has made more revenue than any other tourist entity in Europe for years .  No ones home . 

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

In 2017 the Palace of Versailles received 7,700,000 visitors, making it the second-most visited monument in the Île-de-France region, just behind the Louvre and ahead of the Eiffel Tower.[3]

[AndyinLiverpool]

20 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

If someone was then the revenue would reduce as they would have to close it the same way Buckingham Palace is now. Open Buckingham Palace and it would most likely overtake Versailles.

Brilliant idea. Make sure there's never anyone at home in Buckingham Palace.

[GboroRam]

8 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Brilliant idea. Make sure there's never anyone at home in Buckingham Palace.

Hope that doesn't refer in any way to cigarette and blindfold, as that would be in breach of forum rules.

[GenBr]

2 hours ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

You do know that he pays tax voluntarily on his estates and at less than half the rate you pay on your wages.  His ancestors are mostly Austro- Hungarian -his ancestors weren't successful they were given a third of the land in present's and nicked the rest .  They didn't fancy sharing it with there Russian cousins who begged them for asylum a hundred years ago so left them to it .  A lovely bunch.  Saw the balcony at the palace the other day  ( the one your spending 30 million a year repairing every year for the next decade ) it was practically buckling under the weight of the next bunch of freeloaders. 

Yes I know he pays income tax voluntarily, which is rather good of him if our politicians aren't going to bother changing the law to make it mandatory. However unless the law has changed in the last couple of months I think you will find he pays income tax on his Cornwall incomes at the highest rate, which is 45%. I can assure you I do not pay 90% on my wages. I'd appreciate some evidence to back up your BS claims if you have any.

His ancestors were successful - through marriage and conquest they built their wealth and power. Something your own family were unable to do. As I said it is perfectly reasonable for you to be jealous of their success. Luckily bar a communist revolution, which frankly seems rather unlikely at present you aren't going to be able to do anything about it. 

Prince Charles ancestors for the past 500 years have been German for the most part - not Austro-Hugarian, which again you appear to have made up. So not only do you want to depose (maybe make it execution if that suits you better) the royal family and confiscate all their wealth, but you also want us to demolish Buckingham Palace as well?

3 hours ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

The mistake that the right always makes is that those of us on the left are envious of the landed gentry. 

I’m not envious. It’s just wrong. We are not talking about leaving your savings to your kids. We’re talking about the vestiges of feudal society that have no place in a democratic society. We cannot claim to be democratic, or indeed, meritocratic when the head of state inherited her job from her father and will pass that job (and all sorts of goodies, not just huge tracts of land in the south west) to her children. 

Taking back control in the name of her majesty? It’s about time we joined the modern world. 

Hahahaha - the mistake you make is assigning me to one of your old fashioned political wings. I do not associate with either left or right and I do not support any of the parties we currently have. I assume you are the kind of person who would never change political leaning regardless of policy. 

I said jealous - "feeling or showing an envious resentment of someone or their achievements, possessions, or perceived advantages." I think that describes your opinion rather well. If you want to set a limit to how much you can pass down to your kids I will need a few more details - £10 or £10,000? I certainly wouldn't want my wealth over an arbitrary threshold going to the government just because it upsets you that we aren't all equal. Just because you personally can't think of anything you would like to achieve or you personally haven't been able to amass vast sums of wealth doesn't mean everyone else should be punished for your failings.

We are one of the oldest and most stable democracies in the world. The head of state being elected or not does not make the slightest bit of difference to us being able to call ourselves democratic. And if you are bringing meritocracy into this the person who has been trained for their entire life to fill that role would almost certainly be the ideal candidate for said role.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

3 minutes ago, GenBr said:

Yes I know he pays income tax voluntarily, which is rather good of him if our politicians aren't going to bother changing the law to make it mandatory. However unless the law has changed in the last couple of months I think you will find he pays income tax on his Cornwall incomes at the highest rate, which is 45%. I can assure you I do not pay 90% on my wages. I'd appreciate some evidence to back up your BS claims if you have any.

His ancestors were successful - through marriage and conquest they built their wealth and power. Something your own family were unable to do. As I said it is perfectly reasonable for you to be jealous of their success. Luckily bar a communist revolution, which frankly seems rather unlikely at present you aren't going to be able to do anything about it. 

Prince Charles ancestors for the past 500 years have been German for the most part - not Austro-Hugarian, which again you appear to have made up. So not only do you want to depose (maybe make it execution if that suits you better) the royal family and confiscate all their wealth, but you also want us to demolish Buckingham Palace as well?

Hahahaha - the mistake you make is assigning me to one of your old fashioned political wings. I do not associate with either left or right and I do not support any of the parties we currently have. I assume you are the kind of person who would never change political leaning regardless of policy. 

I said jealous - "feeling or showing an envious resentment of someone or their achievements, possessions, or perceived advantages." I think that describes your opinion rather well. If you want to set a limit to how much you can pass down to your kids I will need a few more details - £10 or £10,000? I certainly wouldn't want my wealth over an arbitrary threshold going to the government just because it upsets you that we aren't all equal. Just because you personally can't think of anything you would like to achieve or you personally haven't been able to amass vast sums of wealth doesn't mean everyone else should be punished for your failings.

We are one of the oldest and most stable democracies in the world. The head of state being elected or not does not make the slightest bit of difference to us being able to call ourselves democratic. And if you are bringing meritocracy into this the person who has been trained for their entire life to fill that role would almost certainly be the ideal candidate for said role.

No .  We can make money on it .  Quite happy to rebuild it  if make's a profit .   Would prefer to send them packing .  You could go to if you like, you have the feel of a Downton Abbey footman .  He pays no corporation tax .  Never has paid inheritance tax .  He claims large parts of his estate are a trust - no capital gains paid .  He claims over two million pounds of public money to run the duchy in travel costs etc - this should be taxable .

Through marriage and CONQUEST- theft of land .

Phillips family are German . After all each of his sisters married SS hierarchy.  Probably couldn't invite many to the wedding .  Old Queenie comes from a different route the same as Princess Michael of Kent  who thinks we should all have more responsibility for purity of our bloodline .  You can go back 800years to the Burgraves if you like effectively they come from the same gene pool. 

Enjoy cleaning your collection of royal wedding porcelain you keep all over your living room this afternoon . 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

1 hour ago, McRamFan said:

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

In 2017 the Palace of Versailles received 7,700,000 visitors, making it the second-most visited monument in the Île-de-France region, just behind the Louvre and ahead of the Eiffel Tower.[3]

A large majority of the Louvre traffic is not paid . They do a lot work for gallerys who give them a fee to show work to client's .  Fair enough I didn't specify paid tourism .

[AndyinLiverpool]

49 minutes ago, GenBr said:

Yes I know he pays income tax voluntarily, which is rather good of him if our politicians aren't going to bother changing the law to make it mandatory. However unless the law has changed in the last couple of months I think you will find he pays income tax on his Cornwall incomes at the highest rate, which is 45%. I can assure you I do not pay 90% on my wages. I'd appreciate some evidence to back up your BS claims if you have any.

His ancestors were successful - through marriage and conquest they built their wealth and power. Something your own family were unable to do. As I said it is perfectly reasonable for you to be jealous of their success. Luckily bar a communist revolution, which frankly seems rather unlikely at present you aren't going to be able to do anything about it. 

Prince Charles ancestors for the past 500 years have been German for the most part - not Austro-Hugarian, which again you appear to have made up. So not only do you want to depose (maybe make it execution if that suits you better) the royal family and confiscate all their wealth, but you also want us to demolish Buckingham Palace as well?

Hahahaha - the mistake you make is assigning me to one of your old fashioned political wings. I do not associate with either left or right and I do not support any of the parties we currently have. I assume you are the kind of person who would never change political leaning regardless of policy. 

I said jealous - "feeling or showing an envious resentment of someone or their achievements, possessions, or perceived advantages." I think that describes your opinion rather well. If you want to set a limit to how much you can pass down to your kids I will need a few more details - £10 or £10,000? I certainly wouldn't want my wealth over an arbitrary threshold going to the government just because it upsets you that we aren't all equal. Just because you personally can't think of anything you would like to achieve or you personally haven't been able to amass vast sums of wealth doesn't mean everyone else should be punished for your failings.

We are one of the oldest and most stable democracies in the world. The head of state being elected or not does not make the slightest bit of difference to us being able to call ourselves democratic. And if you are bringing meritocracy into this the person who has been trained for their entire life to fill that role would almost certainly be the ideal candidate for said role.

The cheap insults about my ambition and achievements do you no credit whatsoever. 

I think you have missed the point slightly. I don't think everyone should be equal and nobody I have ever read or spoken to does either. I am not sure where you get that from. As for passing down stuff to my kids, I will pass down the fruits of my labours. I won't pass down my job or dish out titles. That in the 21st century we have a monarchy that does this in the same way it did in the middle ages is, at best absurd, at worst grotesque.

I disagree profoundly with the last paragraph. Indeed, if they are the ideal candidate for the role, let them put themselves forward for election and make that point. That would be democratic. We could do the same with the 'upper' house of our bicameral parliament.

[Highgate]

3 hours ago, GenBr said:

His ancestors - through marriage and conquest they built their wealth and power. Something your own family were unable to do. As I said it is perfectly reasonable for you to be jealous of their success. Luckily bar a communist revolution, which frankly seems rather unlikely at present you aren't going to be able to do anything about it.

And that's ok with you? Conquest is simply theft and murder on a large scale. And it's fine that a democratic nation, with hopefully some egalitarian notions of equal opportunity for its citizen,s places such a family as their permanent heads of state and calls them 'majestic' ?  In what perverse or distorted meaning of the word are that family or institution majestic ?

Fine, let them keep their ill-gotten money and property as long as they pay fair share of tax.  But why on earth would you want to revere them? 

[jono]

On 10/06/2019 at 18:39, Wolfie said:

It says the average age of BBC TV audience is over 62...

Well, that finally explains the appeal of Mrs Brown's Boys, then.

No matter what happens in the next 2 years (when I reach 62 ) I will never want to watch Mrs Browns boys. Or reality TV or any of the mass market drivel that we are peddled on a regular basis by the BBC / ITV’s Islington living condescending half wits who are apparently “media and entertainment executives” but  really no more than the modern equivalent of Butlins red coats. Well I suppose it is entertainment but if you want to watch none league it is a free country. 

[1of4]

Two rounds of the Tory leadership election circus down. Next up into the ring, we will have the biggest clown of the show. Boris Johnson's advisers have for some reason kept him reasonable quiet and away from media, other than announcing his bribes, in the form of proposed tax cuts, to the tory membership.  Maybe tomorrow when he gets up on stage in front of press, he'll hopefully be asked how he intends to fund these tax cuts.

[i-Ram]

3 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Two rounds of the Tory leadership election circus down. Next up into the ring, we will have the biggest clown of the show. Boris Johnson's advisers have for some reason kept him reasonable quiet and away from media, other than announcing his bribes, in the form of proposed tax cuts, to the tory membership.  Maybe tomorrow when he gets up on stage in front of press, he'll hopefully be asked how he intends to fund these tax cuts.

He’s probably taken a few cuttings off Corbyn’s Money Tree.

[1of4]

23 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

He’s probably taken a few cuttings off Corbyn’s Money Tree.

Thought the Tory party owned that tree and May had to use it to pay off the DUP. 

[ariotofmyown]

6 hours ago, 1of4 said:

Two rounds of the Tory leadership election circus down. Next up into the ring, we will have the biggest clown of the show. Boris Johnson's advisers have for some reason kept him reasonable quiet and away from media, other than announcing his bribes, in the form of proposed tax cuts, to the tory membership.  Maybe tomorrow when he gets up on stage in front of press, he'll hopefully be asked how he intends to fund these tax cuts.

Just use lots of that 350 million he said we could use on the NHS.

All you poor Leave voters who knew the 350 million was an gross exaggeration, but that was ok cos what about 'project fear' who said that economy would be screwed if we leave, but it isn't yet (even though we haven't left) blah blah blah.

Guess what? The real lie was that any saved money would be used for the NHS! Who would have thought it!

Yeah, could never has guessed that 'man of the people' Johnson might not be too bothered about the health of some dirty little working people. How about a US style insurance system for everyone? It's only fair if they are gonna let us eat their tasty chicken.

Oh well, there is still the Brexit party. Farage really, honestly cares about you. He must do, he drinks pints in a pub like you lot. Although, he prefers to drink alone in his fancy Kensington flat paid for by a corrupt businessman using Russian money whilst pretending that Jo Cox's murder was just made up by the BBC. No shots were fired.

It's called democracy.

 

 

[Archied]

There is a move by labour to make a no deal exit unlawful?,

interesting question , if our politicians of any persuasion managed to force a position whereby leaving with no deal was totally no go wouldn’t that mean that the eu could stop uk leaving by refusing to make a deal no matter how many people vote to leave?