Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Remember this pillock on TV?
The AAV website explains a little further for all the other pillocks wrapped up so snugly in their own selfish little bubble that they cannot see beyond their personal bank balance:
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/id-like-to-hear-example-of-country.html
Tom
The AAV website explains a little further for all the other pillocks wrapped up so snugly in their own selfish little bubble that they cannot see beyond their personal bank balance:
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/id-like-to-hear-example-of-country.html
Tom
i largely agree - one has to feel a sense of palpable dread at imagining her mindset: she lives in a country where citizens die prematurely for lack of health, social care, due to lack of funding but smugly sits on an inherited unused several hundred million pound fortune, take much more from taxpayers and make comments publicly about difficult feels to wear a crown
Heads up: it seems like our current president and prime minister want the Schengen border to move back to the centre of the Channel. Or post brexit for the UK to pay ALL costs for keeping it in Calais. One or the other. They seem to be willing to renegotiate all previous treaties.
I watched and enjoyed the program last night. I like history and it interests me. The traditions and regalia associated with royalty goes back centuries and I think it’s fascinating and entertaining. I agree that it’s not to everyone’s taste, but there are a great many people in the United Kingdom who are very much in favour of our royal family.
yes, I don't object to history, traditions or regalia (things I too find interesting). I object to the spending of several hundred million pounds of taxpayer money subsidising a family who could do all they currently do for 10% of this (as, for example, the Dutch royal family does).
I was very surprised when listening to a program on this subject to discover from experts in these areas that a suprising amount of it is not very old.
It was Queen Victoria, aided by Prince Albert, who instituted much of what we see today. The uniforms, the masses of gilt and some of the ceremony. She hated the four ton golden coach since it is so terribly uncomfortable, but did institute all the extra flunkeys. Originally from 1760 the coach was driven by a coachman, but she had him replaced with two Postillions riding on horses of the eight horse team. She also introduced all the walking decoratively uniformed flunkeys surrounding the coach.
It seems she loved all the ceremonial and couldn't get enough of it.
.
so, essentially a 150 year old version of the kardashians (wish they'd get a YouTube channel and leave the taxpayer alone..)
That's just the State Coach version. There's also much more recent ones, the 2014 Diamond Jubilee Coach, built in Australia, that's been used for many events including the opening of parliament ceremony. The Aussies paid for that one to be produced but the palace has paid for it since in order to keep it.
There's actually a number of historic state coaches in the royal mews, an illustration of insanity over the ages.
.
The programme that I watched last night concerned the coronation and the procedures, protocol and regalia associated with that. Most of the coronation regalia goes back centuries and was used to coronate royalty pre Oliver Cromwell. I found it really interesting.
I think our present queen is someone to be admired. Although she has lived a life of fabulous wealth and privilege, I think that has come at a personal cost in terms of restrictions on her life. She must spend hour after hour in the company of "dignitaries" who bore her and who she has no interest in. Then there are the endless engagements which must be painfully tedious. I really don't think I would want or be able to live like that, even with the money.
I am not so sure about the next generation. Charles is a difficult quantity to judge.
Bill Middleton seems to be idle, likes the cheese, but not the work. His 90+ year old grandmother carried out more engagement than him in 2017. He's never at the air ambulance job.
James Hewitt's son Harry seem to put his name to a few things, maybe he's busy.
Air Miles Andy and the gay one, Edward never appear on the radar. What's the point?
Anne seems quite busy and level headed, but beyond that I think the royal family tree could do with a bit of financial pruning.
since publicity, promoting the uk (or some archaic aspects of it) seems their raison d'etre (as they keep reminding us), I think they should be privatised. and not like PFI, properly - I'm sure a few companies would be interested in sponsoring them (imagine the exposure marketing, a few well placed adds on a coach, crown, or having Charles as a spokesperson could generate)
D
Deleted member 4366
Guest
That's because I'm right and it's true! Any sensible person that reads this thread would have to agree with me. Debating? Which posters actually changed their view because of what somebody else posted?
I'm only joining in because I'm bored and have a few minutes while I wait for my Weetabix to go soggy. After my Weetabix, I'll have the strength to carry on with my next electric bike build rather than spouting more shite, so I'll leave you lot to carry on.
Yes, all the apparatus of coronation is very old, it was many of the additionals that Victoria created.
I agree about the deprivations the Queen's royal life has entailed, but to what point in this modern age? Other nations like Australia and even the USA have "royal" style state coaches and ceremonies, but without having anyone living such a life.
I'd rather scrap the whole shebang when the Queen dies, if only because Charles has been and will continue to be a huge pain and William has as much character as a sheep. If not scrapped, at least some drastic pruning is long overdue.
.
Last edited:
That's not the point though, it's a place for letting off steam, just like our time honoured pubs where minds are also rarely changed.
.
Back on topic maybe.... My daughter received two letters from official sources in the UK, one from a major insurance company the other from hm customs and revenue.. a tax rebate. In both cases the letters were posted from abroad. The first from France and the second from Germany. This begs the question why are public services in the UK not supporting UK public services?. I have never received a tax demand or a bank statement from France, which was not posted in France. What is certain is that these practices will not long survive a brexit.
Ok, well I learnt something today. If this has been posted before, sorry if I missed it.
So one of the points many in favour of "leave" have spoken about that I've had some sympathy with, was mentioned by a certain Jeremy Corbyn this weekend. Namely, the protectionist EU imposing tariffs on small poor countries harms them.
However as with most things that are positive about "leave" it turns out this is pretty much nonsense.
I was pointed in the direct of this...
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/tradehelp/everything-arms
"
The Everything But Arms scheme grants full duty free and quota free access to the EU Single Market for all products (except arms and armaments).
"
So when people including some on here speak of the EU punishing developing countries with their protectionist agenda, realise as with most things, its not really true.
If you have a few moments over a coffee, here is a very interesting post using the very coffee you're probably drinking as an example of how this works.
https://twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/888452975689072640
As always, the more we know, the more we realise we don't know... and the more I realise this decision should never have been put to the public.
So one of the points many in favour of "leave" have spoken about that I've had some sympathy with, was mentioned by a certain Jeremy Corbyn this weekend. Namely, the protectionist EU imposing tariffs on small poor countries harms them.
However as with most things that are positive about "leave" it turns out this is pretty much nonsense.
I was pointed in the direct of this...
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/tradehelp/everything-arms
"
The Everything But Arms scheme grants full duty free and quota free access to the EU Single Market for all products (except arms and armaments).
"
So when people including some on here speak of the EU punishing developing countries with their protectionist agenda, realise as with most things, its not really true.
If you have a few moments over a coffee, here is a very interesting post using the very coffee you're probably drinking as an example of how this works.
https://twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/888452975689072640
As always, the more we know, the more we realise we don't know... and the more I realise this decision should never have been put to the public.
I don't think many of the posters oldtom puts up are likely to appear in the Daily Mail, do you?
