UK theme parks from another point of view!

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12
 
Blaze

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:49 pm

Why does tradition matter? Colonising and slavery is part of our history, but we all agree it's a good thing that's confined to the history books. Can anyone say why someone should wield ultimate control over a country just because their ancestors killed someone else's ancestors?

And why can't Camilla be queen more than anyone else? If the system runs through family then it's 'right' she'll be queen. She's a hideous person but unlike democracy where we can have a say, we're stuck with a silly system that allows her to be Queen. And is the current Queen, who wants more money from the government to pay her heating bills while the rest of us suffer, who is friends with dictators and human rights abusers that much better just because she keeps quiet and has a warm smile?
 
User avatar
ImURNemesis
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 224
Joined: May 2012
Location: The valley

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:24 pm

pluk- Can I ask you one thing? You tall about earning respect and working your way up, but The queen was born into her job. Big contradiction! You have also falied to justify why normal familes are given a talking down to about being on benifits and how its ok for the royals to living off the taxpayer?

What a nice country we live in!

A terminally ill person who has days to live who is claming DLA/ESA is targeted by the press, while our "Superiors" are living in luxury at our expense. Who are the real scroungers?
Image
 
Jordan

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sat Jun 02, 2012 11:21 pm

I find it delightful that The Guardian has tried to appeal to both camps in the debate, by adding a handy button to collapse all the Jubilee news on the site. Great sense of humour there :)

Image
 
Dar

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sat Jun 02, 2012 11:52 pm

ImURNemesis wrote:
pluk- Can I ask you one thing? You tall about earning respect and working your way up, but The queen was born into her job. Big contradiction! You have also falied to justify why normal familes are given a talking down to about being on benifits and how its ok for the royals to living off the taxpayer?

What a nice country we live in!

A terminally ill person who has days to live who is claming DLA/ESA is targeted by the press, while our "Superiors" are living in luxury at our expense. Who are the real scroungers?


In my experience though, it's the people that live solely on benefits and make no effort to do anything to "earn" the money that gets the press commentary. Personally, I have never seen a terminally ill person targeted in the press, only people that claim benefits while continuing to smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol regularly.

On the other hand, the Queen and other members of the "main" royal family are out and about being busy representing the country. I don't include the minor royals that don't do anything, they shouldn't be supported. In my opinion, that's a job and that's what they are being paid for.

Say my dad worked as CEO of [LARGE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION], I get a decent, but not great, set of exam results but by virtue of my dad's job I magically manage to get a job that I couldn't get if he didn't work there. I think that's what pluk was insinuating.

If elections were held, people would campaign on political ideals but I like the idea of a non-partisan head of state.

Saying all that, I wouldn't be against removing the monarchy if the majority wanted it, but at a convenient time like Elizabeth's death. Although that throws up the question of what to do with all the property that the state owns and she may have someone to break in her shoes but if she couldn't afford that then it's another person to be lambasted in the press for claiming benefits.


ON topic: I'm not particularly fussed about the whole event, but I do enjoy seeing people come together to celebrate something together. That isn't sport related. :P
 
User avatar
Meat Pie
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 313
Joined: June 2009
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:28 am

When it comes down to it Monarchy is incompatible with democracy and anyone who supports it is anti-democracy. I think that is a shameful position to have. We have fought for centuries for the right to vote and have slowly pushed back the land barons who oppressed normal people and we fought against an anti-democratic regime in world war two.

As small as Monarchy's role is today, they still have influence over us and costs us a great deal of money. We must continue to fight our struggle against anything which is autocratic and that includes the Monarchy.

Why should we not get the right to choose who we want to represent us as a people?

Somebody actually answer that please. Why is the Monarchy allowed to over-ride our rights to choose who represents us to the world? Just stop and think... Why do they deserve this position more then you?

I'm not just fighting for my right to choose but for your rights to choose as well. Having choice over who represents you to the world and who leads us pushes cultural progress in a way which is peaceful. Choice defines freedom. To live under a monarchy is not to live completely free. I don't feel free and I feel as if Royalists are forcing their personal beliefs on me. If I wanted to become a politician I would HAVE to swear an oath to that odious woman and whether you agree with my opinion of her or not, no-one should be forced to make an allegiance to something they find fundamentally wrong or immoral.

One Queen costs as much as 9,560 new nurses a year. How on earth is that value for money? How on earth is that an acceptable cost, especially when there are people suffering horrendous cuts to every other area of public funding?

Again, actually answer that for me please.

Respect has to be earnt and if the Queen and the Royal Family are such a respected group of people they would have nothing to fear if a system of election be implemented.
Last edited by Meat Pie on Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Image
AKA the vocal minority.
 
Dar

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:37 am

Thank you, but I don't want you to fight for my right to choose. I am happy with a monarchy.

I feel as if Republicans are forcing their views on me.

It may be equivalent to 9,560 nurses but it would never equate to that. It would just be spent on the new head of state, or even more if what Dormiens-Dave has stated is true.
 
User avatar
Meat Pie
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 313
Joined: June 2009
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:44 am

You should want to choose. You are choosing autocracy and that is silly.

If the Monarchy went and did something you found abhorrent, you would probably want to change them for somone else and then you would be sorry you didn't have the choice.

Also £150 million is the estimated total cost for the maintenance and lifestyles of the royal family. That is 100 times the cost of the Irish presidency.

Presidency is most certainly cheaper.

Edit: Also, Republicans ask for other candidates. We wouldn't stop you voting for a Monarchical figure and therefore I don't think we are forcing our beliefs on you as you still have the opportunity to get what you want through voting. Under the current system a Republican does not even have the opportunity to get what they want and are actually forced to make oaths that they don't want to make.
Last edited by Meat Pie on Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Image
AKA the vocal minority.
 
iNemesis

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:14 am

Meat Pie wrote:
We wouldn't stop you voting for a Monarchical figure and therefore I don't think we are forcing our beliefs on you as you still have the opportunity to get what you want through voting.


Just out of interest, if the voters of this country voted, & the majority voted for a Monarchical figure, which therefor won, would you still be on your crusade of hatred?

Without sounding in any way argumentative or victimizing, you are beginning to bore me with your constant arguments, not only here, but other threads on this Forum.
 
User avatar
Meat Pie
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 313
Joined: June 2009
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:16 am

Insults. Lol.

However despite that... I will answer the almost sensible question you posed. If there was a democratic election  at regular intervals and the public chose Monarchy, I would be happy that democracy had taken place.

I might however, campaign for another candidate but I would not call into question the issue of democracy.
Last edited by Meat Pie on Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Image
AKA the vocal minority.
 
iNemesis

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:26 am

Meat Pie wrote:
Insults. Lol.

However despite that... I will answer the almost sensible question you posed. If there was a democratic election  at regular intervals and the public chose Monarchy, I would be happy that democracy had taken place.

I might however, campaign for another candidate but I would not call into question the issue of democracy.


Almost sensible? Do elaborate..

You say, if Monarchy received a majority vote, you would be 'happy that democracy had taken place'. Why would you then choose to campaign for another candidate?

You can't have everything you desire in this world, & most certainly not in this country.
 
User avatar
pluk
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 155
Joined: July 2011
Location: Essex
Contact:

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:29 am

Blaze wrote:
Why does tradition matter? Colonising and slavery is part of our history, but we all agree it's a good thing that's confined to the history books. Can anyone say why someone should wield ultimate control over a country just because their ancestors killed someone else's ancestors?

And why can't Camilla be queen more than anyone else? If the system runs through family then it's 'right' she'll be queen. She's a hideous person but unlike democracy where we can have a say, we're stuck with a silly system that allows her to be Queen. And is the current Queen, who wants more money from the government to pay her heating bills while the rest of us suffer, who is friends with dictators and human rights abusers that much better just because she keeps quiet and has a warm smile?


Tradition matters because it is the principles this country is built upon. It is, as a nation, a part of who we are and have been for near enough forever. Get rid of that and we don't exist as an entity. Slavery harms people (to put it mildly), Royals don't. I'm not really seeing the point of the comparison.

I'm kind of joking with the Camilla thing, but really, what does it matter? She would be the wife of someone with no real power. I don't much care what she gets up to, but I do not respect her as I do the Queen, Charles and his Sons. So for me she is not ideal, but if Charles decides it is right so be it.

Wants more money to pay her bills. What? What are you talking about. She chooses to pay a lot of tax she does not need to and I'm sure her income to the country far outweighs what she costs. The hangers on not so much, but as I've said they can do one, a lot of minor Royals need to go and fend for themselves.

As for her friends in high places doing low things, that'a a tricky one and I can see why it upsets people. I going to suggest it is within the Queens influence to try and deal with these issues diplomatically. The other option taken up with such vigour by our elected politicians is to bomb the crap out of them and their people instead. I'd rather let the Queen crack on with the diplomacy.

ImURNemesis wrote:
pluk- Can I ask you one thing? You tall about earning respect and working your way up, but The queen was born into her job. Big contradiction! You have also falied to justify why normal familes are given a talking down to about being on benifits and how its ok for the royals to living off the taxpayer?

What a nice country we live in!

A terminally ill person who has days to live who is claming DLA/ESA is targeted by the press, while our "Superiors" are living in luxury at our expense. Who are the real scroungers?


It is not a contradiction at all. She has had 60 years to earn my and the nations respect and has done so consistently. She may become queen by default but she has shown her worth and deserving of being there many times over, so the people as a whole are happy for her and her family to remain as Monarch. I am not royalty so I don't get to be in line for the thrown. I am also not the Son of a model so don't get to look good and am not the Son of a tiny person so don't get to be a Jockey. I am distinctly average in every way by breeding and upbringing, but have advanced myself to a position I am happy, relaxed and satisfied with. I can look after and care for my family and do some good for society at the same time. With a bit more drive I could be PM. With a bit less I could be a bum. But I am not, I'm me. You may be better concentrating on what you are capable of and realising that potential rather than worrying about what others are doing.

A Monarch that does not act with the will of the people would soon find themselves lacking public support and would be setting themselves up for their own demise.

If you think it is a 'normal family' which lives off of benefits by choice all their life then we really are in a sad state, aren't we? You twist my words you scoundrel. I clearly state the welfare state is a great thing for those of genuine need. But it is abused on a grand scale be lazy people who think the world owes them something, those are the people who are stealing from your Granny and there re plenty of them. The Queen on the other hand is paid to serve the people and manage her estate, and she does so. It is her wage. These things aren't easily quantifiable but I'm sure she and the royal properties more than earns the money they cost as an investment from the tourism they brings in.

I have literally no idea what you are on about with the press and terminally ill people. No one I know begrudges the genuinely needy the support of the state paid for by us, the taxpayer.
Image
Total Unique Ridecount
 
Dar

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:34 am

I'm not a mod, nor am I applying to be one, but I don't think insults are any way to get a point across or engage in a debate. You might not agree but to insult someone displays a lack of further points.
I don't really agree with the opposing side and I don't think it agrees with me but everybody is allowed their opinion. :)

I'm not in favour of the whole royal family. The Queen, Prince Phillip and Charles and his family are what I find "acceptable", for want of a better word. (It's late! :P) The rest shouldn't be funded in my opinion.

How much of that £150 million is spent on the upkeep of state owned property and would therefore still have to spent regardless of whether the monarchy exists? The cost of staff; cleaners, groundskeepers, tour guides and the like would make up a large chunk of that I think.

Also, a final point, I am EXTREMELY silly. A fact that almost anyone from these forums will affirm! :D
 
User avatar
Meat Pie
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 313
Joined: June 2009
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:36 am

iNemesis, by almost sensible, I mean it's a perfectly good question but by tacking on the phrase "crusade of hatred" you made yourself look silly. I'm not calling for anyone's death or harm just for true democracy to be installed. That's not exactly a detestable sentiment by anyone's standard.

I might choose to campaign for another candidate if I felt there was someone more appropriate for the job, like I do in a general election. I accept the majority result as democratic but I would also want to my chosen candidate to win and therefore campaigning for them which would be a way to spread their ideas.

No different from current elections we have now really.
Image
Image
AKA the vocal minority.
 
Dormiens-Dave

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:36 am

My argument against the foul cry of anti-democratic royalty is we live in a state with a monarch who has no legal power and common law certainly puts the rule of parliment above her maj and anyone who comes after her. Our MP's who are democratically elected have the power to remove her but they dont because there is no will for it in the population.

I dont think i'm silly trusting that the will of the people will be represented by their MP's and if the people wished for a republic they will act. Hence why i think there are bigger democratic issues in this country to deal with as quite frankly the legal framework to banish the monarchy when people wish it exists.

Feel free to keep up the fight to change minds but calling people silly for not getting excited about the issue i think is part a misunderstanding that we have the democratic legal framework to deal with the issue when it arises and part frustration because the vast majority disagree and trust our legal system should that change.

And personal attacks keep cropping up in here... please could everyone stop that.
 
User avatar
pluk
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 155
Joined: July 2011
Location: Essex
Contact:

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:05 am

Meat Pie wrote:
When it comes down to it Monarchy is incompatible with democracy and anyone who supports it is anti-democracy.

We must continue to fight our struggle against anything which is autocratic and that includes the Monarchy.

I'm not just fighting for my right to choose but for your rights to choose as well.

Choice defines freedom. To live under a monarchy is not to live completely free.

I don't feel free and I feel as if Royalists are forcing their personal beliefs on me.


Meat Pie wrote:
You should want to choose. You are choosing autocracy and that is silly.


Can you not see that all the above quotes, made since you stated you didn't like being accused of making your point from some sort of intellectual superiority standpoint, come across as just that? You state these things as fact, as if your little group has worked Monarchy out to be wrong and the rest of us aren't quite clever enough to see it.
They are merely your opinions based on your beliefs formed by your principles. That does not make your opinions, beliefs or principles right anywhere but in your own head.
Image
Total Unique Ridecount
 
User avatar
Meat Pie
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 313
Joined: June 2009
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:09 am

Pluk - The problem is you keep talking about the great work that the Queen does, but that is entirely subjective. I don't think she does anything of any worth what-so-ever and certainly nothing to warrant the EXTREME life of luxury. She has to go to some paid for dinners with other rich people from different countries? Oh well Boo-hoo... What a terrible existence that must be...  :roll: Her 'wage' is ridiculously large for what she has to do. A job as a dustman is more taxing then what she has to go through on a daily basis. The Royal Family is a glorified benefits scrounging family who are actually worse because they are already wealthy and the tax money we spend on them should go to pay for more worthy causes.

I think respect has to be earnt BEFORE you get the privilege to serve your country as the head of state, by handing someone the role by default you enshrine them with power before you know that they even deserve it and that is what is wrong with Monarchy, we don't know that they deserve it until it's too late and that is a miserable way to operate. Tradition or not, we cannot let rose-tinted views of our past prevent us from progressing.

Dar if you want a brief breakdown of costs of the monarchy look a page four of this link - http://www.republic.org.uk/valueformoneymyth.pdf

Dormines-Dave - The monarchy does still retain the powers that they don't deserve. No bill can become a legally binding Act of Parliament  until it receives the royal assent. Now just because the monarch hasn't used these powers to defy government doesn't mean it's right for them to have them. In a democracy, only elected representatives should have ANY power over legislation.

We actually do not have such great democratic legal framework to remove the Monarchy because parliament is forbidden from even discussing Royal Affairs! Our government are not even allowed to register criticism of the regime in the House of Commons.

I'm not saying that the will of the people to gain a Republic is actually available now however, I as a Republican feel like I need to try wake people up from Monarchism or at least spread the message when topics like these emerge.

The benefits of Monarchy are largely a lie and the only justification for their continuation is that people like the history of it. Well I say that's not good enough.
Image
Image
AKA the vocal minority.
 
User avatar
Meat Pie
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 313
Joined: June 2009
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:15 am

pluk wrote:
Meat Pie wrote:
When it comes down to it Monarchy is incompatible with democracy and anyone who supports it is anti-democracy.

We must continue to fight our struggle against anything which is autocratic and that includes the Monarchy.

I'm not just fighting for my right to choose but for your rights to choose as well.

Choice defines freedom. To live under a monarchy is not to live completely free.

I don't feel free and I feel as if Royalists are forcing their personal beliefs on me.


Meat Pie wrote:
You should want to choose. You are choosing autocracy and that is silly.


Can you not see that all the above quotes, made since you stated you didn't like being accused of making your point from some sort of intellectual superiority standpoint, come across as just that? You state these things as fact, as if your little group has worked Monarchy out to be wrong and the rest of us aren't quite clever enough to see it.
They are merely your opinions based on your beliefs formed by your principles. That does not make your opinions, beliefs or principles right anywhere but in your own head.



You state your opinion as fact. You categorically say that the monarchy is good, so YOU'VE decided that it is morally correct. We have differing opinions and I think you're wrong just like you think I'm wrong. Unfortunately everyone in any discussion has to assume that they have the intellectual superiority on the issue of discussion. That's inescapable.

You could apply this logic to any point in our history and make out minority opinions to be snobs. "Those damned suffragettes... They are claiming to have moral superiority over the rest of us!"

As I said... It's inescapable and a complete non-point.

You don't see that democracy is a good thing and that makes me think you are a sillybilly. I'm sure you feel the same way towards my opinion.

Edit: Sorry for the double post, this topic is moving too fast for me. :P
Last edited by Meat Pie on Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Image
AKA the vocal minority.
 
User avatar
Squiggles
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 2182
Joined: April 2003
Location: The Land of Make Believe! (No... really)
Contact:

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:19 am

A bit of number crunching for you from t'interweb:

pluk wrote:
These things aren't easily quantifiable but I'm sure she and the royal properties more than earns the money they cost as an investment from the tourism they brings in.


Apparently the Crown Estates (the queen's public property portfolio), which by long standing agreements gives all of it's income to the Treasury, in 2010 provided £210million to the national coffers.

Dar wrote:
How much of that £150 million is spent on the upkeep of state owned property and would therefore still have to spent regardless of whether the monarchy exists? The cost of staff; cleaners, groundskeepers, tour guides and the like would make up a large chunk of that I think.


The largest chunk of that is spent on security at £100 million. But the next biggest is the upkeep of the property at £15 million. (though that is split between the state owned property and privately owned propety).
Edwardo..... move me!
 
User avatar
Meat Pie
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 313
Joined: June 2009
Location: Kent, UK

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:30 am

Crown Estates are properties owned by 'The Crown' and not by Elizabeth Windsor and as such in a change to a Republic, most of those properties would be handed to the state and not retained by members of the Windsor family. Therefore the money made through those properties would not be lost.  :)
Image
Image
AKA the vocal minority.
 
Dormiens-Dave

Re: The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Discussion

Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:31 am

Meat Pie wrote:

Dormines-Dave - The monarchy does still retain the powers that they don't deserve. No bill can become a legally binding Act of Parliament  until it receives the royal assent. Now just because the monarch hasn't used these powers to defy government doesn't mean it's right for them to have them. In a democracy, only elected representatives should have ANY power over legislation.

We actually do not have such great democratic legal framework to remove the Monarchy because parliament is forbidden from even discussing Royal Affairs! Our government are not even allowed to register criticism of the regime in the House of Commons.



You don't understand common-law principles if you think we don't have the legal framework to rid the country of a monarchy. Interestingly just as a point towards democracy the US president isn't elected by the people, he (or she) is elected by a college of electorates who are voted by the people BUT they don't have to vote in-line with the mandate that voted for them. They always do but you keep saying it's only worth being if its a strict law democracy.

As for the finance stuff, find me a source that isn't the republicans website as i doubt it's unbiased, and not all of the "crown estates" are owned by the country.

I like this debate though, would have got into it sooner but i was in London :D
Last edited by Dormiens-Dave on Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests