royal family, yes or no?
30 March 2002, 11:13 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
maybe but all i seem to see from radio, tv and papers at the moment is how great things are , and yes timing maybe a bit off but is it not times such as this when one should look at the structure of the country!
steve
steve
30 March 2002, 11:46 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you will find that chronic short sightedness on the part of successive governments, allied with terminal apathy on the part of the voting population is the major reason the country is the third world ****hole it is today.
To blame it on a symbolic figurehead, who does more for the tourist industry in this country than his royal toniness and his cattle-killing cronies will ever do if they live to be a thousand, is missing the mark by a vast margin, methinks.
To blame it on a symbolic figurehead, who does more for the tourist industry in this country than his royal toniness and his cattle-killing cronies will ever do if they live to be a thousand, is missing the mark by a vast margin, methinks.
Trending Topics
30 March 2002, 11:48 PM
#8
Used to work here!!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Peterhead, Scotland
Posts: 1,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just my opinion (with my moderator hat off !!), but I think we should leave this discussion for another time as a mark of respect.
Stuart
[Edited by sasim - 3/30/2002 11:49:21 PM]
Stuart
[Edited by sasim - 3/30/2002 11:49:21 PM]
30 March 2002, 11:57 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 3,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so just listen, watch all the propogranda without saying a word.
think this tourist thing is misguided to say the least.
Paris America royals No
me thinks we have alot more than a royal family!!
close the royals down and show people around all of royal building
for startes!
steve
think this tourist thing is misguided to say the least.
Paris America royals No
me thinks we have alot more than a royal family!!
close the royals down and show people around all of royal building
for startes!
steve
31 March 2002, 05:02 AM
#11
BANNED
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 9,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
She has given more than she took. It is a shame the World has lost its most Loved "Granny".
But as for the rest of the 2.nd layer royals (Note small "r") get rid of them.
But as for the rest of the 2.nd layer royals (Note small "r") get rid of them.
31 March 2002, 05:04 AM
#12
BANNED
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 9,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
She has given more than she took. It is a shame the World has lost its most Loved "Granny".
But as for the rest of the 2.nd layer royals (Note small "r") get rid of them.
But as for the rest of the 2.nd layer royals (Note small "r") get rid of them.
31 March 2002, 09:29 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Cardiff. Wales
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as the royal family brings in more than it takes out then surely its good for the country. They are also a major part or our history, culture etc.
If you want to get rid of anything in this country then get rid of all these so called bloody asylum seekers. Now that would bring about a good saving .
Chip.
If you want to get rid of anything in this country then get rid of all these so called bloody asylum seekers. Now that would bring about a good saving .
Chip.
31 March 2002, 11:19 AM
#14
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The money the taxpayer spends on the royals may seem a lot but it is utter chickenfeed when compared to the budget of even the smallest government department. Getting rid of them wouldn't save any significant money and they would have to be replaced with another head of state - yes you guessed it - MORE BLOODY POLITICIANS: President and first lady Blair anyone? God forbid. And we all know how much politicians and their bureaucracies cost so it would end up costing the taxpayers more.
You cannot justify exercising petty, outdated, vindictive class jealousies with the economic argument.
You cannot justify exercising petty, outdated, vindictive class jealousies with the economic argument.
31 March 2002, 11:29 AM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 15,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..NO............
......no disrespect to the old lady,101 is impressive whoever you are.......but the idea of an heriditary head of state is way past its sell by date.
31 March 2002, 12:16 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 9,368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no it isnt. The Royals should stay. The royals will stay too. Look at the alternatives:
President Blair being the head of state????
**** THAT!!!!!
If there was a revolution and I had the choice, I know who would go up against the wall.
astraboy.
Besides, Zara is as fit as a butchers
President Blair being the head of state????
**** THAT!!!!!
If there was a revolution and I had the choice, I know who would go up against the wall.
astraboy.
Besides, Zara is as fit as a butchers
31 March 2002, 12:35 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 4,518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If even a handful of people gave up the time and commitment to helping others, it would be a better place.
She was the epitomy of dedication and dignity.
Whatever your views on the future of the monarchy this is a pretty crass time to start the debate.
Deano
She was the epitomy of dedication and dignity.
Whatever your views on the future of the monarchy this is a pretty crass time to start the debate.
Deano
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post