Interesting article on the benefits of the wedding to the economy:
[quote]KBCThird wrote:
[quote]Sharp4850 wrote:
I suppose I didn’t really have a problem with it until I found out that most of the expense comes out of the taxpayers’ wallet… that idea just seems ridiculous to me. What did the total expense billed to the people come out to? Wasn’t the grand total something like 30 million pounds?
Honestly, I feel pretty bad for those of you over the pond for this tradition.
Edit: and in relation to presidential campaigns, this isn’t “on par.” Campaigns are not f
unded by taxpayer dollars.[/quote]
Not true. Campaigns are funded in part by private donations and PACs, but federally provided matching funds make up a significant percentage.
Also, my understanding is that the royal family paid for the wedding, the taxpayer expense was for security.
[/quote]
Kates dad donated 100k towards it.
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
if it bothered the Americans that much, they perhaps wouldnt have got rid of the Monarchy in the first place.
if only we could do the same[/quote]
America loves Britain, you mistake not liking a micromanaging Tyrant like King George III as not liking the Monarch.
I personally will watch the wedding.
[quote]Jfbalabama wrote:
IF theirs anything that bothers me it is that the English still acknowledge those inbreeds as “royalty”. [/quote]
Why does this bother you? Where does this jealously stem from?
[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
[quote]glasgow_rangers wrote:
Interesting fact: it only costs each British taxpaper 65p (under a dollar) per year to fund the Royal Family. A very large proportion of their wealth comes from land rents etc…[/quote]
I was wondering where their money came from. I’m surprised the UK keeps up with that king and queen tradition when they have almost no say in legislation.
[/quote]
Because they are conservatives.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
“For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king and there ought to be no other.”
- Thomas Paine [/quote]
Thomas Paine was an utter fool, the man advocated regicide.
[quote]rugggby wrote:
[quote]krebcycle wrote:
I cannot understand the mentality of the people who go down central london and crowd the streets out just so that they can get a glance of some elitist, inbreeding twats waving at them.
Sometimes I think people like being subservient bitches.[/quote]
How are the happy couple inbred?
It’s every little girls dream - to find their prince, and this girl has done it. Fair enough, she hunted him down and her and her mum basically gave him no choice, but you do what you gotta do.[/quote]
I’m referring to the royals specifically.
I have no problems with a girls dreams. I have a problem with the royal family, who essentially are a group of people who consider themselves ‘chosen by God’. I just don’t understand the mentality of people, in the 21st century, who are celebrating the wedding like it was a close family member who got hitched.
Maybe I’m byist because though I was born and bred in the UK , my parents are Irish. But I refuse to celebrate the wedding of people who lead a privileged life that was build off the misery of many.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
“For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king and there ought to be no other.”
- Thomas Paine [/quote]
Thomas Paine was an utter fool, the man advocated regicide.[/quote]
-
Paine was a genius.
-
I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I see no problem with it considering the times he lived in.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
if it bothered the Americans that much, they perhaps wouldnt have got rid of the Monarchy in the first place.
if only we could do the same[/quote]
America loves Britain, you mistake not liking a micromanaging Tyrant like King George III as not liking the Monarch.
I personally will watch the wedding.[/quote]
homo.
[quote]rugggby wrote:
[quote]KBCThird wrote:
[quote]Sharp4850 wrote:
I suppose I didn’t really have a problem with it until I found out that most of the expense comes out of the taxpayers’ wallet… that idea just seems ridiculous to me. What did the total expense billed to the people come out to? Wasn’t the grand total something like 30 million pounds?
Honestly, I feel pretty bad for those of you over the pond for this tradition.
Edit: and in relation to presidential campaigns, this isn’t “on par.” Campaigns are not f
unded by taxpayer dollars.[/quote]
Not true. Campaigns are funded in part by private donations and PACs, but federally provided matching funds make up a significant percentage.
Also, my understanding is that the royal family paid for the wedding, the taxpayer expense was for security.
[/quote]
Kates dad donated 100k towards it.[/quote]
I thought I heard it was 5 figures, but either way it seems like a nominal contribution, more for face than anything
(was it used to pay for her dress? can’t remember if I heard that)
Where is all the up skirts of Kate?
What’s his name looked very dashing in his murder costume.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
“For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king and there ought to be no other.”
- Thomas Paine [/quote]
Thomas Paine was an utter fool, the man advocated regicide.[/quote]
-
Paine was a genius.
-
I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I see no problem with it considering the times he lived in.
[/quote]
OHHHH DAMN! I love interpretations of shit that was written 200+ years ago being used to see who’s the smartest.
This argument needs to end with one of you asking the other through a window if he likes apples, then slap a napkin on said window and spout off about havin’er numbah.
I’m pulling for Irish
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
“For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king and there ought to be no other.”
- Thomas Paine [/quote]
Thomas Paine was an utter fool, the man advocated regicide.[/quote]
-
Paine was a genius.
-
I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I see no problem with it considering the times he lived in.
[/quote]
OHHHH DAMN! I love interpretations of shit that was written 200+ years ago being used to see who’s the smartest.
This argument needs to end with one of you asking the other through a window if he likes apples, then slap a napkin on said window and spout off about havin’er numbah.
I’m pulling for Irish
[/quote]
[quote]rugggby wrote:
I wasnt bothered about it in the slightest, but as it drew closer I LOVED watching all the fuss about it. As I type, my street are having a party to celebrate. It’s great to see nearly every community coming together, what with the media over here always so negative and so much shit going on in the world, its nice to celebrate something. She is beautiful and he seems like a nice bloke. Good on em.
Quite a few were watching mate. I think our monarchy is loved by most and we take it for granted. Over 2 billion people watched it. Second most viewed tv event in history, the first being princess Dianas funeral.
Days like this make me love this country and the people in it… but in a few days most will go back to not giving a shit about the royals, including me.[/quote]
x2.
It’s been a nice day.
[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
[quote]glasgow_rangers wrote:
Interesting fact: it only costs each British taxpaper 65p (under a dollar) per year to fund the Royal Family. A very large proportion of their wealth comes from land rents etc…[/quote]
I was wondering where their money came from. I’m surprised the UK keeps up with that king and queen tradition when they have almost no say in legislation.
[/quote]
the people vote for the political party they want in power, the party chose which individual from within the party who should be leader, (would become the Prime Minister if that party win the election). once a political party wins the election, the leader of that party asks the Queen if they can form the next Government. The Queen has the right to say no to that request.
so the monarchy have quite a lot of say in legislation. [/quote]
Damn, I honestly didn’t know that. Thanks for the info.
As an aside, can I say that I think English broads have some of the plumpest natural tits in the world? Sweet, plump, juicy tits.
There must be something in the Tea, or horrible weather.[/quote]
no problem. the world tends to think that the UK is a democracy, but in reality it is a Constitutional Monarchy. Yes the public decides who is in Government, but the Monarch has a theoretical power of veto. If the monarch execrcised that right, there would be a call for the end of the Monarchy, so it will never be used. But even so, it is possible.
[quote]dianab wrote:
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
Wills looks like he’s ready to get shitfaced.[/quote]
my advice to Kate - ALWAYS WEAR YOUR SEATBELT![/quote]
ahahahahahahaha
[/quote]
thanks,
well, “accidents” do happen
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
[quote]dianab wrote:
[quote]bluebrasil wrote:
[quote]Doug Adams wrote:
Wills looks like he’s ready to get shitfaced.[/quote]
my advice to Kate - ALWAYS WEAR YOUR SEATBELT![/quote]
ahahahahahahaha
[/quote]
thanks,
well, “accidents” do happen[/quote]
Correction - when you start dating Muslims and there are whispers of marriage, “accidents” happen. The queen doesn’t stand for that shit!
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Jfbalabama wrote:
IF theirs anything that bothers me it is that the English still acknowledge those inbreeds as “royalty”. [/quote]
Why does this bother you? Where does this jealously stem from?[/quote]
Jealousy, no. I feel that the unearned 32 million pounds that the U.K. spends on the windsors every year could have a better use, especially considering the families personal wealth.
Other than that the only thing that disgusts me more than the subservience displayed by the windsors supporters and the U.K. government, are the windsors themselves who feel entitled to taxpayer money, and special privileges (such as there sons being fast tracked through the military academy and achieving unearned promotions,william landing a RAF helicopter in his girlfriends yard).
The windsors are no different than the U.S.'s very own fuck up family the Kennedy s the only difference being that both get away with ridiculous bullshit, both are loved by servile element of the population, but in the Kennedy’s defense they never got near as much out of taxpayers (at least when they were not democratically elected)