AUFC90 Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 She would still be our queen in an independent Scotland For a wee while aye then once she's out the way I'm fairly certain Scotland would vote to chuck them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Just now, AUFC90 said: For a wee while aye then once she's out the way I'm fairly certain Scotland would vote to chuck them. Sorry you seem to be forgetting the part where we are not even at the stage of being an independent country yet 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 11 minutes ago, Forever_blueco said: She would still be our queen in an independent Scotland 6 minutes ago, AUFC90 said: For a wee while aye then once she's out the way I'm fairly certain Scotland would vote to chuck them. 5 minutes ago, Forever_blueco said: Sorry you seem to be forgetting the part where we are not even at the stage of being an independent country yet Jesus, just how fucking stupid are you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 6 minutes ago, jupe1407 said: Jesus, just how fucking stupid are you? I like to think reasonably so but I have been wrong in the past 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Stupid enough to be on his second account. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Buck House certainly is a significant building in Modern British History, and is usually on the 'to do' list for the millions of tourists who visit London every year. That said, the Queen (and the Royals) are wealthy enough to make a sizeable contribution, the rest picked up by the tax payer who ultimately are the owners of the house (Crown Estates). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky88 Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 (edited) 18 hours ago, Baxter Parp said: Scottish Daily Mail in shock "lying through teeth" revelation. http://wingsoverscotland.com/whats-left-out/ It's not lying. The daily mail was talking about travel expenses and other selected expenses that went up. WOS shot back with a load of whataboutery (a very common theme for wos articles) about the total expenses spend being down. Both sources selectively used the figures for their own ends. Edited November 22, 2016 by sparky88 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 It's not lying. . Its the daily mail,even when its telling the truth it probably lying. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 I was reading an interesting and far more informed take on the Buckingham Palace thing elsewhere. The Crown Estate, ie everything owned by the Royal Family, brings in around £300m a year. This is handed over to the treasury who keeps 85% and returns 15% as the Civil List. Everything the Queen takes as "income" from the Civil List she pays income tax on under a voluntary arrangement. To cover the repairs to Buckingham Palace, the Treasury is going to keep 75% and return 25% for ten years. Nothing to do with taxpayers, it's the Royal's own money. Buckingham Palace is actually owned by a Trust with Parliament and the Monarch being trustees. The royals' own money fucking hell. Where do you think they got their assets from in the first place? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 (edited) On 20 November 2016 at 15:14, NewBornBairn said: I was reading an interesting and far more informed take on the Buckingham Palace thing elsewhere. The Crown Estate, ie everything owned by the Royal Family, brings in around £300m a year. This is handed over to the treasury who keeps 85% and returns 15% as the Civil List. Everything the Queen takes as "income" from the Civil List she pays income tax on under a voluntary arrangement. To cover the repairs to Buckingham Palace, the Treasury is going to keep 75% and return 25% for ten years. Nothing to do with taxpayers, it's the Royal's own money. Buckingham Palace is actually owned by a Trust with Parliament and the Monarch being trustees. You didn't read anything "more informed". You read a bit of royalist propaganda. Even the royals' own website acknowledges clearly that they do not and have never owned the Crown Estate. The confusion (that the crown estate revenue is returned by the royals in exchange for the Sovereign Grant) seems to lie in the phrasing of the 18th century decision (which was reached in order to keep the profligate George III from bankruptcy). The 'Crown' is the state - the queen is the current representative of the Crown. In the event of a republic, the Crown Estates would continue to make money for the country - all that would change would be the representative of the crown. I may as well also point out the ludicrousness of imagining that the queen (or any of her predecessors) would merrily sacrifice vast sums of revenue each year for a relatively small return in the form of the Civil List/Sovereign Grant, a fancy hat and some backstage power. It's nonsense. Do people really believe that the Windsors are somehow more altruistic than our politicians? It was no surprise to us to find out that our MPs were no strangers to the trough - why would the queen and her family be any different? The fact is that the queen is constitutionally bound to oversee the transference of Crown Estate revenue to the government (her role being legal overseer rather than owner of the Crown Estates). For this, and her other diplomatic works, she receives the Civil List (at present) as well as security costs and sundry expenses for other members of her family. Edited November 22, 2016 by Antlion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antiochas III Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 The whole Buckingham Palace thing is a mess. The taxpayer should be asked to pay for any structural work that is required to keep it standing but any refirbushment or upgrading while still occupied should be paid for by the royal family. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 3 hours ago, sparky88 said: It's not lying. The daily mail was talking about travel expenses and other selected expenses that went up. WOS shot back with a load of whataboutery (a very common theme for wos articles) about the total expenses spend being down. Both sources selectively used the figures for their own ends. WoS wasn't selective, it showed the whole picture. The Mail was selective in order to give the wrong impression, at the very least it was disingenuous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/21/hospitals-may-require-patients-to-show-passports-for-nhs-treatment?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hehawhehaw Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 16 hours ago, Forever_blueco said: I like to think reasonably so but I have been wrong in the past jupe won't even realise he just took a swift kick to the scrotum as he's been castrated many times. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 7 hours ago, sparky88 said: It's not lying. The daily mail was talking about travel expenses and other selected expenses that went up. WOS shot back with a load of whataboutery (a very common theme for wos articles) about the total expenses spend being down. Both sources selectively used the figures for their own ends. Selectively using the total expense figures, aye? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 4 hours ago, Baxter Parp said: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/21/hospitals-may-require-patients-to-show-passports-for-nhs-treatment?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other I've no doubt that the Tories will do it in an inhumane and I'll thought out way, but I can't be the only person who doesn't have a problem with the idea in principle? If we have eligibility rules, they should be enforced in some way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 I don't necessarily mind the idea but I think it would actually be quite hard to do without introducing some kind of ID card. Passports don't really show anything in terms of being eligible for NHS care and it is open to residents of this country (who don't all have UK passports) and people who are UK citizens but live abroad aren't eligible either. What would showing the passport actually prove? I think it would also be difficult for a non-UK citizen to prove without doubt how long they have lived here to show eligibility. The question would be whether the cost of implementing new systems and staff for checking etc really be worth it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Not that long ago you had to show an NHS registration card. I think my parents had one for me when I was a kid. For the amount foreigners taking the pish costs in relation to the NHS budget I doubt it's worth the time and effort though.We shouldn't be refusing essential treatment to anyone and I doubt there are hoards of foreigners getting free boob or nose jobs or other elective procedures. We nick half our trained staff from abroad, the least we can do is look after a few of their fellow citizens. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 I think someone worked out the "health tourist" unclaimed costs were about £200 million or 0.02% of the budget. Then again it feels a bit pointless to challenge this from an economic perspective when it's obviously ideologically motivated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbornbairn Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 Everybody should have a barcode tattooed on their wrist 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.