blueish swede said:Damocles said:The people who like the Royals like them and enjoy having them for one of the myriad of reasons. The people who don't like them decide that it's not just ok that they don't like them, but everybody else must also not like them and they must be deposed.
They piss about doing charity work all day, pay for themselves entirely and bring SOME measure of tourism into the country no matter how big or small that number is. They have absolutely no negative influence on anybody's life at all and the arguments against them are philosophical in nature.
When the two sides of an argument have one side that brings real value both financially and emotionally to the country/people and the other one is nothing but philosophically good arguments, I'll choose concrete money and concrete feeling good over philosophically feeling good. People on the left wing need to realise that they don't have to die on every single hill and sometimes a net good is just a net good and can be left alone to be a net good.
I'm sorry, but that is just drivel.
The reasons for opposing a hereditary monarchy are based on equality, integrity and the fundamental values of human existence - to be regarded as equal in worth to all others.
The reasons for liking the royals are intransigence, childish fairy tales, and crap plates with pictures on.
urmston said:blueish swede said:Damocles said:The people who like the Royals like them and enjoy having them for one of the myriad of reasons. The people who don't like them decide that it's not just ok that they don't like them, but everybody else must also not like them and they must be deposed.
They piss about doing charity work all day, pay for themselves entirely and bring SOME measure of tourism into the country no matter how big or small that number is. They have absolutely no negative influence on anybody's life at all and the arguments against them are philosophical in nature.
When the two sides of an argument have one side that brings real value both financially and emotionally to the country/people and the other one is nothing but philosophically good arguments, I'll choose concrete money and concrete feeling good over philosophically feeling good. People on the left wing need to realise that they don't have to die on every single hill and sometimes a net good is just a net good and can be left alone to be a net good.
I'm sorry, but that is just drivel.
The reasons for opposing a hereditary monarchy are based on equality, integrity and the fundamental values of human existence - to be regarded as equal in worth to all others.
The reasons for liking the royals are intransigence, childish fairy tales, and crap plates with pictures on.
I agree.
It is drivel.
There is no such thing as royalty. Nobody is royal.
The 'royal' family should be privatised. People who want it or need it should pay for it themselves.
Why should everyone be compelled to pay and to go along with such a daft idea just because some tabloid reading, vacuous, and dull people need a world of princes and princesses to enliven their dismal lives?
jimharri said:I'm sure you'll all be tuned into Sky News at 8:30 tonight for an exciting extended report on the royal birth.
jimharri said:I'm sure you'll all be tuned into Sky News at 8:30 tonight for an exciting extended report on the royal birth.
Damocles said:urmston said:blueish swede said:I'm sorry, but that is just drivel.
The reasons for opposing a hereditary monarchy are based on equality, integrity and the fundamental values of human existence - to be regarded as equal in worth to all others.
The reasons for liking the royals are intransigence, childish fairy tales, and crap plates with pictures on.
I agree.
It is drivel.
There is no such thing as royalty. Nobody is royal.
The 'royal' family should be privatised. People who want it or need it should pay for it themselves.
Why should everyone be compelled to pay and to go along with such a daft idea just because some tabloid reading, vacuous, and dull people need a world of princes and princesses to enliven their dismal lives?
Nobody is paying anything. Reading any of about 20 of the last 30 posts on this thread should have alerted you to this.
But yet you still failed.
urmston said:Damocles said:urmston said:I agree.
It is drivel.
There is no such thing as royalty. Nobody is royal.
The 'royal' family should be privatised. People who want it or need it should pay for it themselves.
Why should everyone be compelled to pay and to go along with such a daft idea just because some tabloid reading, vacuous, and dull people need a world of princes and princesses to enliven their dismal lives?
Nobody is paying anything. Reading any of about 20 of the last 30 posts on this thread should have alerted you to this.
But yet you still failed.
Who is paying for William and Kate's new baby to be born in a private hospital?
They certainly aren't.
I've nothing against the 'royal' family as people.
If the state threw millions of pounds at me for no good reason I wouldn't refuse it.
But why should I pay for them to live such luxurious lives while they do jobs that anyone could do like opening leisure centres and bypasses?
Time to get rid.
Damocles said:urmston said:Damocles said:Nobody is paying anything. Reading any of about 20 of the last 30 posts on this thread should have alerted you to this.
But yet you still failed.
Who is paying for William and Kate's new baby to be born in a private hospital?
They certainly aren't.
I've nothing against the 'royal' family as people.
If the state threw millions of pounds at me for no good reason I wouldn't refuse it.
But why should I pay for them to live such luxurious lives while they do jobs that anyone could do like opening leisure centres and bypasses?
Time to get rid.
Yes, they absolutely are.
The state throws no money at them. they throw money at the state. Go back to page 20 and read through.
Damocles said:urmston said:blueish swede said:I'm sorry, but that is just drivel.
The reasons for opposing a hereditary monarchy are based on equality, integrity and the fundamental values of human existence - to be regarded as equal in worth to all others.
The reasons for liking the royals are intransigence, childish fairy tales, and crap plates with pictures on.
I agree.
It is drivel.
There is no such thing as royalty. Nobody is royal.
The 'royal' family should be privatised. People who want it or need it should pay for it themselves.
Why should everyone be compelled to pay and to go along with such a daft idea just because some tabloid reading, vacuous, and dull people need a world of princes and princesses to enliven their dismal lives?
Nobody is paying anything. Reading any of about 20 of the last 30 posts on this thread should have alerted you to this.
But yet you still failed.
At least go back and read three or four fucking pages you mouth breathing idiot.urmston said:Damocles said:urmston said:Who is paying for William and Kate's new baby to be born in a private hospital?
They certainly aren't.
I've nothing against the 'royal' family as people.
If the state threw millions of pounds at me for no good reason I wouldn't refuse it.
But why should I pay for them to live such luxurious lives while they do jobs that anyone could do like opening leisure centres and bypasses?
Time to get rid.
Yes, they absolutely are.
The state throws no money at them. they throw money at the state. Go back to page 20 and read through.
TV trash like Top Gear makes money.
The 'royal' family makes money.
The lottery makes money.
They make money from the gullible.
Stuff like that should not be run by the state.
The state should not be involved in taking money from the gullible.
It should protect such people, not exploit them for cash.