Guest deebom Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 The argument that they bring in tourists is bollocks. How many tourists actually get to see the royals? Tourists come to look at at the buildings, history, changing of the guard ect. The royals need hanging publicly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Cunt Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to them. Their wealth is almost limitless. They'd be happy to withdraw from public life. I subscribe to the argument that they are net creators of wealth and jobs, so am ok with the situation as it is. I think it is a completely outmoded institution .This of course is purely my own sorry arsed opinion. What a load of bollocks. If it were self-sufficient, it wouldn't need a a fucking top-up! Their "limitless wealth" is not so endless if it needs a net top up. They are using our money to live the life of privilege. And anybody who actually read a few history books, knows jolly well how their "wealth" came about. And the old, fucking rip off is still going on to a certain extent. Please make such comments to primary school kids, they may buy into it. They enjoy fantasy books about knights and princesses. I am too old for this crap 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decimus Posted January 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 The argument that they bring in tourists is bollocks. How many tourists actually get to see the royals? Tourists come to look at at the buildings, history, changing of the guard ect. The royals need hanging publicly. Exactly. Anyone who defends this institution is a fucking brainwashed serf, no better than a 12th century pauper doffing their cap to the lord of the manor. The worst endorsement are the fucking imbeciles who disagree with an elected head of state just because they don't agree with their politics. Stop throwing your royalist toys out of the fucking pram and realise that even if you disagree with policy, the most important thing is to have a leader who is picked by the majority of the population. If you don't agree with that, you're no more advanced than a North Korean peasant destined to live under a fat, mental despot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Snatch Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 If you don't agree with that you're no more advanced than a North Korean peasant destined to live under a fat, mental despot. Is Broney in charge of N.Korea now? Fantasy Ponies for everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuntspotter Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 [qusote name="cuntspotter" post="84450" timestamp="1422204676"] It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to them. Their wealth is almost limitless. They'd be happy to withdraw from public life. I subscribe to the argument that they are net creators of wealth and jobs, so am ok with the situation as it is. I think it is a completely outmoded institution .This of course is purely my own sorry arsed opinion. The peak district is a net creator of wealth, spot, but I wouldn't suggest crowning it. The amount spent on the cunts far outweighs a any benefit in tourism. And even if it didn't id rather live in a genuine democracy and pay a bit more into the system than live in the current dark age system. Fuck the royals, and all the privilege associated with them. You've got a foreign prince of Wales for a start. Do the Welsh find this acceptable? No fucker cares, Dex. If we want to live in a genuine democracy, we'll have to change a damned sight more than the royal family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuntspotter Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 What a load of bollocks. If it were self-sufficient, it wouldn't need a a fucking top-up! Their "limitless wealth" is not so endless if it needs a net top up. They are using our money to live the life of privilege. And anybody who actually read a few history books, knows jolly well how their "wealth" came about. And the old, fucking rip off is still going on to a certain extent. Please make such comments to primary school kids, they may buy into it. They enjoy fantasy books about knights and princesses. I am too old for this crap The House of Windsor's personal wealth is in excess of £1000,000,0000. The £60,000,000 represents their expenses paid by the country In return for property , land and assorted assets given over to the country in the early 19th century. The reality is that the £60,000,000 is small potatoes in the scheme of things..... I'm not defending it, I'm pointing out the reasons that are stated explaining why this continues. Us not liking it is not going to stop it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuntspotter Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Don't be like that Chaim. I'm happy to play Abdul/Oberst to your Rabbi. Have nagila, baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decimus Posted January 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 The peak district is a net creator of wealth, spot, but I wouldn't suggest crowning it. The amount spent on the cunts far outweighs a any benefit in tourism. And even if it didn't id rather live in a genuine democracy and pay a bit more into the system than live in the current dark age system. Fuck the royals, and all the privilege associated with them. You've got a foreign prince of Wales for a start. Do the Welsh find this acceptable? No fucker cares, Dex. If we want to live in a genuine democracy, we'll have to change a damned sight more than the royal family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Cunt Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 The House of Windsor's personal wealth is in excess of £1000,000,0000. The £60,000,000 represents their expenses paid by the country In return for property , land and assorted assets given over to the country in the early 19th century. The reality is that the £60,000,000 is small potatoes in the scheme of things..... I'm not defending it, I'm pointing out the reasons that are stated explaining why this continues. Us not liking it is not going to stop it. Us not liking it and taking steps would actually achieve something. "Their personal wealth" - would you kindly explain to the members how this came about? Put simply, if they can't make ends meet based on their own income, derived from a millennium of theft, they should go to a fucking bank, borrow the money, pay interest, sell equity, pay the loans with interest, sell more equity, etc. until they run out of equity. We are a fucking charity, GIVING money away for FREE to those cunts. Do your maths and see how these so called small potatoes mushroom into vast sums in no time. And while you are at it, do explain all the loopholes and trusts which make sure that the "wealth" is adequately protected for all the future fucking dukes and Wotsits, God forbid, should the tax man wanted a piece of it. They are very well organised financially and will make sure, that as long as there are fools out there who will believe their spin, they can make a packet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuntspotter Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Us not liking it and taking steps would actually achieve something. "Their personal wealth" - would you kindly explain to the members how this came about? Put simply, if they can't make ends meet based on their own income, derived from a millennium of theft, they should go to a fucking bank, borrow the money, pay interest, sell equity, pay the loans with interest, sell more equity, etc. until they run out of equity. We are a fucking charity, GIVING money away for FREE to those cunts. Do your maths and see how these so called small potatoes mushroom into vast sums in no time. And while you are at it, do explain all the loopholes and trusts which make sure that the "wealth" is adequately protected for all the future fucking dukes and Wotsits, God forbid, should the tax man wanted a piece of it. They are very well organised financially and will make sure, that as long as there are fools out there who will believe their spin, they can make a packet. Hey, I'm not defending it.... Rant away to your heart's content. I think it's iniquitous too. I just ain't blowing a fucking gasket over it. Your ire isn't going to change anything Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Cunt Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 I may add I would find it tad insulting, if somebody nicked my wallet and then made me work just to get my money back. That is a simple analogy. Save us the brain-pain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuntspotter Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 I may add I would find it tad insulting, if somebody nicked my wallet and then made me work just to get my money back. That is a simple analogy. Save us the brain-pain. Go and stand outside Buck House with a placard on which is written the legend "Cunts!" Write to Brenda asking for your money back. Actively underpay your council tax by one pound in protest at the £1 annual contribution to the Clampitts. Do anything ... But do something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camberwell gypsy Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Having a King in charge would be neat. Don King for instance. Or Fuzzy Zoeller. What about The Gypsy Kings? They can come out on the balcony at Buck Palace and give impromptu concerts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KuntaCunty Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Fuck off, Prof! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DingTheRioja Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 .......... The worst endorsement are the fucking imbeciles who disagree with an elected head of state just because they don't agree with their politics. ....... That just sounds like "I voted for the other party so get rid of democracy" 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.