It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rejected: Queen's plea for more cash

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Rejected: Queen's plea for more cash


www.independent.co.uk

The Queen and the Government are locked in a secret dispute over royal demands to meet the growing expense of the monarchy.Ministers have been told the palace needs extra money to help with the costs of maintaing the Roayal Estate of palaces and increased fuel,food and staffing costs.But the govt is REFUSING to increase the £15 Million it already pays and will not increase the£7.9mCivil List which pays for the monarchs public functions.Whitehall have replied budgets are already overstretched .
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Instructions for Breaking Alternative News Forum

Edit: Edit to title to reflect actual article headline.



[edit on 9/27/2008 by maria_stardust]




posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Well,what do we think?Is the Queen value for money?Should she get a job?Have you ever had problems paying for your palaces?Personally,I applaud the government.It's our money she would be getting and with thousands of pensioners facing the choice of to heat or to eat this winter The Royals &Co can do one .She should try having a car boot sale for her rich mates or alternatively start shopping at Aldi.

www.independent.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Instructions for Breaking Alternative News Forum

Edit: Edit to title to reflect actual article headline.

[edit on 9/27/2008 by maria_stardust]



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Its absolutely ridiculous and pathetic, to think there is these people sitting there living for free off the people.
Its so insanely absurd its almost incomprehensible.
This is why in the past, some country's have kicked out the monarchy.
Even executed them.
They serve no purpose whatsoever and bleed the tax payer dry.
Its totally illogical.
And people who support it I feel very sad for.
As they must posses not even one ounce of logic or common sense whatsoever.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 08:54 AM
link   
As funny as it is, the 'computer says no' addition to the headline might be lost on people not familiar with 'Little Britain'.


I'm not a Royalist as such; living where I live (ie not in London, Scotland or Cornwall) I'm unlikely to be in the queue for a cure for the King's Evil. Neither do I get to see any fancy buildings or pageantry unless it's through the very London-centric media in this country.

That said, aren't the Royal family meant to cost us individuals something like 50 or 60p a year? Money-grabbing shape-shifters or not, I can't really complain about this. I pay far, far more in council tax and so on and never really see what I get for that , all the while knowing that the government are probably bigger criminals and thieves than the Royals.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:04 AM
link   
LMAO, what I find hilarious, is the 'secret talks' part, there will be no talks, the queen can take what ever she wants from the government, and therefore the people, she can liquidate the entire government if she so pleases, legally.

So the government saying NO? I don't think so, to me, this is a ploy to show 'the government' are 'working for the people', propaganda IMO, then again, what isn't these days.

She asked a while ago for more money for upkeep for her 'estates', last I heard, it was still being discussed, is this the same thing? an update? or something else? if this is something else, expect the previous request to go up by, I dunno, £15 million?


Oh well, just a thought.

As for exectuion, even if she may be a reptillian, lol, it's a bit harsh innit?!? lol

EMM



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


'Computer says no' is a reference to the comedy programme 'Little Britain' and is a skit at beauracracy well all have to face in modern life where decisions are made by a computer.
Merriman ,are you seriously telling me that you don't mind subsidsing the richest woman in Britain?

Slightly off topic but kind of relevant I had the good fortune to listen to a lecture recently by Stuart Ramsay ,SKYNEWS foriegn correspondent.He told us about being taken hostage in Chechneya where he thought he was going to be executed,showed us a video of being on maneuoveres with the Britsh Army in Afghanistan being attacked by the Taliban but what was interesting was how he said he avioded any royal reporting like the plauge.He did a stint with Charles and Camilla and said it was awful .He also said he'd rather face the Taliban than English football hooligans anyday lol as more correspondents get bashed up at footie matches than in wars.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I am a U.S. citizen and am not really affected by this, but a few years back at work a person commented on the way the Royals live and asked where does their money come from? I told her that basically, the Royal family is on what would be considered really, really, really great welfare in our country. After reading this article, I'm suprised at just how accurate I was.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by candyfloss
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


'Computer says no' is a reference to the comedy programme 'Little Britain' and is a skit at beauracracy well all have to face in modern life where decisions are made by a computer.


Yes, I know. That's why I made reference to it in my post. All I'm trying to point out is that, as it stands, your title reads as if the Queen had her cash card eaten at a cash machine or something. It's a bit misleading as does kind of suggest that the Independent are making that comment. I know the Indie has dumbed down of late (and hiked its price up) but you're putting words into its editorial mouth.


Merriman ,are you seriously telling me that you don't mind subsidsing the richest woman in Britain?


To be honest, if it's costing something like 50 or 60p a year, I'm not really that bothered, no. Compared to the £140 I have to pay for the privilege of watching any kind of television or the way I'm shafted for my water rates or bills generally, my council tax - including payment for police I never actually see - and so on; no, not really. 50 or 60p a year is the least of my worries compared to the way I'm being fleeced elsewhere.

Let's get the other things sorted first, and then, when I'm much better off, I'll be happy to talk about this 50 or 60p a year.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Interesting replies -some cinicle that her maj will get the cash anyway ans some who don't mind shelling out.For the US poster ,yes it is like welfare but the Queen can kiss my arse if she wants money from me.Merriman,I know that you know what computer says no is but our curious American comrades reading this thread don't-silly boy..



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
LMAO, what I find hilarious, is the 'secret talks' part, there will be no talks, the queen can take what ever she wants from the government, and therefore the people, she can liquidate the entire government if she so pleases, legally.


Is that true? As an uncouth American, I was always under the impression that the Royals were pretty much powerless, and the power was with the P.M. and Parliament?

EDIT: as powerless as the really disgustingly rich can be, anyway. As powerless as, say, the Walton family in America.

EDIT AGAIN: because I realized this was totally off topic. In my opinion, the Queen should consider this difficult economic time an opportunity to bond with her subjects. Perhaps show the rest of the world how to entertain with grace and dignity on a budget


[edit on 9/27/08 by americandingbat]



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:06 AM
link   
It is time we rid ourselves of this tyrannical system of abuse in the United Kingdom. Aristocracy is pointless, undemocratic and a waste of money.

Need I say no more?



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:13 AM
link   
The only thing good that the Royal family does for the UK is instill a sense of pride and patriotism for our young lads and lasses who join the services and end up getting killed for some politicians game.. at least it gives the kids something to do... and also brings in tourists...

that's about it really.. What's so royal about them anyway?

Should of all been got rid of long ago...and maybe people like Diana would still be alive....



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
 


Well I'm up for execution
sounds good to me.

What makes me sick an bad about these royal parasites is the fact that so many of the population that worship them are skint.

Recently in the UK it was declared open day on those who are out of work etc and in receipt of some benefit. Here we have the Royal house of windsor the biggest social welfare scroungers in the country laughing all the way to the bank.

It's complete BS to say these people represent anything other greed and indolence and privelage.

The minute you leave school and get a job in the UK, these bloated twats have got their hand in Your pocket thieving your hard earned cash. You are NEVER asked would you like to contribute to the Royal Robbery, your money is just taken to fund these leeches.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by americandingbat
 


I don't honestly know how she could just take money from the govt even monarchs like Charles II had to ask the govt the money to fight the Dutch and when they would'nt do it he did a backdoor deal with the French.As ,I understand it ,the Queen is the Head of State .She opens parliament but her role is symbolic .I honestly doubt sh'es going to get the money.

Here's some info anyway;

www.royal.gov.uk...

www.royal.gov.uk...



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Monarchy is a parasitic cancer of the present day, the jobs they fulfill are largely ceremonial and the few foreign tasks and projects they perform in are not that impressive. In my personal opinion, they are the largest obvious symbol that seperates rich and poor. Just look at the wealth and riches they live in, disgusting!

I can talk from experience, i live in the Netherlands, the monarchy here is one of the richest in the world. And the way people here adore them here is sickening. Plenty of skepticism around here i have to admit. People are starting to question the costs of maintaining and funding their family. And i applaud that.

I hope that in my country we abolish this soon.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Well,refering to further back in the thread Stuart Ramsay said about reporting on the Carles and Camilla trip to wherever that he was told by stuffy royal aides that he musn't ask any questions.I'm would'nt be surprised if he was told he musn't look them in the eye.There's alot that could be written about the royals .I'd like to know why the Kitty Kelly book about the royals was banned here in the Uk?I'd also like to know what was behind the scenes when the Queen pulled the plug on Paul Burrell theft trial,warning him ominously that there were 'dark forces operating in Britain'.I know the Queen interfered with the trail because Burrell said he was going to spill the beans if he was prosecuted-



news.bbc.co.uk...

the last few paragraphs of this article are interesting;

www.news.com.au...



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Is that true? As an uncouth American, I was always under the impression that the Royals were pretty much powerless, and the power was with the P.M. and Parliament?

EDIT: as powerless as the really disgustingly rich can be, anyway. As powerless as, say, the Walton family in America.

EDIT AGAIN: because I realized this was totally off topic. In my opinion, the Queen should consider this difficult economic time an opportunity to bond with her subjects. Perhaps show the rest of the world how to entertain with grace and dignity on a budget


From my understanding yes, it is one of those 'outdated laws' yet, still can be applied for some reason, rather than being written off, huh? We got shown some other crazy ones in my college psychology class, you can kill a welshman, at noon, with a crossbow, outside chester town hall, and its legal!

LMAO

From memory, the queen can take any land, that is currently in the British empire, or otherwise under her rule, for her own, legally. Now, I'm not sure if this applies to 'liquid wealth' such as money, but since she can dissolve the government at a wave of her hand, I'm supposing she could.

EMM



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Isn't the Royal Family like RETARDED rich?????


Let them spend their OWN money to maintain the palace!



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Sorry could'nt resist adding a link to some info about Cromwell especialy as some posters are feeling very rebellious;





www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by bismarcksea
Isn't the Royal Family like RETARDED rich?????


Let them spend their OWN money to maintain the palace!




They supposedly own alot of america, lol. Remember she gave alan greenspan a knighthood, what the heck does the fed in america have to do with her? lol, i think we all know.

There mega rich, so why do they need this, the answer is, they need to keep up the delusion that they only have the money the government gives them, period.




top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join