The Queen (UK) should move into a council house - What say yall?

originally posted by: Unity_99
I think royalty should be abolished, and she and the top 1% of the 1% need to be in prison for the rest of their lives with all their wealth distributed to the world's citizens,

So just a lynch mob, do not worry about them being guilty of any crime....

and clean zero point energy out,

Now you really are living in a fantasy world believing such nonsense exists.

A nice high rise that way we can have the lot of them, in the one place. The block next to it could be for the political types, people like IDS and the likes. Some one already mentioned that they are imposters and thieves they stole the crown. They should be grateful we dont invite madam guillotine along to their moving out party.

a reply to: hellobruce

They are exactly reflected in the world, they are the worst criminals in existence, in the galaxy and though you might equal this group somewhere in the entire multiverse, you can't do worse than they have done. You can't do worse than endorsing guerilla's to dismantle democracy and saw the breasts of nursing moms after murdering their babies. You can't do worse than skinning children alive. There is nothing worse than the absolute impoverishment of the majority, stealing the land and resources and advances and technology and destroying earth herself to poison and kill people and having slaves. For the tiny 1 or2 that might be somewhat less guilty, they can sacrifice themselves to the cause of saving the world.

Sorry man, we know they're guilty, the top 1% of the 1% is the reason for every single hideous thing that this world is, when it is a jewel and should be paradise.

And any extra funds and resources they have that is more than anyone else, ie 7 billion, is extortion and slavery, and criminal beyond belief. They get not one penny more than anyone else, not one acre more of land, not one decision more important than anyone else. They're equal or in jail. They don't get to horde history, change it, ideas, inventions, truth, they either are equal, or in jail.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Metallicus
Council housing is where the local authority own houses then rent these houses at low cost to "poor people".

Of course in America you have no such thing as your local authorities are mercenary bast**** and put your "poor people" out on the streets to live in tent towns.

Seriously? What about the trillion dollars a year spent on "anti-poverty" programs including "project" housing in nearly every city in the country, subsidized "section 8" rents, etc. There are more "council houses" under different names in America than there are houses in Great Britain.

And should the Queen move into one? Hell no. If it weren't for the Queen and all the huge houses stolen from the rich (I'm sorry: I mean "given to the National Trust") and now tourist attractions no one would ever visit Great Britain, thus taking away the only major industry left and making Great Britain even poorer than she is today.

If you want to see the results of rampant socialist driven by envy, just look at Britain.

originally posted by: Unity_99
Sorry man, we know they're guilty,

So as I said, just a lynch mob!

a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

I am thinking it would want to be a rather large house with a big back yard . Think of the corgi's man , think of the corgi's . That being said the queen does no harm and millions around the world love her . As far as i can tell she owns bucking huge palace amongst others and has large tracts of very good land . Her worth to England would far outweigh the costs associated with the royal family expenses . Oh and Kate is HOT .

a reply to: Metallicus Im no royalist and personally feel its time that so called royalty was abolished!

She already is - Buckingham Palace is owned by the Crown Estate which in turn is owned by the State, not the Monarchy. In fact, most of the palaces are, with a few exceptions such as Balmoral.

a reply to: korkythecat Agree! My sentiments also.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs
It would not make a difference. Tourists would still come for the history! Lame excuse to keep these parasites and pedos!

a reply to: kloejen

Good example! Folk are blind to what and who these parasites are!
I believe the majority of the UK population want them gone. What % is hard to estimate but maybe 60 to 70% at a guess.

a reply to: HUMBLEONE No they don't but i wanted the US members to contribute.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs Actually it would probably increase the number of visitors wanting to see how the UK Queen now lives!!!!

originally posted by: Unity_99
They are exactly reflected in the world, they are the worst criminals in existence, in the galaxy and though you might equal this group somewhere in the entire multiverse,

What crime has a highly successful businessman / woman, whose business is worth a mint ever done, except create wealth that benefits everyone employed?

What crime has someone, who has a house whose value places them as a "paper" millionaire, but has no influence on housing markets? In the UK, many people of the 1% have bought houses in London when they were cheap.

It's easy, and lazy, to play the politics of envy without considering the detail.

Regards

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs
Actually you'll find it's the pomp and ceremony that tourists come to see not the queen. In fact if you were King Charlie you would pull in just as many tourists.





As jug ears does not have Diana anymore, I doubt that, Bill and Kate might though.

a reply to: crayzeed

Hey, we do have people sleeping rough on our streets in boxes etc also - more the shame of it as this country is supposedly so wealthy. Many of them are ex service men who simply cannot adapt to civvy life and need to keep moving. Although as a nation we do do better than some countries in housing our poor.

a reply to: stumason

Ah now the mystery of the scottish vote becomes so much clearer - she wouldn't have lost balmoral in 1000 years and I bet every trick was pulled to ensure that + she was desperate for that vote to keep the scots' assets and extra purse from scottish tax payers coming in to enjoy.

a reply to: paraphi

The only crime, provided the business was built legitimately and not stolen from others when it was formed, is that many of the rich pay less tax and in some cases none at all due to the corporative nature of their incomes.

Its time for a haircut for the elite and celebrity and instead of worshipping them we should be shaming them.

The 'crown estates' are worth nine billion pounds (English) (not eighteen as I quoted in an other thread) and the government income from that is paid to the Queen at a rate of fifteen percent per year, which is spent on workers wages, such as drivers, farmworkers, bricklayers, carpenters, cooks, cleaners, and the state banquets 'given' by the Queen to visiting presidents and such like.
So the Queen employs people, buys stuff to keep everything going, and pulls in visitors to add to the governments coffers. (old term for 'strong box') Every time a royal jets off somewhere, wages are paid, fuel is bought, which pays tax, which goes back to the government.
When part of Windsor castle burnt down, dozens of workers were employed putting it right, materials bought, all of which were taxed, which went back to the government, do you get my drift?

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

The French have b een earning billions from their royal palaces per year and many other EU countries with considerably less great royalty attractions earn considerably more. Being on a small island the Brits don't get too much EU or foreign news - mostly propaganda type stories so they don't get to compare what isn't directly under their noses here, which would probably cause a furore.