The Royal Family

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people

Do you approve of the royal family?

Approve
4
7%
Disapprove
38
68%
Cock-end
14
25%
 
Total votes: 56

Herainestold
After Pie
Posts: 1821
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Herainestold » Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:43 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... _net_worth
Outside Europe the people who seized oil and self-declared themselves monarchs are all top.

In Europe Wikipedia has Liechtenstein bloke top, Luxembourg second.

Spain 3rd, Monaco 4th.

Elizabeth Windsor is only 5th, Charles Windsor 6th (if combined they'd beat Monaco).

The wealth tax should sort this out. Leave the constitutional monarch with nothing, but pay them a fair whack for their charity, ambassadorial and government work.

ETA:

Top charity CEO gets £240k a year
Top ambassador gets £185k a year
Prime Minister gets £160k a year

Assuming a third of time on each, that averages to about £200k a year. Seems a reasonable salary for a head of state and will leave Elizabeth Windsor in the best paid 0.5% in the country. Chuck in part time use of Chequers, shared with the PM. Chuck in a good travel allowance and maybe even a wardrobe allowance for her fancy dress. Chuck in free banquets whenever another head of state is in town.

I'd take the job for that. It is discriminatory against me that I am denied the chance to apply for this job merely on the basis of my birth circumstances.
This is a good idea . In any top public service job, there should be some kind of performance appraisal.Maybe every two or five years. Whether it should be a straight up referendum or not is another matter. And how to replace them if they fail?
Interestingly Canada's Governor General recently resigned due to poor job performance. It was public pressure/embarassment rather than any formal mechanism.
Masking forever
Putin is a monster, Russian people are not.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2760
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: The Royal Family

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:47 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
Good stuff
Cheers for that, very interesting.
They loved each other and believed they loved mankind, they fought each other and believed they fought the world.

User avatar
Little waster
After Pie
Posts: 2114
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:35 am
Location: About 1 inch behind my eyes

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Little waster » Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:49 pm

Blackcountryboy wrote:
Mon Feb 08, 2021 5:26 pm
If we get rid of the Royal Family we need a Head of State - Nigel Farage doesn't appear too busy nowadays; he would have a good chance if we did it by election.
Under an Irish-style parliamentary system we'd probably end up with some variant of President Tony Robinson (or even President Jackie Weaver, assuming she has the authority).

Under a US or French Presidential system we might end up with a President Johnson* (... or Blair ... or Cameron) and YMMV on how appealing that prospect is. However as the Orange Buffoon over-the-water taught us the wonders of democracy means even the worst President gets to be very publicly ejected eventually. Whereas we are stuck with Brenda and her brood in perpetuity, unless something changes.




*assuming he'd even win a straight head-to-head Presidential race versus his current position based on a vague mix of half the Tory MPs after 5 run-off ballots, two-thirds of the 100,000 geriatric weirdos who make the Tory membership, a third of the voters of Uxbridge and a third of the general electorate's support under FPTP
This place is not a place of honor, no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here, nothing valued is here.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us.
This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.

User avatar
nekomatic
Dorkwood
Posts: 994
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by nekomatic » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:33 pm

Blackcountryboy wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:00 pm
My view is a written constitution is required, whether we keep the Royal family or not.
I always thought that, but David Allen Green argues* that the un-writtenness** of our constitution is not what is wrong with it, and that actually debates about the important constitutional changes we ought to be urgently discussing always get derailed on to how and by whom the writing** of this whole new constitution would be done, which gets in the way of actually changing anything.

If that’s not persuasive, consider that the USA has a written constitution and that doesn’t seem to have helped them much.

* apologies for not linking to where he actually argues it, his site on my phone is slower than a conveyancing solicitor
** Of course our constitution is written; it’s just not all written in one place.
Move-a… side, and let the mango through… let the mango through

User avatar
nekomatic
Dorkwood
Posts: 994
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by nekomatic » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:43 pm

FlammableFlower wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:46 pm
In the main, I'd probably prefer a parliamentary republic (German style) as opposed to a presidential (USA style).
The German style thing that we could really do with is probably a federal organisation of regions. But that’s even less likely than agreeing on a written** constitution.
Move-a… side, and let the mango through… let the mango through

User avatar
Sciolus
Dorkwood
Posts: 1059
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Sciolus » Wed Feb 10, 2021 6:55 pm

Little waster wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:49 pm
Under an Irish-style parliamentary system we'd probably end up with some variant of President Tony Robinson (or even President Jackie Weaver, assuming she has the authority).
The Irish president should be ex officio head of state of the UK as well. I'd be very happy with any of the three they've had since 1990 (I don't know much about earlier ones) to replace the Windsors.

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: The Royal Family

Post by dyqik » Wed Feb 10, 2021 7:20 pm

nekomatic wrote:
Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:33 pm
Blackcountryboy wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:00 pm
My view is a written constitution is required, whether we keep the Royal family or not.
I always thought that, but David Allen Green argues* that the un-writtenness** of our constitution is not what is wrong with it, and that actually debates about the important constitutional changes we ought to be urgently discussing always get derailed on to how and by whom the writing** of this whole new constitution would be done, which gets in the way of actually changing anything.

If that’s not persuasive, consider that the USA has a written constitution and that doesn’t seem to have helped them much.

* apologies for not linking to where he actually argues it, his site on my phone is slower than a conveyancing solicitor
** Of course our constitution is written; it’s just not all written in one place.
The UK doesn't have a constitution worth the paper it's written on. Because any element of it can (although not trivially) be completely changed with a simple majority in Parliament. Thus the UK's constitutional law does nothing much to set out the relationship between the people and the state, or to protect the populations from the whims of government, as the government has a parliamentary majority by default.

Where the US and other real constitutions differ from the UK's constitutional law is that changing the constitutions requires more than just the government's (parliamentary majority's) say-so. And changing that in the UK means getting rid of the only absolute in UK constitutional law - the primacy of Parliament and the principle that it can't bind itself.

User avatar
jimbob
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4030
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: The Royal Family

Post by jimbob » Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:55 pm

Sciolus wrote:
Wed Feb 10, 2021 6:55 pm
Little waster wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:49 pm
Under an Irish-style parliamentary system we'd probably end up with some variant of President Tony Robinson (or even President Jackie Weaver, assuming she has the authority).
The Irish president should be ex officio head of state of the UK as well. I'd be very happy with any of the three they've had since 1990 (I don't know much about earlier ones) to replace the Windsors.
Yup. Someone popular with moral authority but little actual power.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

secret squirrel
Snowbonk
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by secret squirrel » Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:48 am

lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... _net_worth
Outside Europe the people who seized oil and self-declared themselves monarchs are all top.
...
Apart from the King of Thailand in the top spot, who, in addition to his vast wealth, receives over a billion US dollars a year from the tax payers of a fairly poor country. Nevertheless, and in spite of his well known personal flaws, despite draconian laws that give elderly ladies decades long prison sentences for criticizing him, the royal family remains broadly popular in Thailand (though less so with the younger generation). The power of propaganda is truly impressive.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2760
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: The Royal Family

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:03 pm

secret squirrel wrote:
Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:48 am
lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... _net_worth
Outside Europe the people who seized oil and self-declared themselves monarchs are all top.
...
Apart from the King of Thailand in the top spot, who, in addition to his vast wealth, receives over a billion US dollars a year from the tax payers of a fairly poor country. Nevertheless, and in spite of his well known personal flaws, despite draconian laws that give elderly ladies decades long prison sentences for criticizing him, the royal family remains broadly popular in Thailand (though less so with the younger generation). The power of propaganda is truly impressive.
Assuming you're still in Thailand, give us a shout if you need us to disappear this post ;)
They loved each other and believed they loved mankind, they fought each other and believed they fought the world.

secret squirrel
Snowbonk
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by secret squirrel » Sat Feb 13, 2021 7:51 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:03 pm
Assuming you're still in Thailand, give us a shout if you need us to disappear this post ;)
Thanks. Fortunately, I doubt there are many Thai ultra-royalists browsing this forum. Also, even if I posted this on facebook or something and it came to the attention of the authorities, as a foreigner I think I would likely only lose my job and be deported.

noggins
Fuzzable
Posts: 362
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:30 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by noggins » Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:03 pm

If you were a Thai and looked at your neighbours’ governments and histories, monarchy starts to look quite appealing.

secret squirrel
Snowbonk
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by secret squirrel » Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:03 pm

noggins wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:03 pm
If you were a Thai and looked at your neighbours’ governments and histories, monarchy starts to look quite appealing.
Well, on paper they're a constitutional monarchy, and in practice they were a military dictatorship for much of the 20th century. They struck deals with the Japanese to avoid the worst of Japanese occupation during WW2, and they didn't get bombed by the US like Laos and Cambodia did, which goes a long way to explaining their current position relative to their neighbours (excluding Malaysia). But yes, the previous king was a 'good king', and did various good works for the people, along with living an overtly modest life. He gave the military propagandists good material to work with.

User avatar
veravista
Catbabel
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 7:29 pm
Location: Directly above the centre of the earth

Re: The Royal Family

Post by veravista » Sun Feb 14, 2021 10:28 pm

Hooray, another parasite on the way to distract us plebs from the pandemic and brexit. Gawd bless em

User avatar
Gfamily
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4100
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:00 pm
Location: NW England

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Gfamily » Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:40 pm

veravista wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 10:28 pm
Hooray, another parasite on the way to distract us plebs from the pandemic and brexit. Gawd bless em
They don't have a lot of choice in how these things are presented.
As I think I've said in another place, I am pretty sure that both of the main grandchildren would seriously consider being given a pass against having to do that job of being Head of State.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!

User avatar
Gfamily
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4100
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:00 pm
Location: NW England

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Gfamily » Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:19 pm

Hmmm
Nothing proclaims your innocence of all charges more than saying "I have an agreement that proves the complainant has no cause to sue, but I'd rather nobody saw the agreement"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ent-sealed
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Grumble » Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:37 pm

Nonce Andrew kicked out of the Royal Family. Will defend case “as a private citizen”.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... SApp_Other
A bit churlish

User avatar
Martin_B
Dorkwood
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:20 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Martin_B » Thu Jan 13, 2022 10:47 pm

Grumble wrote:
Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:37 pm
Nonce Andrew kicked out of the Royal Family. Will defend case “as a private citizen”.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... SApp_Other
Not quite kicked out of the family (not yet, anyway!) Stripped of military titles and use of HRH, but still Prince Andrew, and still lives in royal property.
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"

User avatar
Gfamily
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4100
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:00 pm
Location: NW England

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Gfamily » Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:44 am

Martin_B wrote:
Thu Jan 13, 2022 10:47 pm
Grumble wrote:
Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:37 pm
Nonce Andrew kicked out of the Royal Family. Will defend case “as a private citizen”.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... SApp_Other
Not quite kicked out of the family (not yet, anyway!) Stripped of military titles and use of HRH, but still Prince Andrew, and still lives in royal property.
So not "The Andrew formerly known as Prince" quite yet.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!

User avatar
Martin_B
Dorkwood
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:20 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Martin_B » Fri Jan 14, 2022 7:07 am

Gfamily wrote:
Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:44 am
Martin_B wrote:
Thu Jan 13, 2022 10:47 pm
Grumble wrote:
Thu Jan 13, 2022 6:37 pm
Nonce Andrew kicked out of the Royal Family. Will defend case “as a private citizen”.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... SApp_Other
Not quite kicked out of the family (not yet, anyway!) Stripped of military titles and use of HRH, but still Prince Andrew, and still lives in royal property.
So not "The Andrew formerly known as Prince" quite yet.
:lol:
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"

IvanV
Dorkwood
Posts: 1300
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 11:12 am

Re: The Royal Family

Post by IvanV » Fri Jan 14, 2022 4:26 pm

That struck me as a bit strong, "will defend it", as if he was being instructed to defend it. But actually the wording was "is defending it". Well, that's an assumption too. Is he defending it?

It has always struck me that one of the options of dealing with a civil case in another country is simply not to defend it. Doubtless you will get a judgment against you by default. But does that mean anything? If there is no reciprocal agreement on enforceability of civil judgments, and there isn't in the case of US & UK, then maybe not. If an ordinary person of ordinary income were, for some reason, stuck with a civil case in the US, such is the cost of lawyers there, etc, I suspect that is all we could do, not defend it. We would have to accept that we couldn't visit the US having that default judgment against us. But it could be of little effect if we just stayed away.

I had a quick look at whether a civil judgment in the US court is enforceable in the UK, in the absence of such a reciprocal agreement on enforceability. Apparently you can still be sued in UK court for the debt, the sum the plaintiff was awarded in the US court. But it will only be accepted as an enforceable debt here subject to certain conditions. One is whether you submitted to the jurisdiction of the US court. If you were present in the US, at the time of the action, then you have submitted to US jurisdiction. But if you don't go there, and don't defend it, then the judgment could well be unenforceable here. One of the things you can do, apparently, and still be found not to have submitted to US jurisdiction, is apply for the case to be struck out. So maybe he can still argue that he hasn't submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. Another thing he can do is argue that the matters are being given to the wrong jurisdiction. UK courts are usually not impressed by extraterritorial judgments. Given that photo of Giuffre, Maxwell and Andrew was taken in London, maybe he can argue that anything that alleged to have happened here in England should be litigated here in England. It seems that a proportion of Epstein's misbehaviours also happened in some Caribbean islands, but also in Florida. I don't know what evidence there is against Andrew in relation to happenings only on US soil.

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3402
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Grumble » Fri Jan 14, 2022 4:34 pm

I do find it slightly strange that Andrew is being sued in the US for an offence that happened in the U.K..
A bit churlish

User avatar
Rich Scopie
Snowbonk
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:21 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Rich Scopie » Fri Jan 14, 2022 4:36 pm

Image

Used to be the Duke of York.
It first was a rumour dismissed as a lie, but then came the evidence none could deny:
a double page spread in the Sunday Express — the Russians are running the DHSS!

WFJ
Snowbonk
Posts: 578
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:54 am

Re: The Royal Family

Post by WFJ » Fri Jan 14, 2022 5:21 pm

With any luck he'll end up doing an Archer/Aitken in court.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9287
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sat Jan 15, 2022 12:48 am

As amusing as watching the next celebrity nonce getting a delayed but deserved comeuppance may be (allegedly), Epstein must've had clients/co-nonces who were far richer and more powerful than this Hapless Royal Halfwit. I hope justice will ultimately extend in their direction too.

Whatever happened to all those tapes from his safe? Maybe blackmail is funding the CIA's black projects now that the drugrunners are too powerful to need their help?
Tree dwellers leaping out the boughs shouting «Get the paper»
Trunk hugging rebels chucking petals at a detonator

Post Reply