Jump to content

The pound is on the brink


Chancer
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 600
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So having read the link RH gave and following a link given in the Wiki entry and assuming I read it right the Queen basically hands over all her income to the government in return for her allowances. So if we got ride of her and flogged off the assets (Regents Street to name but one) the government would get a one off tax payment. To me that seems to be the same thing that people blamed the Tories for and New Labour i.e. selling of assets. Also lets not forget that in fact the houses, palaces, coach's, paintings etc don't really belong to her they belong to the state and she can't just sell them off to raise a bit of money. What happens to all the jobs all this creates, a rough tally of the just the Queens household shows over 200 people with only about 10% of them being high and middles management the rest are just 'ordinary' jobs looking after things, cleaning etc.

Also a lot of what the Queen does she is told to do by the government, state visits comes immediately to mind. They are basically used as a marketing tool.

Personally I think we would loose far more (financially) than we would gain in the long run if we got rid of them. I am just trying to look at it logically based on the info available. They don't have any effect on my personal life one way or the other and as to having their job, well I don't want to be working at 80 odd years of age and be sent all over the world at the whim of some politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the review of the biography of the late Queen Mother, quoting figures from that book:

"She used the money to pay for 83 full-time staff, including four footmen, two pages, three chauffeurs (what do they do, split her into three parts for transportation?), a private secretary, an orderly, a housekeeper, five housemaids... the list goes on and on. She even insisted that it was a legitimate use of public funds to maintain a full-time "Ascot office", whose job was to do nothing but keep a register of members of the Royal Enclosure and send them entry vouchers."

I don't see the benefit to tourism there.

And don't forget that the Crown Estates just deal with the public finances, so it is not a question of 'Queen basically hands over all her income to the government'

It is not her income

The royals have enormous private wealth which they could easily live off, but don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest problem is that it is (deliberately it would seem) difficult to differentiate between public and private wealth as explained HERE . What appears to happen depending on your personal view is how things are lumped together making it appear either more or less. Yes she is rich, somewhere around the 4th or 5th richest person in the world according to the Forbes list but then they have added in the value of state owned property, her art collection etc. Those that say she is not as rich as we think leave out land values etc. Its all down to what you want to believe and the angle from which you are coming from (pro or anti royalty)

I would like to see the Queen 'come clean' and a report produced that shows exactly what she 'owns' and what is private and public wealth although sadly I don't think it will happen. Even if it did who will believe it, certainly not those that perceive her to be a very rich person, a parasite, a drain on the UK economy etc. As the Queen is officially a 'Limited Corporation' then perhaps the government could sell her and everything that goes with her to the highest bidder, I am sure that would please many until that is they see the income she generates, bit like when they flogged off the water board and people saw the horrendous profit the made the first year they were privatised.

With regards to the QM she did carry out public engagements almost up to her death. These engagements where mainly at the command of the government. When she visited something she had a personal interest in or was patron of (Red Cross for example), like the Queen paid for the visit out of here own income be that a very rare occurrence (including security costs etc). I can't comment on the book, as I said I don't own a copy and have not read it.

Basically, as I have said, until its all officially laid open and written down for all to read none of us really knows and we are all jumping to conclusions often based on other peoples guess work.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NormanH"]From the review of the biography of the late Queen Mother, quoting figures from that book:

"She used the money to pay for 83 full-time staff, including four footmen, two pages, three chauffeurs (what do they do, split her into three parts for transportation?), a private secretary, an orderly, a housekeeper, five housemaids... the list goes on and on. She even insisted that it was a legitimate use of public funds to maintain a full-time "Ascot office", whose job was to do nothing but keep a register of members of the Royal Enclosure and send them entry vouchers."

I don't see the benefit to tourism there.
And don't forget that the Crown Estates just deal with the public finances, so it is not a question of 'Queen basically hands over all her income to the government'
It is not her income
The royals have enormous private wealth which they could easily live off, but don't.
[/quote]

My suggestion is that rather quote from the review by someone who seems to have started with an agenda in the first place, you actually read the book.

Frankly I doubt if many of us are suprised to discover that QM was a spendthrift with some very narrow views and who liked a drop of gin or two...there were thousands of her generation that were similar.

To be honest I don't even think its a very interesting argument, the UK has a Royal family and seems likely to for several generations so we may as well make the most of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course going back to the thread - I don't suppose the drop of the euro against the pound is anything to do with the present Irish Referendum? Or is it a coincidence that the pound loses against the euro when this malarky is being raised again in Ireland - surely someone somewhere should have realised that the Irish no meant no, rather than let's try it again next year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Keni "]

Of course going back to the thread - I don't suppose the drop of the euro against the pound is anything to do with the present Irish Referendum? Or is it a coincidence that the pound loses against the euro when this malarky is being raised again in Ireland - surely someone somewhere should have realised that the Irish no meant no, rather than let's try it again next year?

[/quote]

The Irish did not mean "no", the general public in Ireland (and in the UK) simply don't understand what the Lisbon treaty really is.That is why a government is chosen to make this kind of decisions instead of the man-in-the-street. The outcome btw is irrelevant for the Euro, but not for Ireland..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jako"][quote user="Keni "]

Of course going back to the thread - I don't suppose the drop of the euro against the pound is anything to do with the present Irish Referendum? Or is it a coincidence that the pound loses against the euro when this malarky is being raised again in Ireland - surely someone somewhere should have realised that the Irish no meant no, rather than let's try it again next year?

[/quote]

The Irish did not mean "no", the general public in Ireland (and in the UK) simply don't understand what the Lisbon treaty really is.That is why a government is chosen to make this kind of decisions instead of the man-in-the-street. The outcome btw is irrelevant for the Euro, but not for Ireland..

[/quote]

A somewhat patronising comment with more than a touch of arrogance about it I feel. Perhaps you feel that you have a superior understanding.

The Irish people voted NO because they meant NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the HFX page with the pound/euro spotrate saved as a a favorite (thankyou Bugbear) and I clicked on it today, yes I know it is illogical and that the markets probably dont trade on a Sunday buy heyho.

Anyway the naughty gremlins have either got into my computer or their site, when I saw the rate I sooooo wanted it to be true once again, I then thought that it might be a severe recurrence of my malarial fevers complete with hallucinations until I looked very carefully.

Try yourselves http://www.hifx.co.uk/marketwatch/currency_charts/historical_data.aspx

If only it were true (again) [:(]

Editted:

I promise you that I have not altered my link to HFX and its not April the 1st either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jako"][quote user="Keni "]

Of course going back to the thread - I don't suppose the drop of the euro against the pound is anything to do with the present Irish Referendum? Or is it a coincidence that the pound loses against the euro when this malarky is being raised again in Ireland - surely someone somewhere should have realised that the Irish no meant no, rather than let's try it again next year?

[/quote]
The Irish did not mean "no", the general public in Ireland (and in the UK) simply don't understand what the Lisbon treaty really is.That is why a government is chosen to make this kind of decisions instead of the man-in-the-street. The outcome btw is irrelevant for the Euro, but not for Ireland..

[/quote]

Based on my experience of doing business in the Republic of Ireland / Southern Ireland "NO" is a word which simply does not translate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that virtually nobody has ever read this treaty and yet everybody is supposed to give a vote on the matter. The Dutch and the French said "no" for a lot of valid reasons, but not one of those reasons had anything to do with the treaty. If you need rely on the information given to you by others, then let those others decide for you.  That is what  governments are chosen for.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just found this quote on another forum I frequent. If only 'the clowns' (I won't put the name of the leader (?) of the British government down here just in case someone might bring a zillion court cases against me) who say they are running the British government could be bothered to learn from history! I can't sleep for the worry of impending charges!!!!!!

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled,
         public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be
         tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should
         be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt.  People must again learn to
         work,  instead of living on public assistance."
       
                                                                -   Cicero   - 55 BC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi

checked the stirling v australian dollar rate the other day it was about 1 : 1.8, so no hols there, it was around 2.5 a year and a half ago.  It's also well down on the nz dollar.  Going to morocco this winter expect its down against it's currency.  The uk isn't doing well and the labour politicians want the electorate to vote for them.   Not sure if the other lot are any more competent.  Anyway Blair will sort out the eu if he gets the top job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jonzjob"]

I have just found this quote on another forum I frequent. If only 'the clowns' (I won't put the name of the leader (?) of the British government down here just in case someone might bring a zillion court cases against me) who say they are running the British government could be bothered to learn from history! I can't sleep for the worry of impending charges!!!!!!

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled,

         public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be

         tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should

         be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt.  People must again learn to

         work,  instead of living on public assistance."

       

                                                                -   Cicero   - 55 BC

[/quote]Pedant hat on the quote actually comes from the fictional novel based on Cicero's life called 'A Pillar of Iron by Taylor Caldwell.

Good all the same [;-)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You leave my sandals alone Wooly! They're my lucky ones. I won that competition and managed 2 loops at the end!

As far as the quote is concerned I wasn't around when it was wrote and as far as I can make out it's just as good to be ainti-sematic as it is to be pro unless you are the type of clown who takes it over the top?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...