Monarch or Elected President

Would you rather have a monarch or an elected president as the head of state?

A hereditary monarch is what we have now.

An elected president would be (presumably) a senior politician, probably a former PM. But would be replaced/re-elected every few years rather than a job for life.

Personally, an elected president seems much more logical. Imagine if Paul Hurst's son had to be our next manager, with nobody able to challenge it?

The Queen was a dedicated and capable monarch, but not everyone would even want to do the job or be able to do it anywhere near as well. Her uncle abdicated because he didn't fancy it (even before his marriage), it does seem unfair to just demand people do a particular job for their whole life.

Elected President.

Get rid of the House of Lords for an elected upper house. Develop a full, written constitution. Introduce a proper PR voting system in both Houses of Parliament. Have increased devolution of power to all regions (not just the different countries of the UK).

Keep the Royals on for bits of pomp and circumstance and for foreigners to ogle. Remove some of their tax perks so they aren't treated differently to the rest of the landed gentry. They own vast swathes of the country already, so they'll manage to pay their way.

It's not broken and worked well for over 1000 years. Both King Charles and the new Prince of Wales will modernise it and make it fit for the 21c.

Thatched roofs. We've had them thousands of years and they work well. No need at all to change them for something better.

Quoted from Maringer

Elected President.

Get rid of the House of Lords for an elected upper house. Develop a full, written constitution. Introduce a proper PR voting system in both Houses of Parliament. Have increased devolution of power to all regions (not just the different countries of the UK).

Keep the Royals on for bits of pomp and circumstance and for foreigners to ogle. Remove some of their tax perks so they aren't treated differently to the rest of the landed gentry. They own vast swathes of the country already, so they'll manage to pay their way.

This!

Quoted from DB

It's not broken and worked well for over 1000 years. Both King Charles and the new Prince of Wales will modernise it and make it fit for the 21c.

You'll still be using a horse and cart then as opposed to a car?

Just to add, the monarchy worked so well at one stage that we had a revolution (quite deliberately called the 'Civil War' after the restoration) and chopped off the King's head. If Cromwell had lived a bit longer, we might well have seen us remain a republic in the longer term, but they couldn't develop a stable government given the conditions of the time and it was him holding it all together.

Quoted from mariner91

You'll still be using a horse and cart then as opposed to a car?

LOL  

Privatise the monarchy. Massive corporations would throw millions at the chances of naming rights on Buckingham Palace, the Crown jewels etc. You could slap sponsors on their clothes, 'Visit Rwanda' on King Charles sleeve, the Amazon tick across Prince Wiliams chest. The Royal Family start paying for themselves and not the tax payer. Everybody wins 👍.

Quoted from Manchester Mariner

Privatise the monarchy. Massive corporations would throw millions at the chances of naming rights on Buckingham Palace, the Crown jewels etc. You could slap sponsors on their clothes, 'Visit Rwanda' on King Charles sleeve, the Amazon tick across Prince Wiliams chest. The Royal Family start paying for themselves and not the tax payer. Everybody wins 👍.

It may have changed - I doubt it, but it may - but yonks ago I had to do a case study on this issue and it turns out the royal family generate more £ in tourism and other things for the UK economy than it costs us to fund them.  I'd be in favour of cutting away all the dross though, so it's only the Monarch and next in line that's paid for and all the cousins, uncles etc can survive off their own personal fortunes.

Quoted from Manchester Mariner

Privatise the monarchy. Massive corporations would throw millions at the chances of naming rights on Buckingham Palace, the Crown jewels etc. You could slap sponsors on their clothes, 'Visit Rwanda' on King Charles sleeve, the Amazon tick across Prince Wiliams chest. The Royal Family start paying for themselves and not the tax payer. Everybody wins 👍.

Golden arches at Windsor would go well, especially if the Brexiteers permit a rapprochement with the French and allow MaccyD's to use Royale with cheese...

But I'd really like Charles to start throwing weight around on climate change and the environment (it's an existential issue not a political one) - in a kind of Thomas Shelby way. What do you mean I can't be a meddling monarch, I'm the feckin King...

Quoted from Limerick Mariner

Golden arches at Windsor would go well, especially if the Brexiteers permit a rapprochement with the French and allow MaccyD's to use Royale with cheese...

But I'd really like Charles to start throwing weight around on climate change and the environment (it's an existential issue not a political one) - in a kind of Thomas Shelby way. What do you mean I can't be a meddling monarch, I'm the feckin King...

I'd actually be willing to pay the licence fee to see that series of Peaky Windsors!  Have to say I more see him as a Tony Soprano character, 'in this palace, columbus is hero'

When was the last time we had a decent democratically elected leader? At least a monarch thinks long term.

Quoted from TuckerJenkins

When was the last time we had a decent democratically elected leader? At least a monarch thinks long term.

Actually, the Cameron Clegg coalition was the most democratic since the 1930s - 60% of the vote and the only post-war government with more than 50% of the popular vote. On social liberalism, they did some very good things. On the economy, the Tories well and truly fecked the Liberals and the lower paid, the Liberals paid for it, and we've been paying for it since and especially now with the years of underinvestment in the NHS other public services, transport and by the privatised-monopolies. If the Liberals had gone with Labour, the government would have had 52% of the popular vote.

I suspect that Braverman would be seriously keen on having the Coast Guard sponsored by Visit Rwanda. She's that dim.

Quoted from DB

It's not broken and worked well for over 1000 years. Both King Charles and the new Prince of Wales will modernise it and make it fit for the 21c.

About time we tried something different then.

The monarchy is an outdated busted flush and needs abolishing, along with the House of Lords.

21st century it is not.

Quoted from ginnywings

About time we tried something different then.

The monarchy is an outdated busted flush and needs abolishing, along with the House of Lords.

21st century it is not.

House of Lords yes but not the monarchy for me.

Quoted from promotion plaice

House of Lords yes but not the monarchy for me.

Fair enough PP. Can't personally see the point of a monarchy in a modern world, but each to their own.

Quoted from ginnywings

About time we tried something different then.

The monarchy is an outdated busted flush and needs abolishing, along with the House of Lords.

21st century it is not.

Yep, dump the House of Lords. It's the place a PM sends their pals to,

Quoted from ginnywings

About time we tried something different then.

The monarchy is an outdated busted flush and needs abolishing, along with the NHS and the House of Lords.

21st century it is not.

Edited for you.

Quoted from OddShapedBalls

It may have changed - I doubt it, but it may - but yonks ago I had to do a case study on this issue and it turns out the royal family generate more £ in tourism and other things for the UK economy than it costs us to fund them.  I'd be in favour of cutting away all the dross though, so it's only the Monarch and next in line that's paid for and all the cousins, uncles etc can survive off their own personal fortunes.

I’ve heard the tourism argument so many times.  I don’t have any statistics to counter the claim so I’ll ask a question instead.  If the monarchy was abolished and all properties/(allegedly) public possessions opened to tourism, do you think fewer tourists would come?

Quoted from DB

Yep, dump the House of Lords. It's the place a PM sends their pals to,

The sad thing is that there are a lot of good people in the Lords (including some hereditary peers) who take the job seriously and really contribute at lot to the political process. They would be worthy of a place in an elected upper house. The problem is that they are massively outnumber by the political appointees who are given peerages to the wealthy for spunking money at political parties who then use their places to prop up their chosen party rather than helping to govern for the country. Usually with a bit of lobbying for their own interests as well. Then there are the parasites given peerages as a lucrative 'reward' (the likes of Dorries and do forth) for support. The whole system is a shambles and has to be changed.

Quoted from Maringer

The sad thing is that there are a lot of good people in the Lords (including some hereditary peers) who take the job seriously and really contribute at lot to the political process. They would be worthy of a place in an elected upper house. The problem is that they are massively outnumber by the political appointees who are given peerages to the wealthy for spunking money at political parties who then use their places to prop up their chosen party rather than helping to govern for the country. Usually with a bit of lobbying for their own interests as well. Then there are the parasites given peerages as a lucrative 'reward' (the likes of Dorries and do forth) for support. The whole system is a shambles and has to be changed.

I can’t find a single flaw in your opinion.  

Elected president, but the Irish version where they are non partisan and just there for the ceremonial shite

Quoted from FPVmariner

I’ve heard the tourism argument so many times.  I don’t have any statistics to counter the claim so I’ll ask a question instead.  If the monarchy was abolished and all properties/(allegedly) public possessions opened to tourism, do you think fewer tourists would come?

Nobody has bothered to visit France since 1792.

Quoted from FPVmariner

I’ve heard the tourism argument so many times.  I don’t have any statistics to counter the claim so I’ll ask a question instead.  If the monarchy was abolished and all properties/(allegedly) public possessions opened to tourism, do you think fewer tourists would come?

It's a good point mate, if you were to do the same study again now you might be correct - but, this was early 2000's I did it so my memory isn't going to be 100% on the subject but yes it would devalue the long term amount of money received.  If you dropped them all tomorrow and opened up all the residences as museums, you would get several years of massive profits until the novelty wore off, so a short term success.  After that, you make losses on the properties as museums because the novelty has gone for the local population and without the royals themselves there just isn't the same draw for foreign tourists.  The actual royals are a draw in their own right for people from other countries and that's based off studies in other countries at the time.

The second part of why I think we should keep them (although a lighter version of just the monarch and immediate family)is that they attend 1,000's of functions representing britain where we would otherwise have to send a high ranking politician.  I'd rather have the people who are supposed to be running the place (not talking about the current lot, just in general) freed up to do their elected job whilst the royals plant trees and shake hands for them.

As for the house of lords, I'd happily abolish the thing in favour of some form of representative house to check the commons - what form that would be I don't know but personally I'd support something along the lines of 3 scientists, 3 doctors, 3 agriculture, 3 fisheries people etc who are non-party aligned and can use actual relevant experience to stop the governments crazier ideas and approve ones that will work.  whether that's workable I'll let more intelligent people decide, but I do think one of the issues with current MP's is that the commons has all the power and nobody checks them.

Quoted from OddShapedBalls

It's a good point mate, if you were to do the same study again now you might be correct - but, this was early 2000's I did it so my memory isn't going to be 100% on the subject but yes it would devalue the long term amount of money received.  If you dropped them all tomorrow and opened up all the residences as museums, you would get several years of massive profits until the novelty wore off, so a short term success.  After that, you make losses on the properties as museums because the novelty has gone for the local population and without the royals themselves there just isn't the same draw for foreign tourists.  The actual royals are a draw in their own right for people from other countries and that's based off studies in other countries at the time.

The second part of why I think we should keep them (although a lighter version of just the monarch and immediate family)is that they attend 1,000's of functions representing britain where we would otherwise have to send a high ranking politician.  I'd rather have the people who are supposed to be running the place (not talking about the current lot, just in general) freed up to do their elected job whilst the royals plant trees and shake hands for them.

As for the house of lords, I'd happily abolish the thing in favour of some form of representative house to check the commons - what form that would be I don't know but personally I'd support something along the lines of 3 scientists, 3 doctors, 3 agriculture, 3 fisheries people etc who are non-party aligned and can use actual relevant experience to stop the governments crazier ideas and approve ones that will work.  whether that's workable I'll let more intelligent people decide, but I do think one of the issues with current MP's is that the commons has all the power and nobody checks them.

A light-hearted reported story to confirm this was about 2 American Ladies visiting Balmoral. They came upon an elderly English lady with a young man whom they assumed to be her relative.

They asked the elderly lady if she had seen the Queen, no came the reply but this young man has, who then smiled. Ignoring the elderly lady they then asked the young man about the Queen. Saying their goodbyes the Americans wondered if they would ever meet the Queen and left.

The Queen and her bodyguard went in a different direction.

The American tourists were there because of the Queen and not Balmoral castle, which underlines what you have said above.

Quoted from DB

A light-hearted reported story to confirm this was about 2 American Ladies visiting Balmoral. They came upon an elderly English lady with a young man whom they assumed to be her relative.

They asked the elderly lady if she had seen the Queen, no came the reply but this young man has, who then smiled. Ignoring the elderly lady they then asked the young man about the Queen. Saying their goodbyes the Americans wondered if they would ever meet the Queen and left.

The Queen and her bodyguard went in a different direction.

The American tourists were there because of the Queen and not Balmoral castle, which underlines what you have said above.

I doubt very much two people there to see the Queen would not recognise her, I went to Versailles but surprisingly never bumped into the Sun king, it was packed solid with other tourists free to roam the complete palace and grounds, they must have missed the message that it’s been a couple of hundred years since they had done away with this hereditary nonsense and  there was no monarch.  
People have gone to Buckingham Palace every day this summer and the Queen has been in Scotland, people would still go if there was no monarchy, yes the ceremonies like changing the guards attract crowds but-you do not need a monarch for this.

Quoted from codcheeky

I doubt very much two people there to see the Queen would not recognise her, I went to Versailles but surprisingly never bumped into the Sun king, it was packed solid with other tourists free to roam the complete palace and grounds, they must have missed the message that it’s been a couple of hundred years since they had done away with this hereditary nonsense and  there was no monarch.  
People have gone to Buckingham Palace every day this summer and the Queen has been in Scotland, people would still go if there was no monarchy, yes the ceremonies like changing the guards attract crowds but-you do not need a monarch for this.

Did you visit pre-or post Robespierre?  You've got to really plan historical jaunts carefully.  Interestingly I went to Rome a few years back and a man who must have been about 30 stone, wearing a child's plastic armour and sword, assured me he was a real gladiator and for 10 euros I could have a picture taken with him.  I asked how much for a video of us shouting 'are you not entertained?' together.   Also 10 euros but with his broken English it wasn't the best Russell Crowe impression I've seen.

My Mum visited Holyrood in Edinburgh some years ago and was quite seriously asked by two American ladies, "Is this Buckingham Palace?". She had to let them down gently and indicate they were in the wrong capital city.

Quoted from codcheeky

I doubt very much two people there to see the Queen would not recognise her, I went to Versailles but surprisingly never bumped into the Sun king, it was packed solid with other tourists free to roam the complete palace and grounds, they must have missed the message that it’s been a couple of hundred years since they had done away with this hereditary nonsense and  there was no monarch.  
People have gone to Buckingham Palace every day this summer and the Queen has been in Scotland, people would still go if there was no monarchy, yes the ceremonies like changing the guards attract crowds but-you do not need a monarch for this.

I reckon a few sat on the royalist/republican fence will have dropped onto the republican side over the last few days.

Quoted from LH

I reckon a few sat on the royalist/republican fence will have dropped onto the republican side over the last few days.

Yeah me. Was fairly indifferent before, I could cope with the Queen and quite liked her.
The fact that Andrew is coming back into public life makes an even bigger sham of it.
Charles is not my king and I won't be singing the national anthem.  

Quoted from LH

I reckon a few sat on the royalist/republican fence will have dropped onto the republican side over the last few days.

Let's hope so.

I didn’t mind singing god save the queen but I won’t be singing god save the King.

What a complete disgrace it is that a dirty flipping nonce is going to stepping in for "king charles" when required.

Please can we end the monarchy, makes me pig sick

Quoted from Hagrid

What a complete disgrace it is that a dirty flipping nonce is going to stepping in for "king charles" when required.

Please can we end the monarchy, makes me pig sick

You won’t get an argument with me on this one I’m sick of them and their angry King.

I’ve no doubt that members of the royal household have used their status to ensure some good, William and Harry and their charity work for example…

Then you get Handy Andy and everything is undone. Mummy hid him away (just like those disabled family members), have him a wad of cash to pay off the victims and protected a blatantly guilty man.

The fact they’d even consider allowing Handy Andy anywhere near public life is a disgrace. All these royalists and the weird flag shaggers associated with it who bang on about grooming gangs yet conveniently ignore the fact that a prominent member of their beloved royals and his chums did exactly the same thing…

Freedom of speech has seemingly gone out of the window and the country has lost its mind. Thousands queuing and some that are, are moaning about it. Thick girl privates. Nobody made them…

The grand old Duke of York,
He had 12 million quid*.
He gave it to someone he’d never met,
For something he never did.

(* his Mum gave him the 12 million quid for the pay-off)

Has anyone off here been down to Westminster Hall and if so why?

Quoted from LH

Has anyone off here been down to Westminster Hall and if so why?

I have no idea what they get out of it. Queue for 24 hours to walk past a coffin.  

They’re watching us this week in Pyongyang thinking it’s a bit much.

There have been some crazy, crazy things happen in this country in the past 15 years but people queuing up for almost 24 hours to bow, sign and cross in front of a catafalque (!) must be near the very top.

Do these people not have jobs or other commitments?

Whilst they’re shuffling through the Westminster Hall, distracted by waving and mope-gurning at the cameras on the Mourn Hub livestream, the Government are pushing through legislation to remove the cap on bankers bonuses, whilst the rest of us get told not to ask for a pay rise.

The sort of deflection this country hasn’t seen since Paul Parker in Italia ‘90.

That’s the sort of thing we should be forming a massive crowd in London about. Jarrow March instead of harrow march.

To top it off, we’ve got the likes of David Beckham (desperate last attempt for a knighthood to boost his brand), Philip Schofield and other no-mark celebrities treating it like a Wimbledon-lite social event.

The absolute state of this country.

Jean Luc Godard - the king of French cinema died this week, he would have rock star status in France - secret family cremation only for him. That would have been top class street-cred if Charles and his siblings and the grandkids had just buried her in a field somewhere at Balmoral and called it a natural burial and just told everyone to just have a street party.

We did a natural burial for my dad in private then a service and reception for friends after, no feck rse parading about with the coffin. Worked really well. If I can't be sent off in a burning viking longboat on the Humber - my first choice, I'd go for the natural burial in some field in Lincs

Quoted from ginnywings

I have no idea what they get out of it. Queue for 24 hours to walk past a coffin.  

Unlike you, I'm a Royalist but like you, I don't get it. Queue for 5 miles in all weathers for 24 hours?

The worst part about the queueing is so many have been moaning about it. What did they expect the queue to be like? flipping odd balls.

I’ve queued overnight for trainers and gig tickets but at least I got something out of it.

If people get themselves on Reddit there’s a video doing huge rounds of the BBCs coverage with precious commentary spliced together which is about North Korea…first perfectly.

It’s flipping mental, all of it, and it isn’t getting any better.

We’ve had serious meetings for kids cancelled this week because the LA or whoever is in a period of mourning. We’ve proven nothing other than our ability to be good at absolute irrelevant guff and the ability to walk in flipping lines.

Quoted from aldi_01

The worst part about the queueing is so many have been moaning about it. What did they expect the queue to be like? flipping odd balls.

I’ve queued overnight for trainers and gig tickets but at least I got something out of it.

If people get themselves on Reddit there’s a video doing huge rounds of the BBCs coverage with precious commentary spliced together which is about North Korea…first perfectly.

It’s flipping mental, all of it, and it isn’t getting any better.

We’ve had serious meetings for kids cancelled this week because the LA or whoever is in a period of mourning. We’ve proven nothing other than our ability to be good at absolute irrelevant guff and the ability to walk in flipping lines.

Actually there are loads of extra trains running in and out of London - yet there is a national shortage of train drivers, and it is not easy to magic up extra rolling stock is it. Or it seems it is. Thankfully mourners wont have the Grimsby fans to Notts Couny experience…

My plan for Monday is great IKEA build day - the boxes have been sitting there for weeks.

Quoted from aldi_01

I’ve no doubt that members of the royal household have used their status to ensure some good, William and Harry and their charity work for example…

Then you get Handy Andy and everything is undone. Mummy hid him away (just like those disabled family members), have him a wad of cash to pay off the victims and protected a blatantly guilty man.

The fact they’d even consider allowing Handy Andy anywhere near public life is a disgrace. All these royalists and the weird flag shaggers associated with it who bang on about grooming gangs yet conveniently ignore the fact that a prominent member of their beloved royals and his chums did exactly the same thing…

Freedom of speech has seemingly gone out of the window and the country has lost its mind. Thousands queuing and some that are, are moaning about it. Thick girl privates. Nobody made them…

Nobody made them? Really? I thought that the "Daily Heil" and the "Daily Excess" did....  

Schofield and Willoughby would have been at the front of my queue at the trials anyway for the alleged secret relationship with a lad of a questionable age and for being part of Celebrity Juice. Add spin to win your bills and the self importance of skipping the queue and it really doesn’t look good for them.

Quoted from LH

Schofield and Willoughby would have been at the front of my queue at the trials anyway for the alleged secret relationship with a lad of a questionable age and for being part of Celebrity Juice. Add spin to win your bills and the self importance of skipping the queue and it really doesn’t look good for them.

Schofield and Handy Andy scrapping it out for the title of biggest sex case?

Anyone got any idea why Willoughby had a face mask on to?

It’s all a bit weird now, let’s be honest.

If you turn the sound off, focused on the queue, we could quite easily be in Pyongyang or waiting outside to see Mao’s body…

Well said that man, though he will probably now mysteriously die in an "accident".

https://www.theguardian.com/po.....-labours-clive-lewis

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/16/mourning-republicans-system-privilege

Quoted from ginnywings

I have no idea what they get out of it. Queue for 24 hours to walk past a coffin.  

Maybe they just feel they have to give something back to a queen that dedicated her life to serve us for 70 years.

Quoted from promotion plaice

Maybe they just feel they have to give something back to a queen that dedicated her life to serve us for 70 years.

She didn't serve me.

I keep hearing this guff about service and duty. What did she actually do?

Cut some ribbons and smashed a few champagne bottles on the back of some ships. Not a bad gig for a life of untold wealth and privilege.

I just don't get it. Never have, never will.

I think she did a lot more than she really needed to in recent years (should have abdicated a decade or more ago, if you ask me), but let's not kid ourselves that she's been grafting at the coalface all these years. As when Princess Diana died, I'm always struck by the fact that, for all the public appearances and support for good causes, the Royals still spend half of the year or more on holiday. Half of the hangers on (Edward and Andrew, I'm looking at you) do sweet F.A., truth be told.

As I've said in the past, the Queen was the best of them, but she's still lived a life of luxury, as have they all.

It's no surprise that her children are such unimpressive characters given this want for nothing upbringing. I'd imagine the children of most superwealthy people tend to similarly flail around but they at least have the chance to enter mummy or daddy's business. The Royals' business is merely to exist and create heirs.

Quoted from ginnywings

She didn't serve me.

I keep hearing this guff about service and duty. What did she actually do?

Cut some ribbons and smashed a few champagne bottles on the back of some ships. Not a bad gig for a life of untold wealth and privilege.

I just don't get it. Never have, never will.

I really don’t understand the utter disrespect, have you any idea just how tough it is going on a 96 year holiday, never having a solitary thing to worry about.  All the while being surrounded by an army of sycophantic flunky’s who’s only mission in life is to be part of the club and get some pointless badge for achieving the square root of fûck all.  

Quoted from FPVmariner

I really don’t understand the utter disrespect, have you any idea just how tough it is going on a 96 year holiday, never having a solitary thing to worry about.  All the while being surrounded by an army of sycophantic flunky’s who’s only mission in life is to be part of the club and get some pointless badge for achieving the square root of fûck all.  

You’re harsh. She served, tea and cakes, well, her lackies did it. She had parties, well, turned up in fancy outfits…

There’s a reason so many kids of wealthy types, particularly aristocracy have such copulated up morals and lives is Becauee they do excrement all.

They serve nobody except themselves. It’s the public wasting their time queuing up to see an empty box with a crown made of stolen diamonds on it. Don’t see royalty rocking up at funerals of normal folk…

It’s all fucjing guff and to be honest, as the weeks gone on I’ve began to be even more belligerent about my desire to see the end of the monarchy.

Quoted from aldi_01

You’re harsh. She served, tea and cakes, well, her lackies did it. She had parties, well, turned up in fancy outfits…

There’s a reason so many kids of wealthy types, particularly aristocracy have such copulated up morals and lives is Becauee they do excrement all.

They serve nobody except themselves. It’s the public wasting their time queuing up to see an empty box with a crown made of stolen diamonds on it. Don’t see royalty rocking up at funerals of normal folk…

It’s all fucjing guff and to be honest, as the weeks gone on I’ve began to be even more belligerent about my desire to see the end of the monarchy.

Me also.

The endless news cycle on this is just creepy. People falling over themselves to tell us what a great woman she was and how much the grieving nation will miss her. The latest guff I saw was concerning Viscount Severn (no, me neither) who has been so "brave" to stand vigil at his Grannies coffin for 15 minutes.

It all feels very North Korean.

Quoted from ginnywings

[/b]

Me also.

The endless news cycle on this is just creepy. People falling over themselves to tell us what a great woman she was and how much the grieving nation will miss her. The latest guff I saw was concerning Viscount Severn (no, me neither) who has been so "brave" to stand vigil at his Grannies coffin for 15 minutes.

It all feels very North Korean.

He’s got some grandparent with the name Battenberg…are these weird inbreeds all named after cakes and biscuits?

It’s weird and odd and to be honest serves little purpose. People aren’t queueing because they’re sad, they’re queueing to say they were at something and for a excrement picture for social media.

We’ve mocked countries for less.

It’s all North Korea…

They’re flipping mad this lot. In other news leaked today the working time directive is getting shelved - a great week to deliver bad news.

Quoted from LH

They’re flipping mad this lot. In other news leaked today the working time directive is getting shelved - a great week to deliver bad news.

Tweet 1571565456758280192 will appear here...

Inevitable since the minute we left the EU.

Quoted from ginnywings

Inevitable since the minute we left the EU.

Yep. Bankers bonus cap going too - it only ever served one group of people that load of balderdash.

Tomorrow is gonna be unbareable. I’ll go sit in the shed i think and just avoid news., social media….

I’ll watch it. I was on standby for Op Bridges for two and a half years of my service career and practised elements of it monthly for that time. I want to see it happen for real - and I hope those delegated the responsibility carry it out do so immaculately even if only so their efforts aren’t wasted. However I do think it is antiquated and outrageous that this sort of stuff still goes on in the 21st century.

This funeral has been in planning for 20 years apparently.  

I shall take the dog for a long walk and hopefully the seafront will be empty.

Two people disagree with my post. What are you disagreeing about?

Was a nice walk anyway, with not much traffic or many people about. Nowhere to get a coffee though.

As expected the uniforms, drill and precision of the forces was absolutely spot on and I could only see one fainter at Wellington arch. All of this could of course be done for an elected head of state.

The queen is loved by the way she conducted herslf over 70 years.
Charles on the other hand does not have the same appeal  so i expect a surge in people thinking do we need royalty.
I wont be here so it wont effect me either way.

Queens Head of Comms saying she didn’t back Brexit is brilliant…Gammons exploding all over the shop…

Quoted from Maringer

Elected President.

Get rid of the House of Lords for an elected upper house. Develop a full, written constitution. Introduce a proper PR voting system in both Houses of Parliament. Have increased devolution of power to all regions (not just the different countries of the UK).

Keep the Royals on for bits of pomp and circumstance and for foreigners to ogle. Remove some of their tax perks so they aren't treated differently to the rest of the landed gentry. They own vast swathes of the country already, so they'll manage to pay their way.

You would be happy with a Donald Trump character then?

As for the monies spent on the Royals, I hope you don't mind me complaining about the billions spent by that lying, murdering twit Blair on an illegal war, or the billions thrown away by that frigging clown Brown by selling off the UK's gold at its lowest level, or the millions spent on illegal immigrants who have contributed intercourse all to this country but will be kept in 4 start hotels, probably never get a job for the rest of their lives so will be on benefits till the day they die, will have direct access to free health care where the rest of us are damn lucky to get through to a doctor on the phone let alone actually see one.

I agree about the House of Lords, they can fwck off.

Quoted from LH

As expected the uniforms, drill and precision of the forces was absolutely spot on and I could only see one fainter at Wellington arch. All of this could of course be done for an elected head of state.

Do you think the same number of people would turn out for an elected Head of State seeing as the past couple of decades or so the Prime Ministers we have had have all ended up being hated . You would probably only need half a dozen traffic wardens.

Quoted from arryarryarry

You would be happy with a Donald Trump character then?

As for the monies spent on the Royals, I hope you don't mind me complaining about the billions spent by that lying, murdering twit Blair on an illegal war, or the billions thrown away by that frigging clown Brown by selling off the UK's gold at its lowest level, or the millions spent on illegal immigrants who have contributed intercourse all to this country but will be kept in 4 start hotels, probably never get a job for the rest of their lives so will be on benefits till the day they die, will have direct access to free health care where the rest of us are damn lucky to get through to a doctor on the phone let alone actually see one.

I agree about the House of Lords, they can fwck off.

Different kind of President to what we would have.

Also, it's nice to see people still having a go at the Labour party after 12 years of the Tories. It's not like the Tories have been economically prudent is it? I'll raise you all the wasted cash we spunked during covid. Just the pathetic track and trace to mention one. There are plenty of other examples.

Quoted from ginnywings

Well said that man, though he will probably now mysteriously die in an "accident".

https://www.theguardian.com/po.....-labours-clive-lewis

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/16/mourning-republicans-system-privilege

He is a bit of a knob, complains about the Royal Family and is a confirmed republican but remains in a Party led by a Lord

Why doesn't grow a pair and form his own Republican Party and then see how he does?

Quoted from arryarryarry

You would be happy with a Donald Trump character then?

As for the monies spent on the Royals, I hope you don't mind me complaining about the billions spent by that lying, murdering twit Blair on an illegal war, or the billions thrown away by that frigging clown Brown by selling off the UK's gold at its lowest level, or the millions spent on illegal immigrants who have contributed intercourse all to this country but will be kept in 4 start hotels, probably never get a job for the rest of their lives so will be on benefits till the day they die, will have direct access to free health care where the rest of us are damn lucky to get through to a doctor on the phone let alone actually see one.

I agree about the House of Lords, they can fwck off.

Wowsers…

Guess the last twelve years don’t exist, the 12m shovelled in to the pocket of a victim of sexual abuse, the tax evasion and theft of precious jewels from around the world…and they’re just some obvious ones.

Remove the palaces and the fancy hats and the royal family would feature on a channel 5 poverty porn programme…incest, crime, dodgy goings on, benefits, divorce, murder…like a flipping family from shameless…

Quoted from arryarryarry

Do you think the same number of people would turn out for an elected Head of State seeing as the past couple of decades or so the Prime Ministers we have had have all ended up being hated . You would probably only need half a dozen traffic wardens.

How many prime ministers have had funerals on anything like that scale since the war? 2. Not every one would get one but only those whose terms were of exceptional significance. Charles need a serious turnaround to be as popular as Elizabeth was and will still get the pageantry seen today when he goes.

Quoted from ginnywings

Different kind of President to what we would have.

Also, it's nice to see people still having a go at the Labour party after 12 years of the Tories. It's not like the Tories have been economically prudent is it? I'll raise you all the wasted cash we spunked during covid. Just the pathetic track and trace to mention one. There are plenty of other examples.

I'm no fan of the Tories, Boris was a complete knob and as frigging useless as May and Cameron and that complete male private Major, who obviously would rather shag the bottom off Edwina Currie that run the country properly.

Quoted from Limerick Mariner

Actually, the Cameron Clegg coalition was the most democratic since the 1930s - 60% of the vote and the only post-war government with more than 50% of the popular vote. On social liberalism, they did some very good things. On the economy, the Tories well and truly fecked the Liberals and the lower paid, the Liberals paid for it, and we've been paying for it since and especially now with the years of underinvestment in the NHS other public services, transport and by the privatised-monopolies. If the Liberals had gone with Labour, the government would have had 52% of the popular vote.

Apart from the fact that 0% of the population voted for a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government. It was an agreement cooked up behind the scenes after a general election, that neither Tory nor Lib Dem voters voted for.

Quoted from davmariner

Apart from the fact that 0% of the population voted for a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government. It was an agreement cooked up behind the scenes after a general election, that neither Tory nor Lib Dem voters voted for.

Ooh, don’t forget the £10bn spûnked by May to get a couple of Northern Irish votes.  I think it’s called bribery in the democratic world.

Quoted from arryarryarry

You would be happy with a Donald Trump character then?

As for the monies spent on the Royals, I hope you don't mind me complaining about the billions spent by that lying, murdering twit Blair on an illegal war, or the billions thrown away by that frigging clown Brown by selling off the UK's gold at its lowest level, or the millions spent on illegal immigrants who have contributed intercourse all to this country but will be kept in 4 start hotels, probably never get a job for the rest of their lives so will be on benefits till the day they die, will have direct access to free health care where the rest of us are damn lucky to get through to a doctor on the phone let alone actually see one.

I agree about the House of Lords, they can fwck off.

Wowsers. That's an odd response.

I'm thinking of an Irish-style Presidency where the President is just an apolitical figure with little actual power. The US President is effectively an elected King for the length of his term which isn't perhaps surprising when you consider that the US founding fathers weren't actually anti-monarchy, they were anti-paying taxes which were being levied at a high rate by the UK government at the time, I seem to recall reading. Despite the President=King dynamic in the US, they have an elected higher house (the Senate) which has real authority and can stop the President having too much power. Remember, Obama couldn't do half of what he wanted due to obstructionism by the Senate and Trump wasn't able to do as much wrecking as he planned either. Trump's longer-term legacy is packing the courts with political appointees who are going to be doing the wrecking for the Republicans for decades to come. Or until the next Civil War. Whichever comes first.

There are various other options for heads of state - it doesn't have to be a President who is King in all but name.

Not sure why you're still going on about Blair and Iraq as the Tories were in full lock-step behind him so we were going to war one way or another. IDS was one of the first UK politicians to call for an invasion of Iraq and that was back at the end of 2001! It doesn't mitigate the fact that Blair took us into that pointless war, but I'm always amazed how people who use it as a stick to bash Blair and co with completely ignore the fact that the Tories would have without a doubt have done the same. The 'Brown sold the gold' argument is such a tedious and poorly thought-out one that I'm amazed it is still being quoted as relevant. The bullion was sitting there doing nothing and achieving nothing (because it is gold which does noting and achieves nothing), so we sold it and invested the money elsewhere. The decision to announce we would sell in advance was a poor one as it forced the value down further, but the fact that the value subsequently rebounded was just chance.

If Wikipedia is correct, the Tory press claim it 'cost' the UK between £2 billion and £7 billion. This would assume, of course, that the money invested elsewhere from the sales had no return at all. I'd guess it didn't. The money is equivalent to between £3 billion and £10 billion in 2021 values, incidentally.

Now, let's compare that to the £5 billion expected to be lost to fraud from the Covid Business loans fiasco. How about the £37 billion of money allocated to Test and Trace which didn't work effectively, in part, because the government decided to set up a new system from scratch bunging billions to the private sector, instead of building on existing test capacity and public health expertise? What about the £14 billion spent on often useless PPE through the unlawful 'VIP lane' where many Tory MPs and ministers got their mates on the gravy train and told them to fill their boots? I do hope you're having a good rant about these mind-boggling numbers in 20 years time.

As for immigration, you do know that asylum seekers quite literally aren't allowed to work for at least a year after they make their asylum claim? Pre-pandemic, it was taking between 1 and 3 years for people to receive the first decision on their claims and, of course, they can also appeal if the initial claim is rejected so that's many waiting for years before they could even begin to contribute. Some can receive a limited work permit if they have been waiting over a year, but they can only work in a limited number of professions. Some more information:

https://www.unhcr.org/uk/asylum-in-the-uk.html

Not sure what whacky stuff you've been reading which makes you think that most immigrants are being put up in luxurious hotels, but it's complete bullshit.

As you'll see from the UNHCR link, in mid-2021, there were about 135,000 refugees in the UK. Undoubtedly, a lot more illegal immigrants (probably half a million or thereabouts) but they don't get anything from the government and I'd imagine most are working in the black economy. Wouldn't it be good if we could get these people on the books and into the light.

The reason the NHS is failing isn't because of immigrants, illegal or otherwise, it's because we've had a Tory government in charge for over a decade which has quite deliberately underfunded the service:



The above image was from a report from 2015 which factored in spending plans to 2020. The pandemic obviously led to an increase in spending in the shorter term (and the Tories' mates like it very much, thanks), but we've got no longer-term plan for anything. Social care is collapsing due to lack of funding or any coherent plan how to deal with the problems they are facing. The service provided NHS is collapsing due to in part to the lack of social care which means patients can't be discharged from hospitals, plus an every-increasing shortage of staff, crumbling infrastructure and vast waiting lists caused by a combination of underfunding and the pandemic. Not to mention the fact that the Covid pandemic itself really still isn't over, despite what people want to pretend (more people died of Covid in August 2022 than they did in August 2021, for example) so the winter months will be even worse. The ability of the Ambulance service to even get close to their targets has pretty much collapsed even during the summer months so heaven help us this winter, especially when the next Covid variant takes over alongside the flu season with the vulnerable becoming increasingly ill due to fuel poverty.

The country is a shitshow at the moment, but not for any of the reasons you seem to think. Which is frankly remarkable.

It’s quite Ironic when dedicated Labour advocates will defend the party’s disastrous decisions of the past by proclaiming the Tories would of done it! And then cry foul at the Tories covid decision making that Labour largely backed.
I would love to see Maringer try and keep a straight face as he tells me Labour Party would of done things so much differently and we wouldn’t be in a cost of Covid crisis, well we know the lockdowns and masks would of lasted so much longer that would’ve helped😂