Do only thick C&@%S moan about the royal wedding???

I’m not gonna go through it and list them, but it’s headline is the figure it costs us to have the Royals, so a couple of examples on that.

Rooms lived in by Royals and no rent paid, they claim if rented private it would generate cash, this is true but that makes it income not a cost and there is no evidence to support how much rental it would create so the figure supplied is speculation not fact.
Two of the largest figures used to create the figure are from the Duchies, it says they don’t own them but the profits go to support the Royals and this profit would go to the public instead. They are operated as independent companies and pay their taxes like any other company, so if the money wasn’t given to the Royals they would be privately owned companies.

By their own admission some of the figures are estimated as they don’t know the figures.

As Havana said a good read with a Republican bias.

 

We cannot house or feed our citizens. A report today shows an explosion in over 60s homelessness. I’d say with that in mind continuing to fund the royal family is also something we cannot afford.

 

Keep filling up the country then with more people we can’t house, feed or give medical treatment to , here’s a thing for na try look after the ******* people we’ve got already then see where we’re at . The Royals can pay their own way and contribute massive tax payments they don’t have to

 

It is though. It perpetuates the idea that some people are born better than others and have an unimpeachable right to be in positions of power. The ideology of a monarchy is harmful to the working class.

 

More down to selfish ******** buying multiple houses and renting back to folk who can no longer afford to get on the property ladder.

Overheard one such arrogant **** a few months back in my local Indian. Laughing as he told the restaurant manager he'd just bought another couple more terrace houses to add to his portfolio, because "you can't not at that price, can you?".

Yes mate, £70,000 to you may be pocket change, but for a 20 year old starting out, it's a 25 year mortgage.

 

I’d agree to a point though the right to buy policy has been the biggest factor and is the most destructive social policy in the post war period.

 

Not really:
How many working class people who are trying to get by think "oo it's terrible being subjugated by the monarchy"? I have a deep and long-standing dislike of privilige on the basis of birth, or more specifically such people being in positions of power as a consequence. The royal family don't take up jobs in the government, foreign office etc. Yes we are facing many struggles but the cost factor is equalised pretty much through merchandising and tourism. We need to be focussing rather on the Reece-Mogs of this world.

 

Yes, I know of someone who bought up a load of the council houses on his estate under the right to buy. Many were elderly tenants. Then rented them back to them, with a promise of new double glazing and to re-decorate.

 

I'm not saying it has a direct effect, more that it has a subtle but pervasive influence. It reinforces the idea of a class system and that people should be judged based on the social standing of their family rather than their individual achievements. It's this kind of attitude which allows chinless wonders like JRM to rise through the system.

 

Agreed. As it stands it is an abomination that has caused misery and an explosion in shoddy dodgy landlordism.

 

Got a lot of sympathy for that view. There's a lot of nepotism that prevents opportunities for all. For example Jeremy Corbyn's son works for John McDonnell, and afaik Len McCluskey's daughter, John Prescott's son and McDonnell's son all work for Corbyn. Didn't see those jobs advertised in the Chronicle for young kids from Athersley to apply. Poltics is rife with it.

 

Yes

Yes i should have mentioned Corbyn et al because it's far from being a tory
only issue.

 

I've come up with a solution and it's one that generally goes against my principles: let's privatise the fuckers.
The Royal Family Ltd
So... all merchandising, use of name etc to be copyrighted to TRF Ltd All income gained from tourists visiting royal establishment's to go directly to TRF Ltd
Sponsorship deals: Prince Harry regularly seen jogging with his Nike's on, the queen often to be seen checking the time with her rolex on. Multi-millions gained through their world-wide recognition.
Just a thought.

 

Historically speaking the Monarchy have been a moderating factor since the Reformation - although Charles I ended up sans head ultimately support for the Monarchy managed to moderate the Puritan Taliban who tried to change society in their own image. The problem I have is their existence today is used as "proof" by our modern day Whigs like that Manx bloke to peddle some kind of English exceptionalism (the irony of the current lots German origins obviously being lost on them).

 

I do like winding up the "Send them home" lot by telling them to start with Philip and his descendants and come back when they have a list of who else has to go.

 

How does anyone buy a load of council houses under the "right to buy"?

Have we all the "right to buy" half a street full of council tenants if we want?

I think not.

 

You convince the elderly council house tenant who's lived there for 20+ years and have the right to buy their house from the council for say £20K, that you will fund the purchase, transfer ownership (to him) and then the elderly tenant will pay the same rent to him, the landlord, rather than the council. As a sweetener, the landlord will also put in new double glazing and do some other upgrades on the house.

My mates elderly mother had a council bungalow which she was offered to buy for around £18K under the right to buy , but she couldn't afford it. So my mate (her son) offered to buy it, with her continuing to live there until she passed. As he had 6 other brothers and sisters, her mum wouldn't buy it as she didn't think it fair on the others. Even though the other siblings weren't interested in raising the finances towards the purchase. His mum died about 6 years ago and the house returned back to the council. An identical house on her road, sold on the private market in 2007 for £87K.

 

Happens more usually with those dodgy mortgage companies who see an opportunity where it doesn’t matter if the person who is buying can afford a mortgage as they can repossess if needed.

 

It is the tenant who has the right to buy. Cheaply. Nobody else.The house goes into the tenants name as freehold owner, and must remain so for a number of years. If the tenant thinks there is a decent deal in it for him by having someone assist him, then why not?

Why deny a tenant the right to buy?

Anyway, you don't know anyone who bought a load of houses under the right to buy. You might know someone who provided the finance for individual tenants to buy their own houses, in accordance with an ancillary agreement he may have had with said tenant.