Can I have my 62p back please?

Very difficult to work that out

Castles, palaces etc would all still be there.

You'd have to ask each tourist whether they would still vist Windsor Castle, for example, if we no longer had a monarch.

Egyptian tourism doesn't suffer just because they no longer have a Pharoah? In fact tourism is greater now than when they had Pharoahs!

 

Spitting Image

The Queen playing Monopoly - classic!

 

Will you stop it?

Bingley's suffering here and you're all taking the piss.

 

Thanks for the tip Muttley.

I'll certainly take advice from a master!

 

RE: £184.8 million to end of March 2005

Did you get a bill for the 62p?

 

RE: £184.8 million to end of March 2005

No but there'd need to be an extra 184.8 mill raised in taxes if the Crown kept all the revenue.

 

RE: £184.8 million to end of March 2005

Is all property theft then ?

 

SOCIALISM!!!

 

Ah, so touching!

But let them carry on Muttley, I'm fine, I've had lots of experience of trying to getb things over to people that are way beyond their grasp. I find it quite funny nowadays.

 

RE: Eyup.

Personal insults already? tsk

The land was take by William conqueror bloke to pay for the running of the country. The monarch doesn't pay for that anymore yet they still hold onto it. It's not their personal property.

 

RE: £184.8 million to end of March 2005

woah there, that's a big jump for bloke wi ickle legs.

Quite happy to have a monarchy even though it's the most expensive one around and has no real power. Republics tend to be more expesive anyway.

 

RE: £184.8 million to end of March 2005

Tangential ? Moi ?</p>



The thought of someone like Thatcher or Blair as President of the UK quite liderally terrifies me.</p>

 

Good for you.

Nice to see you're putting on a brave face.

 

RE: £184.8 million to end of March 2005

int blair president already?

Poor show when every policy is leaked to the press,givt sit back and wait for reaction then go to parliament.

 

Stop it!

You actually made me laugh out loud at that, people are looking strangely at me now!

 

I see.

So it's "ours" is it? We owned it originally did we?

You reckon that'd hold up in the Bailey do you Rumphole?

 

RE: Stop it!

Maybe they think you should stop vainly trying to salvage your dignity and answer a few calls.

 

RE: Will you stop it?

I have it down as a draw, Bingleys putting up a good fight although Windy is doing his usual mysterious approach and bating the opposition. Windy's arguament is sound but he loses points because we all know he's only doing it as a wind up.

 

RE: I see.

Bailey's a criminal court. It'd be civil action.

tut

 

RE: I see.

Yadda yadda yadda. If you want to work out who the legal owner is after 1000 years of ancestry then you can have the job. First job is to find out who owned the land in 1066 and if they have the supporting documentation. Report back in 1000 years, I'll hold onto the land in the meantime, the owners can have all profits accruing in the meantime , but I'll take a small percentage as an administrative charge.