Jump to content

The Royal Family Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Don’t know what Australians make of this, but their taxpayers are stumping up over one million dollars for the current royal tour: link, link. New Zealand taxpayers also - link. Hopefully they are getting value for money! On top of this is the cost to the British taxpayers.

 

Meanwhile, ordinary folk can be suitably impressed by Ms Markle in her jewellery and attire - Meghan Markle wore almost £2,000 of her favourite luxury jewellery brand yesterday. Meghan Markle stuns in nearly $A30,000 worth of designer outfits in four days on royal tour of Australia.

 

Aside from the games, for which Harry could have funded his own travel etc, perhaps we could be forgiven for wondering what it’s all about and if it is really necessary :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would quite willing to pay 70p a year.

 

I would be willing to pay quite a bit more to get rid of them all.

 

---------- Post added 22-10-2018 at 13:35 ----------

 

Prince Charles is trying to slim it down to just that: Himself and Harry's immediate family. Which is why he's at daggers drawn with Prince Andrew, who sees himself as every bit as important as Harry, and his daughters, the only two 'blood' Princesses, as integral to the Royal family firm.

 

Prince Charles does not agree.

 

Andrew is as important as Charles. They are both equally unimportant. As are all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard on the radio, Harry is taking a rest as he has been busy handing out medals!, LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A meritocracy definition says people advance on only ability, not social position or money.

Its somewhat utopian, but good luck in finding what what you're looking for. One thing I would point out concerning ability in leaders in the UK's democracy.

The Queen has in my opinion, an extraordinary ability to deal with situations and people from all walks of life, and does it so well. That's why I consider her to be a very significant asset to the UK and the Commonwealth, and part of the glue that holds the program together for us all.

By definition, the Queen isn't there through merit. She is there through inheritance, and you happen to think she is good at what she does.

There would be thousands of other people equally or better able if promoted to that same position through merit.

Unfortunately we don't live in a meritocracy. Having a queen 'responsible' for the things she is, is as equally silly as allowing a goverment minister with no experience of management of anything, or the subject, head a governemnt department responsible for that thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By definition, the Queen isn't there through merit. She is there through inheritance, and you happen to think she is good at what she does.

There would be thousands of other people equally or better able if promoted to that same position through merit.

Unfortunately we don't live in a meritocracy. Having a queen 'responsible' for the things she is, is as equally silly as allowing a goverment minister with no experience of management of anything, or the subject, head a governemnt department responsible for that thing.

 

What do you imagine the Queen to be responsible for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you imagine the Queen to be responsible for?

 

Keeping the crown on her head and in the family. That's it.

 

Please note they (and the men in grey suits) are prepared to go to any lengths to achieve just that. ...Did somebody mention the word 'ruthless'....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By definition, the Queen isn't there through merit. She is there through inheritance, and you happen to think she is good at what she does.

There would be thousands of other people equally or better able if promoted to that same position through merit.

Unfortunately we don't live in a meritocracy. Having a queen 'responsible' for the things she is, is as equally silly as allowing a goverment minister with no experience of management of anything, or the subject, head a governemnt department responsible for that thing.

 

You mean like is the case now?? (my bold)

 

---------- Post added 22-10-2018 at 15:36 ----------

 

Don’t know what Australians make of this, but their taxpayers are stumping up over one million dollars for the current royal tour: link, link. New Zealand taxpayers also - link. Hopefully they are getting value for money! On top of this is the cost to the British taxpayers.

 

Meanwhile, ordinary folk can be suitably impressed by Ms Markle in her jewellery and attire - Meghan Markle wore almost £2,000 of her favourite luxury jewellery brand yesterday. Meghan Markle stuns in nearly $A30,000 worth of designer outfits in four days on royal tour of Australia.

 

Aside from the games, for which Harry could have funded his own travel etc, perhaps we could be forgiven for wondering what it’s all about and if it is really necessary :confused:

 

Only a million dollars? Cost 18 times that to have a fat orange idiot from the states pop over for a couple of days golfing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is as equally silly as allowing a goverment minister with no experience of management of anything, or the subject, head a governemnt department responsible for that thing.

You mean like is the case now?? (my bold)

 

You mean like is the case now?? (my bold)

 

 

Exactly what I mean. Lots (most?) Ministerial appointments suck. Meritocracy or technocracy for me please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is as equally silly as allowing a goverment minister with no experience of management of anything, or the subject, head a governemnt department responsible for that thing.

You mean like is the case now?? (my bold)

 

 

 

Exactly what I mean. Lots (most?) Ministerial appointments suck. Meritocracy or technocracy for me please.

 

Given there's no mention of either when voting for MPs how do you suggest that would work in the HoC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is as equally silly as allowing a goverment minister with no experience of management of anything, or the subject, head a governemnt department responsible for that thing.

You mean like is the case now?? (my bold)

 

 

 

Exactly what I mean. Lots (most?) Ministerial appointments suck. Meritocracy or technocracy for me please.

 

I tend to agree, but what other democratic system do you suggest?

 

Remember ministers are guided by civil servants and an army of advisers, think tanks, experts, and 'wise heads' (I use the words loosely..) in the house of Lords - all at great expense I might add, and still they get it wrong.

 

IMO the biggest problem is short-termism and being far too influenced by the need to get re-elected at any cost.

 

However I've often said we need to take elections and election candidates far more seriously. I want to know much more about those who want my vote, and a quick flyer through the door at election time extolling their virtues just doesn't cut it.

Edited by Anna B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Given there's no mention of either when voting for MPs how do you suggest that would work in the HoC?

I simply don't think a someone solely with experience of local party politics, who's made their way up the slimy ladder, should be head of a department of thousands and budgets of billions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I simply don't think a someone solely with experience of local party politics, who's made their way up the slimy ladder, should be head of a department of thousands and budgets of billions.

 

How do you pick them then ? How do you select who can and can't stand for election to parliament? 'cos they're going to be the ones running and making decisions for departments.

Share this post


Link to post
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.