UK still paying £30 million in child benefit for immigrant children in other countrie
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Juichiro
In France they don't have Prime Minister so they don't necessarily pay more than a country with a head of state and a Prime Minister. I wonder how much does maintaining a inhabited historical building costs compared to a inhabited one.
3. What are the exact figures?
3. What are the exact figures?
Actually they do have a Prime Minister in France. It's currently Mauel Valls and he has his own grand residence called Matignon.
Whilst the French president resides at the Elysee palace:
So they have to pay to upkeep inhabited buildings as well.
It's impossible to calculate the exact impact the queen has on tourism because you can't quantify to what extent people are drawn here by the monarch.
Original post by tengentoppa
Actually they do have a Prime Minister in France. It's currently Mauel Valls and he has his own grand residence called Matignon.
Whilst the French president resides at the Elysee palace:
So they have to pay to upkeep inhabited buildings as well.
It's impossible to calculate the exact impact the queen has on tourism because you can't quantify to what extent people are drawn here by the monarch.
Whilst the French president resides at the Elysee palace:
So they have to pay to upkeep inhabited buildings as well.
It's impossible to calculate the exact impact the queen has on tourism because you can't quantify to what extent people are drawn here by the monarch.
Woah, sounds like a major waste of money. What does this PM do?
If you can't quantify it why mention it as one advantage?
Original post by DiddyDec
Have you never heard of drug dealers? They don't charge tax.
Oh silly me! I thought you bought crack cocaine at Tesco! Wow, drug dealers, what a thing right...?
And I'm pretty sure that the money we use to find drug dealers and users we could make a huge profit on by taxing them once we find them which we do, quite a lot.
Original post by tengentoppa
The queen is our head of state, a key part of the Westminster model of parliamentary government, an ambassador and diplomatic tool and a revenue stream through tourism.
So it makes more sense to spend money on her than on people in another country. Even if we did not have a queen, we would still have to pay for the upkeep of historical buildings like Buckingham Palace and we would still need to pay for a head of state. The French Presidency for example costs £91 million.
So it makes more sense to spend money on her than on people in another country. Even if we did not have a queen, we would still have to pay for the upkeep of historical buildings like Buckingham Palace and we would still need to pay for a head of state. The French Presidency for example costs £91 million.
the queen doesn't do £40 million worth of labour for her job (as opposed to something like £200k for being PM) so why does she get paid so much like this? what is it for?
Original post by Ozzin
Oh silly me! I thought you bought crack cocaine at Tesco! Wow, drug dealers, what a thing right...?
And I'm pretty sure that the money we use to find drug dealers and users we could make a huge profit on by taxing them once we find them which we do, quite a lot.
And I'm pretty sure that the money we use to find drug dealers and users we could make a huge profit on by taxing them once we find them which we do, quite a lot.
Once we find them? We haven't been very successful so far considering that the UK smokes an estimated 1020 metric tonnes of cannabis a year.
Selling it at raised price would be silly because there is no way to stop drug dealing, so really the smart thing to do would be to undercut the illegal market by selling drugs cheaper than street price. It is basic economics.
That's what, like half a fighter jet... Disgraceful. Especially when we are such desperate need of jets to fight a bunch of farmers in the desert.
Original post by DiddyDec
Once we find them? We haven't been very successful so far considering that the UK smokes an estimated 1020 metric tonnes of cannabis a year.
Selling it at raised price would be silly because there is no way to stop drug dealing, so really the smart thing to do would be to undercut the illegal market by selling drugs cheaper than street price. It is basic economics.
Selling it at raised price would be silly because there is no way to stop drug dealing, so really the smart thing to do would be to undercut the illegal market by selling drugs cheaper than street price. It is basic economics.
Even that wouldn't work, once you get rid of the illegal market the government would stop providing legal "cheap" drugs and they would just go back to making and using their illegal ones.
Original post by missfats
Depends on how much she generates (I've no idea how much)
£30 million lmao, I thought you were gonna say £30 billion. But anyway why do you care? Just focus on your own problems and stop blaming other people. It's up to the government on how they spend the money, whether you like or not.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Ozzin
Even that wouldn't work, once you get rid of the illegal market the government would stop providing legal "cheap" drugs and they would just go back to making and using their illegal ones.
Why would the Government stop selling if they were gaining tax revenue?
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by DiddyDec
£30 million in the grand scheme of things is **** all.
Agreed. But when you Add up all of the things that are **** all they add up.
Original post by MatureStudent36
Agreed. But when you Add up all of the things that are **** all they add up.
Indeed it does, but this just another "blame the immigrants" story.
Original post by Juichiro
Woah, sounds like a major waste of money. What does this PM do?
If you can't quantify it why mention it as one advantage?
If you can't quantify it why mention it as one advantage?
The Prime Minister does much of the day-to-day running of the country.
You can't put a number on the queen's impact on tourism, but it certainly exists.
Original post by zippity.doodah
the queen doesn't do £40 million worth of labour for her job (as opposed to something like £200k for being PM) so why does she get paid so much like this? what is it for?
The crown gets money to manage the estates and keep them in good condition I believe.
Original post by Nader_KSA
£30 million lmao, I thought you were gonna say £30 billion. But anyway why do you care? Just focus on your own problems and stop blaming other people. It's up to the government on how they spend the money, whether you like or not.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
It's obvious people are going to care where their tax money is spent, and the government is accountable to the people so they have every right to complain.
Original post by missfats
Obviously you don't understand that the Queen owns the majority of the property she is on.. She gives Parliament any profits of those lands and then Parliament give an appropriate share back.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by tengentoppa
The Prime Minister does much of the day-to-day running of the country.
You can't put a number on the queen's impact on tourism, but it certainly exists.
You can't put a number on the queen's impact on tourism, but it certainly exists.
No one denies that. The question is if it is worth the investment. You wouldn't invest in a product without evidence of a return, right?
Original post by tengentoppa
The Prime Minister does much of the day-to-day running of the country.
You can't put a number on the queen's impact on tourism, but it certainly exists.
You can't put a number on the queen's impact on tourism, but it certainly exists.
Then what does the President do?
Original post by DiddyDec
Indeed it does, but this just another "blame the immigrants" story.
The issue is that they're not immigrants. They're foreignors in this case in receipt of tax payers money.
Original post by MatureStudent36
The issue is that they're not immigrants. They're foreignors in this case in receipt of tax payers money.
There isn't really much we can do about it as a nation. What the article does however fail to mention is how many of these migrants are also paying tax while claiming benefits.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Can immigration actually been controlled?
- Social class prejudice and private schools in Britain
- Why are rents so high
- Why are you concerned about migration?
- Labour plans to add 20% VAT to Private School fees.
- I didn't watch a single minute of the coronation today!
- What do you think of HS2 only going to Birmingham
- Getting documents back from SFE
- Factors to consider when having a child
- 2020 - 5 wasted years, what could have been?
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- Rishi Sunak relaunches plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda
- AS Human Geography help!!!!!!!!
- Funding for DClinPsy?
- Poetry essay feedback needed!! (A-Level)
- Why do schools ignore bullying?
- International Studets
- Imperial maths 2024
- Why doesn't my dad know how to show love?
- Housing crisis
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
