Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The debate about whether Britain should be a republic is not one for political parties, it is one of consensus. At this moment in time Britain is in favour of a constitutional monarchy, so the Greens have definitely shot themselves in the foot. What they should be arguing for is a referendum, I would suggest every ten years, or two parliaments. As a republican myself this would be acceptable, and I would be quite willing to accept the majority decision.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    I'm increasingly thinking that the Greens may steal by vote from Labour.
    I'm actually concerned that these people were even Labour, i always thought of Labourites as generally nice (misguided in my opinion) people. But policies to aim for zero growth, abolish the monarchy and allow membership of terrorist organisations are far out. I dare say the last policy in particular is extremely dangerous and represents nothing but naive appeasement.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I'm actually concerned that these people were even Labour, i always thought of Labourites as generally nice (misguided in my opinion) people. But policies to aim for zero growth, abolish the monarchy and allow membership of terrorist organisations are far out. I dare say the last policy in particular is extremely dangerous and represents nothing but naive appeasement.
    I still have no idea where the telegraph is getting half of their nonsense from. I've been searching for the zero growth aim and the terrorism bit and can't find these policies anywhere. Not in the 2010 manifesto, not in the 2015 mini manifesto, and not in the PCC where the writer claims to have found them in here. They do want to get rid of old Liz though and it's a wonderful policy.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by kumon)
    NHS is free for everyone, you don't see everyone sleeping in the palace do you. Idiot.
    No, not it isn't. Some services are free to anybody in the world, but not all. Emergency treatment is, treatment of some infectious diseases is, compulsory psychiatric is, anything imposed by a court order is, family planning is; and the only people form whom everything is free are obviously UK citizens, those who work for UK-based employers, students on courses in excess of 6 months. Pensioners living outside the EEA and visitors from countries that have a healthcare agreement with the UK are entitled to free treatment, but not pre-planned treatment or treatment that can wait for their return home.

    You were saying? There are hundreds of millions, at least, who don't have access to healthcare that is "free" at the point of use, and there are billions who don't have access to healthcare of the quality we have. Specifically the NHS only what? 5% of the world's population is eligible to full "free" use of it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone actually suggest a rational reason a certain family is siphoning off millions of pounds of public money in order to live a life of luxury, whilst everyone else bears the brunt of paying off a debt created by a broken financial sector? It's ludicrous!
    Plus the fact that this is written by The Times, a paper owned by someone who would massively lose out if the Greens had any sort of power.
    The actual quote being "I can’t see that the Queen is ever going to be really poor,
    but I’m sure we can find a council house for her — we’re going to build lots more.".
    I suppose you can always start an "aid for ex-royals" charity if you're that bothered about Liz & Co clinging to their millions...

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    No, not it isn't. Some services are free to anybody in the world, but not all. Emergency treatment is, treatment of some infectious diseases is, compulsory psychiatric is, anything imposed by a court order is, family planning is; and the only people form whom everything is free are obviously UK citizens, those who work for UK-based employers, students on courses in excess of 6 months. Pensioners living outside the EEA and visitors from countries that have a healthcare agreement with the UK are entitled to free treatment, but not pre-planned treatment or treatment that can wait for their return home.

    You were saying? There are hundreds of millions, at least, who don't have access to healthcare that is "free" at the point of use, and there are billions who don't have access to healthcare of the quality we have. Specifically the NHS only what? 5% of the world's population is eligible to full "free" use of it.
    Those guys can move areas and get the services you mention. Allbeit with a long waiting list, which would be reduced if you re-disturbed the royal money to them instead.
    Also don't waste valuable money on these lots holidays, when our own people are starving and in food banks and freezing homeless people. Instead send the homeless in the palace as well.

    Go on tell me you wont put homeless people there, are they not good enough for you? So much for equality.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by kumon)
    Those guys can move areas and get the services you mention. Allbeit with a long waiting list, which would be reduced if you re-disturbed the royal money to them instead.
    Also don't waste valuable money on these lots holidays, when our own people are starving and in food banks and freezing homeless people. Instead send the homeless in the palace as well.

    Go on tell me you wont put homeless people there, are they not good enough for you? So much for equality.
    Ummm? How liberal do you want our immigration policy to be exactly? Pretty sure most people in the world have basically 0 chance of being let in.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Fender7535)
    Can anyone actually suggest a rational reason a certain family is siphoning off millions of pounds of public money in order to live a life of luxury, whilst everyone else bears the brunt of paying off a debt created by a broken financial sector? It's ludicrous!
    Plus the fact that this is written by The Times, a paper owned by someone who would massively lose out if the Greens had any sort of power.
    The actual quote being "I can’t see that the Queen is ever going to be really poor,
    but I’m sure we can find a council house for her — we’re going to build lots more.".
    I suppose you can always start an "aid for ex-royals" charity if you're that bothered about Liz & Co clinging to their millions...

    Not a complete answer but they have got a significantly net-positive effect on the UK economy. Social reasons I accept but in terms of the economy, they're a big benefit. The money we pay to subsidise them is small in comparison to the money that comes in from their estates and from tourism.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    Not a complete answer but they have got a significantly net-positive effect on the UK economy. Social reasons I accept but in terms of the economy, they're a big benefit. The money we pay to subsidise them is small in comparison to the money that comes in from their estates and from tourism.
    If that's been calculated and verified then I'll take that. Still seems overtly hypocritical to me to have Tory royalists slamming the poor for "scrounging off the state" by using social housing, whilst zealously defending a family of posh people doing exactly the same thing; just with a much larger public sector house haha. "Do as I say not as I do" springs to mind, but I s'pose you've got to be pragmatic if they're bringing money into the treasury.

    P.S I'd pay a lot more as a tourist to see the Queen trying to adjust to life in a 3 bedroom semi than stand outside Buckingham Palace all day.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Fender7535)
    If that's been calculated and verified then I'll take that. Still seems overtly hypocritical to me to have Tory royalists slamming the poor for "scrounging off the state" by using social housing, whilst zealously defending a family of posh people doing exactly the same thing; just with a much larger public sector house haha. "Do as I say not as I do" springs to mind, but I s'pose you've got to be pragmatic if they're bringing money into the treasury.
    What's vastly more hypocritical is slamming the poor for benefits scrounging whilst defending bankers and tax evaders who effectively steal billions upon billions from the UK economy. The "crimes" of the Royal Family (and the poor) absolutely pale in comparison to that. That's what the current system is about. Constantly attack the poor for petty little crimes whilst defending the rich for their much bigger crimes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    What's vastly more hypocritical is slamming the poor for benefits scrounging whilst defending bankers and tax evaders who effectively steal billions upon billions from the UK economy. The "crimes" of the Royal Family (and the poor) absolutely pale in comparison to that. That's what the current system is about. Constantly attack the poor for petty little crimes whilst defending the rich for their much bigger crimes.
    100% agree on that. A smokescreen made from xenophobic, fear inducing media headlines is pretty effective at pulling the wool over the eyes of most of us.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Article was idiotically taken out of complete context and assumptions made from what Bennett said, or rather didn't say
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    i have just read an appalling press release by the Green Party in which they promise to put Her Majesty the Queen in a council house.

    i had to check to see if i had picked up Viz instead of The Times.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/p...cle4333034.ece
    What's surpising about that exactly? It's in keeping with the Green policy, and belief in democracy. Where should the Queen stay when the monarchy is abolished?


    (Original post by kumon)
    I am so happy they said this. At least they stand up for what they believe in.

    Plopping out of the right vagina shouldn't mean you should get my hard earned money to spend on royal holidays, at the same time people are struggling on food banks.

    How any of you can justify people being born into privilege is disgraceful.
    So much for your hypocrisy about "equality".

    Glad the greens said this. They are a real alternative who actually give a toss about the 99%.
    I agree wholeheartedly.

    This is in keeping with the Greens policies. I believe the abolishment of the monarchy, and the honors system is crucial to abolishing the house of lords, and getting a democratically elected second chamber. The greens would prefer a national assembly for England as well as increased powers of devolution for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

    Also say what you want about the Greens...at least they have a manifesto, and stick to it.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Man. These policies. They would require 80% income tax brackets to implement. What on Earth.

    There's socialism and there's the Green Party.

    What are they doing to education? Abolishing SATS, making league tables illegal and encouraging "creative subjects" over "academic subjects". Do they they not give a **** about the economy in the slightest? It's like "damn, why should I be efficient if I can have a fun life and just get the government to pay for everything", erm, well, because that means 80% income tax brackets for everyone. How else will they fund all this ****?

    Import taxes on all goods? Really? Do they realise how much we import?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dozyrosie)
    The debate about whether Britain should be a republic is not one for political parties, it is one of consensus. At this moment in time Britain is in favour of a constitutional monarchy, so the Greens have definitely shot themselves in the foot. What they should be arguing for is a referendum, I would suggest every ten years, or two parliaments. As a republican myself this would be acceptable, and I would be quite willing to accept the majority decision.
    Ye I'd go with this. It's like EU membership. It should be put to a referendum.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    For people who don't want to hear twisted versions of it from the Times or other parts of the Murdoch-owned press, here are the actual Green policies on the constitution and government of the UK. Basically they want to modernise and democratise Britain. Many of the things that are worst in this country, such as government secrecy, over-centralisation, imperialist wars abroad and the lack of true accountability, derive ultimately from the lack of a constitution and the ways powers are assumed to be vested in the Monarch and devolved from there to a 'loyal' parliament.
    http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/pa.html

    This is the actual policy about the royal property. No mention of council houses.

    "
    1. Peers and members of the royal family shall have the same civil rights and fiscal obligations as other citizens.
    2. A settlement of property held by the current royal family shall be made, to divide it between that required for the private life of current members of the family and that to be public property. "
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TorpidPhil)
    Man. These policies. They would require 80% income tax brackets to implement. What on Earth.

    There's socialism and there's the Green Party.

    What are they doing to education? Abolishing SATS, making league tables illegal and encouraging "creative subjects" over "academic subjects". Do they they not give a **** about the economy in the slightest? It's like "damn, why should I be efficient if I can have a fun life and just get the government to pay for everything", erm, well, because that means 80% income tax brackets for everyone. How else will they fund all this ****?

    Import taxes on all goods? Really? Do they realise how much we import?
    excellent post Phil. these people are a menace. if they stuck to cuddling toads or whatever i would consider voting for them.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    excellent post Phil. these people are a menace. if they stuck to cuddling toads or whatever i would consider voting for them.
    How do you feel about the royals sympathizing with the Saudi regime that wants to flog a man for expressing his political views on a blog? How does that fit in with the avatar you are currently wearing?

    Also from the greens...

    "

    1. Peers and members of the royal family shall have the same civil rights and fiscal obligations as other citizens.
    2. A settlement of property held by the current royal family shall be made, to divide it between that required for the private life of current members of the family and that to be public property. "

    What you posted in the OP is completly out of context.

    This isn't the french revolution. They are not going to get their heads chopped off. It's not even that radical when countries like France, america etc do not have monarchies.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    So the only countries without monarchies are Leninist communist countries. OK then. Better tell america.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.