Turn on thread page Beta
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    I still get PRSOM messages though.



    If she can win an election every 5 years I have absolutely no problem with that.



    It's an elite of one versus an "elite" of millions. Plenty of senior politicians were not from rich backgrounds, and from then on its their own life choices that affect whether or not they can realistically aspire to be PM.
    yeah, only one person per 'x' reps but no maximum amount per day
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    If she can win an election every 5 years I have absolutely no problem with that.
    Why does it have to be every 5 years if it's in perpetuity? Should we have an EU referendum every 5 years? Would you be happy if the majority of people, which seems to be the case as it stands, wanted her to stay Queen in perpetuity?

    It's an elite of one versus an "elite" of millions. Plenty of senior politicians were not from rich backgrounds, and from then on its their own life choices that affect whether or not they can realistically aspire to be PM.
    Name me one PM who has a similar background to a single mother of three who lives in a council house with a degree from an ex-poly and with parents who were working-class labourers and tell me anyone can realistically become PM.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    Yes, see the similarly clever response of some other poster above.

    We're not trying to change anything. We're defending the status quo against pointless complaints. The majority of people support it and in any event it will stay unless a very large number of people get very mad about it. You're not going to achieve that by making snide comments and tabloid posts of pictures of pre-war nazi salutes on a thread in an internet forum about a new record set by the queen. You're just being spoilsports.
    Nowt to do with your snarky reply - the point is you can't just say "oh, you're just annoying" when the monarchist argument is equally pointless and has less substance to it.

    Would you consider anyone who gripes about the wall to wall coverage of the football last summer a spoilsport? Some people just don't like the monarchy (quite rightly given it's an outdated concept tied to when we thought that some people were superior by nature, usually because of a tie to religion in some way, and, as the americans quite famously figured out a few centuries ago "all men are created equal"), just as some people don't like the football - and just as it being practically impossible to avoid the football during the world cup, it's been practically impossible to avoid the pathetic fawning over some old lady because she had the good fortune to be born to the right person then just live (which isn't an achievement, she's done nothing to earn this record).
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    Why does it have to be every 5 years if it's in perpetuity? Should we have an EU referendum every 5 years? Would you be happy if the majority of people, which seems to be the case as it stands, wanted her to stay Queen in perpetuity?
    There should be regular elections to ensure alternative candidates have a decent chance of standing against the Queen.

    Name me one PM who has a similar background to a single mother of three who lives in a council house with a degree from an ex-poly and with parents who were working-class labourers and tell me anyone can realistically become PM.
    The point I was making in that last post was that anyone at birth can be PM, without a long list of people needing to die first. What one chooses to do with one's life after that point can affect the feasibility of becoming PM, but it is not an accident of birth.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    There should be regular elections to ensure alternative candidates have a decent chance of standing against the Queen.
    That doesn't make sense. You want the majority to have a say over the office of head of state, but you would deny them the democratic right to determine that the office should belong to the Queen in perpetuity. You're either for democratic will or not.

    The point I was making in that last post was that anyone at birth can be PM, without a long list of people needing to die first. What one chooses to do with one's life after that point can affect the feasibility of becoming PM, but it is not an accident of birth.
    Well, I would say that the most powerful, influential position in the country being open to only a select pool of people, largely determined by elitism, is worse than a ceremonial role being open only to one person.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)

    That's semantics. She 'works' like many others. The German President performs the same duties - does he not work? Just because you subjectively view her tasks as 'non-strenuous' (sorry she's not doing back-breaking labour :rolleyes:), does not mean that she doesn't 'work'.
    No it isn't. She doesn't do anything for money. Work is doing something for money. Therefore, she doesn't work. Even if her duties were linked to her remuneration, she would be ridiculously overpaid considering the minimal amount of effort they involve.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    and here is the day when my middle finger rises in the general direction of ****ingham palace
    the queen and the royal family actually makes me wish I had *more* middle fingers on my hands because there are just so many of them
    **** you, elizabeth. **** you charles. **** you camilla. **** you phillip. **** you willliam. **** you harry. **** you george. and **** you, kate
    Spoiler:
    Show


    I'll say it again because my comment was stealth-deleted! didn't even get a yellow card for it!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    She's been useless for the past years and will bloody continue to be.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    That doesn't make sense. You want the majority to have a say over the office of head of state, but you would deny them the democratic right to determine that the office should belong to the Queen in perpetuity. You're either for democratic will or not.
    I would absolutely deny them the right to make that decision for their children and their grandchildren.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    And what we see here is why certain groups in the left wing remain unelected and hated by pretty much everyone.

    Do me a favour - stop being pretentious and complaining about how everyone else lives there lives and how everything is an injustice. Most of us are getting tired of hearing it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    No it isn't. She doesn't do anything for money. Work is doing something for money. Therefore, she doesn't work. Even if her duties were linked to her remuneration, she would be ridiculously overpaid considering the minimal amount of effort they involve.
    That's quite a claim, considering that what the Queen does is equatable to the work of, for example, the President of Germany. At similar cost for the office, the German president is paid a salary of €191,000. The Queen has a salary of £0. Do you think the German president is 'ridiculously overpaid'?
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Don't understand why she hasn't been sanctioned by the DWP after nearly 70 years without seeking gainful employment. Oh sorry, yes I do - a couple of her ancestors were world leaders a few hundred centuries ago so she's special and us plebs should all bow down and worship her.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Wait? She doesn't have a job? I guess Obama, Hollande, Gauke etc don't have jobs either.
    Nor do any of our ambassadors

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    A thought just crossed my mind
    It is against TSR rules to break the law, so I can shut up the Republicans by reporting them for breaking the rules and law

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    it's an outdated concept tied to when we thought that some people were superior by nature, usually because of a tie to religion in some way, and, as the americans quite famously figured out a few centuries ago "all men are created equal"... it's been practically impossible to avoid the pathetic fawning over some old lady because she had the good fortune to be born to the right person then just live (which isn't an achievement, she's done nothing to earn this record).
    On all this I'd simply direct you to my earlier comments.
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    What I'd say to that is that it makes no difference. There are plenty of other things we can all be. The monarchy works best when it is fixed, as it currently is. The left tends to be preoccupied by envy of the position of particular individuals. Yes, the queen is probably, in general, lucky that she's the queen. Who cares? Lots of people get lucky by birth. The question is whether the institution overall is desirable or not. To concentrate on equity to potential applicants for the position of monarch rather than the function of the monarchy in society is to get the issue completely backwards.
    If you follow what people are saying, you'll see that pretty much no-one is claiming that staying alive this long is an achievement of the queen personally. Most people are reflecting upon how well she has carried out her role through that period, upon the change that society has seen during that period, upon how the occasion highlights the contrast between the stability of the monarchy and the instability of everything else, etc. Clearly simply staying alive is not an achievement. As usual the republicans miss the point spectacularly.

    Yes, people who whined about the world cup were annoying, but substantially less so than republicans. Partly because they were just complaining that they didn't like what was on TV, rather than prattling on about privilege and flattering themselves that they were making points of real consequence or elevating themselves above others because they are simply too proud to 'fawn'. Partly because the world cup ends -- republican griping is always there in the background.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I'll just pop this here for those who want another beaurocrat..

    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    A thought just crossed my mind
    It is against TSR rules to break the law, so I can shut up the Republicans by reporting them for breaking the rules and law
    And what law would that be?
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    And what law would that be?
    High treason, you should know, you're trying to get rid of that element of it in MHoC.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    High treason, you should know, you're trying to get rid of that element of it in MHoC.
    I think the precedent of nobody being prosecuted in modern times for advocating the end of the monarchy, and in fact the BBC allowing Republic's leader onto the Daily Politics today, would suggest that it is not considered high treason.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Wait? She doesn't have a job? I guess Obama, Hollande, Gauke etc don't have jobs either.
    Nor do any of our ambassadors

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Obama, Hollande and Gauck can all be removed from office, and therefore stop earning money, if they fail to either do their job or keep within certain limits, therefore their remuneration is tied to what they do, therefore they have jobs. Likewise ambassadors. Not likewise the Queen.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Obama, Hollande and Gauck can all be removed from office, and therefore stop earning money, if they fail to either do their job or keep within certain limits, therefore their remuneration is tied to what they do, therefore they have jobs. Likewise ambassadors. Not likewise the Queen.
    Remove the Queen from office and her income goes up almost 4 fold And you said HRH doesn't have a job, in which case all the people with the same "not a job" as her also have no job and are scrounging, so now she does have a job?
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

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.