The Queen's 90th Birthday

jtoon74

Whilst by no means a royalist, I would like a freebie from cryptic to celebrate this Veeeeery important even.

BTW I am english.

artan42

I think some Typhoon Class battleships given out to English players would be just the ticket.

No ulterior motive here at all... nope...​​

rllaillieu

I'm not even English and I think this should be celebrated. The Queen is one of the awesomest people alive right now and if that shouldn't be celebrated, I don't know what should.

conkav22

artan42 wrote: »

I think some Typhoon Class battleships given out to English players would be just the ticket.

No ulterior motive here at all... nope...​​

Can we get them free Typhoons in Ireland as well, please thanks

marcusdkane

I never liked the royal familiy when I was a child... Now I'm older, I can say that Liz was quite tasty as a young woman, and from some of the stuff I've seen (such as her photobombing) she has quite the sense of humor

Happy birthday, Liz

artan42

conkav22 wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

I think some Typhoon Class battleships given out to English players would be just the ticket.

No ulterior motive here at all... nope...

Can we get them free Typhoons in Ireland as well, please thanks

No. You can stand with the Welsh and Scots staring jealously inwards as we fly our Typhoons around England.

You can't spent 800 years trying to get rid of us only to turn around now and ask for our starships .​​

lazarus51166

If only the good die young the queen must have done horrible things over the years. shapeshifting, blood drinking illuminati temporal agent confirmed

theraven2378

Happy 90th, I have a whole new respect for the queen for what she did during the blitz, driving an ambulance through the city while the bombs fell

mirrorchaos

when Kate Middleton becomes the queen then i will show some interest, she is after all english. the current group of old "royals" are nothing but german and greeks who stole the land and proclaimed themselves as a royal family, i do not recognise them or their claim.

so when Kate becomes queen i will recognize her as the queen.

alexmakepeace

jtoon74 wrote: »

Veeeeery important even.

Yes, 90 is a very important even. This may sound odd coming from someone as irrational as I am, but I think she's still in her prime.

Then again... not to sound negative, but according to certain fractions in parliament, the Queen's power is only imaginary.

Just don't ask her to make you some pi. It takes forever.

artan42

mirrorchaos wrote: »

when Kate Middleton becomes the queen then i will show some interest, she is after all english. the current group of old "royals" are nothing but german and greeks who stole the land and proclaimed themselves as a royal family, i do not recognise them or their claim.

so when Kate becomes queen i will recognize her as the queen.

Her succession is determined by her marriage into the current bloodline. Besides these 'German' monarchs can be traced back to English Victoria. Then further back to Scots, Dutch, French, Norse, Saxon, Roman, and so on. Was William the first's claim illegitimate when he seized the throne from the Saxon line? The Saxons from Europe?

Besides, at the end of the day, her only job is to sign on the dotted line, a job that nowadays wouldn't cause a blip in the wheels of civil service if she refused. The wheels would still spin. It turns out a German with a pen can sign a piece of paper as well as an English person with a pen.

Edit: Kate will not be queen, not in the same way. Any official role of hers will be that of princess consort, though she will be eligible to the title of queen as she's not Greek.​​

jorantomalak

Happy Birthday to the queen of england from the american side of the atlantic mud puddle

thunderfoot

In a chaotic world filled with hate mongering people whose only desire is to wreck everything in sight, Elizabeth is a reminder of what we could be if we chose. Happy 90th, Your Majesty. And may you have another 90.

equinox976

thunderfoot006 wrote: »

Happy 90th, Your Majesty. And may you have another 90.

I think a 180 year old Queen might be a little bit freaky...

lazarus51166

equinox976 wrote: »

thunderfoot006 wrote: »

Happy 90th, Your Majesty. And may you have another 90.

I think a 180 year old Queen might be a little bit freaky...

two words: Darth Zash

mirrorchaos

artan42 wrote: »

mirrorchaos wrote: »

when Kate Middleton becomes the queen then i will show some interest, she is after all english. the current group of old "royals" are nothing but german and greeks who stole the land and proclaimed themselves as a royal family, i do not recognise them or their claim.

so when Kate becomes queen i will recognize her as the queen.

Her succession is determined by her marriage into the current bloodline. Besides these 'German' monarchs can be traced back to English Victoria. Then further back to Scots, Dutch, French, Norse, Saxon, Roman, and so on. Was William the first's claim illegitimate when he seized the throne from the Saxon line? The Saxons from Europe?

Besides, at the end of the day, her only job is to sign on the dotted line, a job that nowadays wouldn't cause a blip in the wheels of civil service if she refused. The wheels would still spin. It turns out a German with a pen can sign a piece of paper as well as an English person with a pen.

Edit: Kate will not be queen, not in the same way. Any official role of hers will be that of princess consort, though she will be eligible to the title of queen as she's not Greek.​​

i couldnt care less about politics inside that "royal" family, my point is that i do not recognise this 90 year old person as legitimate. you may as well stop trying, im going to only dig my heels in even more.

alexmakepeace

mirrorchaos wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

mirrorchaos wrote: »

when Kate Middleton becomes the queen then i will show some interest, she is after all english. the current group of old "royals" are nothing but german and greeks who stole the land and proclaimed themselves as a royal family, i do not recognise them or their claim.

so when Kate becomes queen i will recognize her as the queen.

Her succession is determined by her marriage into the current bloodline. Besides these 'German' monarchs can be traced back to English Victoria. Then further back to Scots, Dutch, French, Norse, Saxon, Roman, and so on. Was William the first's claim illegitimate when he seized the throne from the Saxon line? The Saxons from Europe?

Besides, at the end of the day, her only job is to sign on the dotted line, a job that nowadays wouldn't cause a blip in the wheels of civil service if she refused. The wheels would still spin. It turns out a German with a pen can sign a piece of paper as well as an English person with a pen.

Edit: Kate will not be queen, not in the same way. Any official role of hers will be that of princess consort, though she will be eligible to the title of queen as she's not Greek.​​

i couldnt care less about politics inside that "royal" family, my point is that i do not recognise this 90 year old person as legitimate. you may as well stop trying, im going to only dig my heels in even more.

Did you know that the Queen's ancestors actually come from Africa?

samt1996

I mean it's cool y'all have an old bat as your countries national pet that sucks up millions and millions of taxpayer pounds (see what I did there?) To live the life of a spoiled brat just because of her fancy last name.... but I'm glad we don't have that over here.

thunderfoot

samt1996 wrote: »

I mean it's cool y'all have an old bat as your countries national pet that sucks up millions and millions of taxpayer pounds (see what I did there?) To live the life of a spoiled brat just because of her fancy last name.... but I'm glad we don't have that over here.

Yeah, having far too many people on Welfare who are capble of working yet refuse to do so is sooo much better. :rolleyes:

samt1996

Well good point, but not quite the same thing. Her and her entire family are literally guaranteed lives of perfect luxury, wealth and fame because they are the descendants of some crazy psychopaths that people were indoctrinated to worship as gods.

I don't care too much because it doesn't affect me personally but I know plenty of Scott's and Irishman with strong opinions about it.

marcusdkane

samt1996 wrote: »

Well good point, but not quite the same thing. Her and her entire family are literally guaranteed lives of perfect luxury, wealth and fame because they are the descendants of some crazy psychopaths that people were indoctrinated to worship as gods.

I don't care too much because it doesn't affect me personally but I know plenty of Scott's and Irishman with strong opinions about it.

Like the Bush Dynasty... They might not have 'crowns' or 'titles', but America has the same rot of an overly-entitled strata of inherited wealth and privilege making their mark on society itself... Don't kid yourself otherwise, the political machine of America, and those who make up that political class, are every bit as entrenched, as self-serving, and insulated from consequences as any inherited monarchy...

equinox976

samt1996 wrote: »

Well good point, but not quite the same thing. Her and her entire family are literally guaranteed lives of perfect luxury, wealth and fame because they are the descendants of some crazy psychopaths that people were indoctrinated to worship as gods.

I don't care too much because it doesn't affect me personally but I know plenty of Scott's and Irishman with strong opinions about it.

I would say with the amount of money the Queen generates for the UK via tourism that the Royal family pretty much pay for themselves.

rooster707

Political discussion, wheeeee...

mustrumridcully0

artan42 wrote: »

I think some Typhoon Class battleships given out to English players would be just the ticket.

No ulterior motive here at all... nope...​​

I though the Brits didn't want the Eurofighter... Or was that just the French and their Rafale?

alexmakepeace wrote: »

jtoon74 wrote: »

Veeeeery important even.

Yes, 90 is a very important even. This may sound odd coming from someone as irrational as I am, but I think she's still in her prime.

Then again... not to sound negative, but according to certain fractions in parliament, the Queen's power is only imaginary.

Just don't ask her to make you some pi. It takes forever.

artan42

reyan01 wrote: »

Mixed feelings about her myself, although I tend to maintain the opinion that she generates more positive than negative for the country.

For example, considering all the crying about how much taxpayer money the Royals supposedly swallow, studies actually claim that tourism revenue connected to the monarchy and its heritage was valued at £535 million for 2015. An an anti-monarchy group's research claimed that the monarchy costs the UK taxpayer £334 million a year.

I also tend to consider the fact that the majority of the 'news' generated by the Royals is positive, in stark contrast to the sadly all too frequent news about terrorism/murder/child abuse etc etc.

All of that is true. As a republican (not that kind) I see no reason to remove her as head of state. I do however take objection to the tax free status of the immediate royal family and the taxpayer funded upkeep to the various palaces, castles, and assorted other properties around Britain. The Queen and her mob are the largest and richest landowners in the country. The rent from Cornwall alone should fund their houses. I will not be held to pay for the leaky roof of the richest woman in the country. Nor pay to fund Andrew and his accounting with murderous barbarians and other despots. You know we bought the Kate and whatshisname's new home. He's second in line to the bleeding throne, he can buy his own damn house.

In other words, as head of state and assorted hangers on the country gets £535 mil, they stop taking our support and stand on their own two feet, selling property to the state (or the National Trust or whatever) if they need the money, and we save £334 mil. That's around £800 mil now.
Obviously it'll be down to about £500 or so mil due to them having to shoulder their own costs, but those costs will come down once they learn that you don't need to give a free jet to a third cousin, or that nobody needs (or should have) more than two palaces at an absolute maximum.​​

dareau

artan42 wrote: »

In other words, as head of state and assorted hangers on the country gets £535 mil, they stop taking our support and stand on their own two feet, selling property to the state (or the National Trust or whatever) if they need the money, and we save £334 mil. That's around £800 mil now.
Obviously it'll be down to about £500 or so mil due to them having to shoulder their own costs, but those costs will come down once they learn that you don't need to give a free jet to a third cousin, or that nobody needs (or should have) more than two palaces at an absolute maximum.​​

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm kinda on the opposite side of the Atlantic...

If the mere existence of the Royal Family's netting the Government 535 mil pounds/year in "Tourism Fees and related spending taxes", and they're shelling out 334 mil, that translates to a net 201 mil pounds/year the Government keeps...

And you'd think that the 334 mil pounds/year is factoring in things like third or fourth palaces, private jets, "field trips", whatnot...

Now, I bet if the Government were to stop supporting the Royals, they'd "take back" the tourism money's the Government's currently collecting - so while the 334 mil expenditure stops, a lot of that 535 in goes away, too. If it goes to, say, 100 mil in, 0 out, that's not the 201 mil kept right now - what's Parliament going to do?

artan42

dareau wrote: »

artan42 wrote: »

In other words, as head of state and assorted hangers on the country gets £535 mil, they stop taking our support and stand on their own two feet, selling property to the state (or the National Trust or whatever) if they need the money, and we save £334 mil. That's around £800 mil now.
Obviously it'll be down to about £500 or so mil due to them having to shoulder their own costs, but those costs will come down once they learn that you don't need to give a free jet to a third cousin, or that nobody needs (or should have) more than two palaces at an absolute maximum.

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm kinda on the opposite side of the Atlantic...

If the mere existence of the Royal Family's netting the Government 535 mil pounds/year in "Tourism Fees and related spending taxes", and they're shelling out 334 mil, that translates to a net 201 mil pounds/year the Government keeps...

And you'd think that the 334 mil pounds/year is factoring in things like third or fourth palaces, private jets, "field trips", whatnot...

Now, I bet if the Government were to stop supporting the Royals, they'd "take back" the tourism money's the Government's currently collecting - so while the 334 mil expenditure stops, a lot of that 535 in goes away, too. If it goes to, say, 100 mil in, 0 out, that's not the 201 mil kept right now - what's Parliament going to do?

Currently the majority of the spending to the RF is done by the taxpayer. The prophets from the RF are split between the state, the RF, and the public (shops selling merchandise etc.)
The RF technically have enough money behind them to fund their own enterprises. So the state wouldn't exactly be earning more from them, it'd just be spending less on them whilst still benefiting from them (if they paid tax at a rate appropriate to people of their wealth bracket).
In addition, as head of state, the Queen and the close RF are part of the state, so even if self funded, they would still be required to return portions of their prophets to the state as it would pay for the official tools of their job as representatives of the state, so we win there as well.

The issue has never been the finances though, it's an obsession we have with class and tradition. You should have heard the fuss in parliament when there was a vote to switch from using vellum to record laws to using archive paper and electronic copies. You cannot drag those people into the 21st century with a big digger.

Plus it doesn't help that the only time we were a republic we had a Lord Protector who was, to be as mild as possible, a bit of a TRIBBLE. Scotland and Ireland were never particularly enamoured with Oliver (or Richard when anybody remembers him).​​