jonthefox Posted 17 December 2014 Posted 17 December 2014 Sounds far fetched i know and it's in the fail, but there's no smoke without fire as they say. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2877751/Bookies-suspend-bettering-Queen-abdicating-Christmas-Day-speech-flurry-bets.html
cambridgefox Posted 17 December 2014 Posted 17 December 2014 Sounds far fetched i know and it's in the fail, but there's no smoke without fire as they say. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2877751/Bookies-suspend-bettering-Queen-abdicating-Christmas-Day-speech-flurry-bets.html i hope she does abdicate,with all that rich food she would be backed up.Seriously though I like the royals, I don't think she will for a minute.God save the Queen.
Hollism Posted 17 December 2014 Posted 17 December 2014 No chance. Interesting that there were "a flurry of bets" though.
Jimothy Posted 17 December 2014 Posted 17 December 2014 No chance. Interesting that there were "a flurry of bets" though. All from Charles, after she hinted she'd got him a very special Christmas present this year.
fleckneymike Posted 17 December 2014 Posted 17 December 2014 Sounds far fetched i know and it's in the fail, but there's no smoke without fire as they say. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2877751/Bookies-suspend-bettering-Queen-abdicating-Christmas-Day-speech-flurry-bets.html dry ice
DennisNedry Posted 17 December 2014 Posted 17 December 2014 dry ice Not gas technically edit: had a mare, is carbon dioxide apparently.
Guest MattP Posted 17 December 2014 Posted 17 December 2014 Bloody hope not. If that dhimmi Charles ever gets the chair I'll be outside with Russell Brand.
FoxesAreBlue Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 Didn't she vow to rule for life? Doesn't strike me as the kind of bird to go back on her word?
leicsmac Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 Can't see it happening. More likely that the throne will pass straight to William when she passes on.
MPH Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 Can't see it happening. More likely that the throne will pass straight to William when she passes on. She'd need to be alive as she is the only one who has the authority to make that decision. In other words, she'd have to abdicate.
Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 Sounds far fetched i know and it's in the fail, but there's no smoke without fire as they say. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2877751/Bookies-suspend-bettering-Queen-abdicating-Christmas-Day-speech-flurry-bets.html Putting a flame to a daily mail does the trick.
leicsmac Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 She'd need to be alive as she is the only one who has the authority to make that decision. In other words, she'd have to abdicate. That's interesting. Didn't know that. Could she not make the decision and make it so it comes into effect upon her death? Choosing the heir, as it were?
chrisfox Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 I bet she's got a tenner on it not really bothered either way, but it would at least give the Queens speach a bit of relevance this year
Buce Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 She'd need to be alive as she is the only one who has the authority to make that decision. In other words, she'd have to abdicate. She doesn't have the right to choose her successor, as the 'Right of Succession' is enshrined in parliamentary statute.http://www.britroyals.com/faqs.htm
Rincewind Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 Don't really care. It will just be another excuse to spend millions of the taxpayers money Funnily one of my poems came to mind during the night which is about her 60 years om the throne. Charles is getting on a bit so may go first with his hectic lifestyle.
FoxesAreBlue Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 Don't really care. It will just be another excuse to spend millions of the taxpayers money Funnily one of my poems came to mind during the night which is about her 60 years om the throne. Charles is getting on a bit so may go first with his hectic lifestyle. You do realise that, unlike your good self, the Queen pays tax don't you? She also brings in a vast amount more than she costs.
Rincewind Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 I paid tax for 40 plus years and I pay tax on nearly everything that I buy. We are told often enough that she pays taxes and brings in money often enough so we all should be convinced by now. I still don't care and I expect she gives little thought to her subjects when sat on the throne.
FoxesAreBlue Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 Facts are facts Ken, whether you like where they come from or not. Well done on your 40 years of graft, you deserve your early retirement. Imagine if Liz, who is 88 by the way, had done the same? And how you can comment on what she thinks makes you a far cleverer man than me.
Guest MattP Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 I paid tax for 40 plus years and I pay tax on nearly everything that I buy. We are told often enough that she pays taxes and brings in money often enough so we all should be convinced by now. I still don't care and I expect she gives little thought to her subjects when sat on the throne. Spending state money down the pub doesn't really make you a tax-payer does it? The Queen has took a bigger pay cut then any public sector worker and is still working at 88, also unlike politicians, she saved during the good years so she could account for such a reduction in the nation's finances. As is widely recognised, The Royal Family is a bargain for the British people. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html Although as this explains quite well below, we should never just think of them in monetary terms. Although the monarchy undoubtedly represents value for money, its true worth cannot be expressed in financial terms. It is the personification of the nation, the embodiment of our national identity. The monarchy is living history, a pageant of our past that remains relevant in the present and will continue to do so in the future. Constitutionally, it is the guarantor of stability: during the political impasse that followed the general election and the protracted negotiations, our governmental process did not miss a beat, since the Queen remained as the constitutional authority, ensuring continuity. She also gives authority a human face. In other countries, how many hospital wards are significantly cheered by the visit of a republican head of state, usually a political retread with partisan baggage? The additional advantage of a royal family, with several members carrying out official duties, is that many more engagements can be accommodated than any single president could ever perform. Bagehot also recognised that a family at the apex of society generated more interest than a solitary individual.
Beliall Posted 18 December 2014 Posted 18 December 2014 I paid tax for 40 plus years and I pay tax on nearly everything that I buy. We are told often enough that she pays taxes and brings in money often enough so we all should be convinced by now. I still don't care and I expect she gives little thought to her subjects when sat on the throne. dont blame, shes probably to busy reading foxestalk on the throne like the rest of us
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.