Gove is the best troll ever...
Discussion
Randy Winkman said:
TheHeretic said:
Just had a look at some 'ish' figures. Civil list is 8 million a year. Crown estate brings in 210 million a year.
Why do they "own" all that money-making stuff? Cos they are the Queen, Prince etc. They didn't do anything to get it.Randy Winkman said:
TheHeretic said:
Just had a look at some 'ish' figures. Civil list is 8 million a year. Crown estate brings in 210 million a year.
Why do they "own" all that money-making stuff? Cos they are the Queen, Prince etc. They didn't do anything to get it.You're right, they didn't do anything to deserve it. Poor b
ds.B Huey said:
Do you really think the Queen would prefer not to be Queen?
Well, considering she, and her family would be a lot better off, without doing all the hand shaking, dinners, and having no life outside of a secretaries appointment book, whilst reaping the income from the crown estate? Who is to say.
TheHeretic said:
They don't actually own it. It is in trust, but they made a deal way back when MBH was a pensioner, and in exchange for having. Crown, etc, they get a 'yearly wedge of cash' and the land that they owned, the Crown Estate, has it's profits go into the treasury. If we remove the civil list, then they can revert back to the land ownership, and we are 8 million better off, but with 200+ out of pocket, as well as probably having to pay rent on crown land.
Not correct TH 
The Crown Estates are not personal property, even if the current HoS decided to try and take back the revenues (crazy crazy move), and even if they were 'allowed', the money would still have to be spent on governance because it is owned by the Crown (not a private person and not the HoS). Even back in the mid 19th century observers thought such a move was impossible, and we are now in 2011.
In short the HoS does not give this money back to the country, it is the countries.
http://www.andywightman.com/docs/civil_list_crown_...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown
TheHeretic said:
ell, considering she, and her family would be a lot better off, without doing all the hand shaking, dinners, and having no life outside of a secretaries appointment book, whilst reaping the income from the crown estate? Who is to say.
"If, therefore, the King exercised his legal right and resumed possession be would only be entitled to retain a sum sufficient for the support of his household and family in a state befitting the Royal dignity. The remaining produce would have to be devoted to the public service. As in the last resort it would be for Parliament to say what sum the King should retain, the advantage of a resumption instead of a surrender is problematical. It would, indeed, scarcely serve any good purpose to revert to the old system of Royal control..."
Edited by Halb on Monday 16th January 20:38
TheHeretic said:
Absolutely. I'm not sure of the intricacies, but as far as I am aware, the money the crown receives from the government, is far outweighed by the profits of the crown estate which gets given to the treasury.
It's 57p/person/paFor me they are welcome to my packet of crisps per year... The benefit they bring must massively outweigh this? Surely?
If only the fact that have this quasi feudal system stops us being like the yanks with their blimmin president or the f
king French for that matterHalb said:
Not correct TH
The Crown Estates are not personal property, even if the current HoS decided to try and take back the revenues (crazy crazy move), and even if they were 'allowed', the money would still have to be spent on governance because it is owned by the Crown (not a private person and not the HoS). Even back in the mid 19th century observers thought such a move was impossible, and we are now in 2011.
In short the HoS does not give this money back to the country, it is the countries.
http://www.andywightman.com/docs/civil_list_crown_...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown
I never said they were personal property. However, the trust is there because of the act between the government, and the Crown. Dissolving that act will, I would assume, revert it to how it was. The Crown Estates are not personal property, even if the current HoS decided to try and take back the revenues (crazy crazy move), and even if they were 'allowed', the money would still have to be spent on governance because it is owned by the Crown (not a private person and not the HoS). Even back in the mid 19th century observers thought such a move was impossible, and we are now in 2011.
In short the HoS does not give this money back to the country, it is the countries.
http://www.andywightman.com/docs/civil_list_crown_...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown
TheHeretic said:
Halb said:
Not correct TH
The Crown Estates are not personal property, even if the current HoS decided to try and take back the revenues (crazy crazy move), and even if they were 'allowed', the money would still have to be spent on governance because it is owned by the Crown (not a private person and not the HoS). Even back in the mid 19th century observers thought such a move was impossible, and we are now in 2011.
In short the HoS does not give this money back to the country, it is the countries.
http://www.andywightman.com/docs/civil_list_crown_...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown
I never said they were personal property. However, the trust is there because of the act between the government, and the Monarch. Dissolving that act will, I would assume, revert it to how it was. The Crown Estates are not personal property, even if the current HoS decided to try and take back the revenues (crazy crazy move), and even if they were 'allowed', the money would still have to be spent on governance because it is owned by the Crown (not a private person and not the HoS). Even back in the mid 19th century observers thought such a move was impossible, and we are now in 2011.
In short the HoS does not give this money back to the country, it is the countries.
http://www.andywightman.com/docs/civil_list_crown_...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crown
I thought the point you were making was that if it were to revert, the monies would be for the HoS to do as they like, which is not true, since the CE are not private property, and not to be dispensed with as they please by the current HoS. The HoS is not the Crown. Please see my expanded response above.
Edited by Halb on Monday 16th January 20:42
Never suggested it would be their pocket money, merely that they would have the income of the crown estate to use, rather than the relative pittance they get at the moment. They would still have duties to perform, as before.
What happens if we became a republic? What would happen to the crown estate?
What happens if we became a republic? What would happen to the crown estate?
TheHeretic said:
Just had a look at some 'ish' figures. Civil list is 8 million a year. Crown estate brings in 210 million a year.
No it isn't. About £8M is paid over but that leaves a shortfall of about the same which is paid from the civil List reserve.Anyway, that is too simple. It only covers the cost of civil duties. What about the cost of maintaining and running the palaces etc and all the other 'expenses'?
Truth is we don't know what the real cost of the Royals is and it is disingenuous to simply say they pay it back in intangible form. Where is the evidence? Where is the evidence that we wouldn't be better off without them?
As for the yacht, the plan would be that it would be nothing but a cost for 4 or 5 years, during which time it would be for the Royals sole use, in order to give it provenance. Only then night it be used to bring in revenue.
Christ, we have millions on the peverty line and huge debts and someone wants to buy the Queen a f
king yacht? Unbelieveable.TheHeretic said:
Never suggested it would be their pocket money, merely that they would have the income of the crown estate to use, rather than the relative pittance they get at the moment. They would still have duties to perform, as before.
What happens if we became a republic? What would happen to the crown estate?
"whilst reaping the income from the crown estate? Who is to say." andWhat happens if we became a republic? What would happen to the crown estate?
"but with 200+ out of pocket, as well as probably having to pay rent on crown land"
gives the impression it would be used as pocket money. They currently reap what they are allowed to right now. If they were allowed to take it back they would then have to run the thing themselves (they would probably bring the current lot on a wage) and then have to pay the same things that are paid for now. They would be liable, even so Parliament could dictate terms.
That is a debated issue. The way I see it, is that since the CE belong to the Crown nothing much would change there, they have been and shall be there to pay for civil governance and the bit given to the current royal family would be used as well, save the cost of an elected HoS.
Edited by Halb on Monday 16th January 20:52
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff