Jamaica to become a Republic.

[s2art]

Halb said:

johnfm said:

I don't know. You should ask him. Did he do a deal whereby he gave up revenues from his property in return for an annual payment?

He is suggesting taking their property. I think mine is a valid question.

If he did the deal which was similar to the royals then he did not give up 'his' property. The CE are 'held' by the HoS in the name of the country for the payment of government, the then HoS forgave his rights to them for a regular set stipend (it was a good deal for him at the time) they are/were not personal property. So he is not suggesting they take 'their' property, that's why it is not valid.
If Fittster held a job, and with that job went property and an amount of money to do that job, then that property would not be 'his'. He would manage the property in the name of the company. It is quite different from any personal property Fittster would own in the name of Fittster.

Edited by Halb on Friday 6th January 14:26

Not so fast. The Monarch has to re-approve the arrangement every time they become monarch. All Kings and Queens have done so since the original agreement. In law it would seem its still the property of the Queen.

[johnfm]

Fittster said:

johnfm said:

I don't know. You should ask him. Did he do a deal whereby he gave up revenues from his property in return for an annual payment?

He is suggesting taking their property. I think mine is a valid question.

How did they get this property? Because god said it was rightfully there's?

I assume in the same way as most people before codified property law. They took it in battle and then defended it in battle.

What's your point?

[johnfm]

Halb said:

johnfm said:

I don't know. You should ask him. Did he do a deal whereby he gave up revenues from his property in return for an annual payment?

He is suggesting taking their property. I think mine is a valid question.

If he did the deal which was similar to the royals then he did not give up 'his' property. The CE are 'held' by the HoS in the name of the country for the payment of government, the then HoS forgave his rights to them for a regular set stipend (it was a good deal for him at the time) they are/were not personal property. So he is not suggesting they take 'their' property, that's why it is not valid.
If Fittster held a job, and with that job went property and an amount of money to do that job, then that property would not be 'his'. He would manage the property in the name of the company. It is quite different from any personal property Fittster would own in the name of Fittster.

Edited by Halb on Friday 6th January 14:26

Fittster suggested either taking the income (their property) or the crown estates. I assume the 'Crown Estates' were called that because they were, whether we approve of the method of acquisistion, 'owned' by the 'crown'.

[MX7]

johnfm said:

Not this st again.

If you don't like it, move to a republic. Simple really.

Even in the opening post, you turn it around to 'I want the UK to be a republic'.


As for Jamaica, it's been going on for years, and I think they should cut the cord now. PM after PM has hankered for a republic. Do it.

[Rude-boy]

bobbylondonuk said:

I will take on another anti monarchist on the same deal! in return, they relinquish their right to whinge against the monarchy.

Likewise, but I would require that they fk off to some tin pot Republic elsewhere.

[Halb]

s2art said:

Not so fast. The Monarch has to re-approve the arrangement every time they become monarch. All Kings and Queens have done so since the original agreement. In law it would seem its still the property of the Queen.

Quite, but if the HoS chose not to (apart from the establishment going nuts) they would then take on the responsibilities for paying for the nation...I don't see that happening
"The assets of The Crown Estate are therefore not the property of the Government, nor are they the Sovereign's private estate. They are part of the hereditary possessions of the Sovereign "in right of the Crown".

The property is managed by the CE on behalf of the HoS on behalf of the nation.

johnfm said:

Fittster suggested either taking the income (their property) or the crown estates. I assume the 'Crown Estates' were called that because they were, whether we approve of the method of acquisistion, 'owned' by the 'crown'.

Please see above. The HoS does not 'own' the property, a more accurate description would be a caretaker, being in name only the person who transfers it from one HoS in name of the crown to the next.

edit, to make it clearer, her personal wealth is different.

"The Queen’s personal income, derived from her personal investment portfolio and private estates, is used to meet her private expenses.

The Queen owns the Balmoral and Sandringham Estates, which were both inherited from her father.

Estimates of The Queen’s wealth often mistakenly include items which are held by her as Sovereign on behalf of the nation and are not her private property. These include Royal Palaces, the majority of art treasures from the Royal Collection and the Crown Jewels. The Queen cannot sell these – they must pass to her successor as Sovereign."
http://www.royal.gov.uk/TheRoyalHousehold/Royalfin...

Edited by Halb on Friday 6th January 14:44

[AndrewW-G]

For once I almost agree with Fittster . . . . Direct Democracy (house of representatives, with a system of the electorate voting on important subjects) with a reduced civil list, would be my preference, keep the monarch, their heir and a spare, but get rid of the rest

[Eric Mc]

I have a nominee for the first Jamaican President - she has all the credentials -

self important
self serving
right colour

[Zaxxon]

Eric Mc said:

I have a nominee for the first Jamaican President - she has all the credentials -

self important
self serving
right colour

Nahhh she gonna be the new Sherriff of Rock Ridge

[AndrewW-G]

Zaxxon said:

Eric Mc said:

I have a nominee for the first Jamaican President - she has all the credentials -

self important
self serving
right colour

Nahhh she gonna be the new Sherriff of Rock Ridge

Gabby Johnson said:

The new Sheriff, she's a NI . .BONG, BONG, BONG . . R!

[Ayahuasca]

Eric Mc said:

I have a nominee for the first Jamaican President - she has all the credentials -

self important
self serving
right colour

but wouldn't any candidate need to be Jamaican?

[Amateurish]

Halb said:

Please see above. The HoS does not 'own' the property, a more accurate description would be a caretaker, being in name only the person who transfers it from one HoS in name of the crown to the next.

edit, to make it clearer, her personal wealth is different.

"The Queen’s personal income, derived from her personal investment portfolio and private estates, is used to meet her private expenses.

The Queen owns the Balmoral and Sandringham Estates, which were both inherited from her father.

Estimates of The Queen’s wealth often mistakenly include items which are held by her as Sovereign on behalf of the nation and are not her private property. These include Royal Palaces, the majority of art treasures from the Royal Collection and the Crown Jewels. The Queen cannot sell these – they must pass to her successor as Sovereign."
http://www.royal.gov.uk/TheRoyalHousehold/Royalfin...

Edited by Halb on Friday 6th January 14:44

From my student days, I seem to recall that all land in the country is owned by the Crown. And all freeholds are subject to the Crown's ultimate ownership. So just remember the next time you diss the big Q, she's also your landlord.

[Randy Winkman]

I'm with Doug Stanhope on this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctOHo4RzZEc

[sjn2004]

thinfourth2 said:

I'd happily bet that on average each royal costs the UK less then the average MP

Just think of all those Japanese and Chinese tourists who come hoping to meet Diane Abbott and Ed Willybrand.

[TheEnd]

If we didn't have a Queen, how would American tourists start a conversation?
They can't use the weather, that's our line.

[colonel c]

The Royal Family is only popular with the public at large because of the 'X Factor' factor.
Lets face it with out fresh faced William and Kate to keep up the public interest Charles and Camilla would have sunk the ship by now.

[BruceV8]

colonel c said:

The Royal Family is only popular with the public at large because of the 'X Factor' factor.
Lets face it with out fresh faced William and Kate to keep up the public interest Charles and Camilla would have sunk the ship by now.

Not sure I agree wholeheartedly, but if that is the case it probably says a lot more about what the public have become rather than the Monarchy.

Incidentally, Prince Charles, and Camilla for that matter, come across a lot better in person than they do on the screen or are presented by the press. I wonder if they have been somewhat 'under-sold' by the media over the years.

As for Jamaica, it saddens me when this happens but there's nothing we can do to stop them. Are they going to put it to a referendum or will it be done by the stroke of a politician's pen?

[elster]

Fittster said:

Zaxxon said:

Fittster said:

And where exactly did I state I support the TV license?

You lot seem to love having costs of supporting parasites inflicted on you.

'You lot'? What the fk do you mean 'You lot'?

The group of you who support paying for inbred monarchs, incompetent political representatives and possibly Jonathan Ross.

That would be the 'lot' you belong to.

You mean the majority of the population.

[FarleyRusk]

Based on a 3 week fly drive holiday there almost a decade ago (crikey!), Jamaicans are self-destructive when they're not being lazy - so good riddance if they want to go it alone.

[Ed5995]

Eric Mc said:

I have a nominee for the first Jamaican President - she has all the credentials -

self important
self serving
right colour

spot on...get rid of her and Jamaica. Gobstes