Queen Elizabeth II

[ncurd]

I do wonder with non UK states if they'd still like the monarchy if they had to pay for any of it.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

I do wonder with non UK states if they'd still like the monarchy if they had to pay for any of it.

I'm sure that would make a huge difference

Media release: Opinion Poll - Majority of New Zealanders want a New Zealand head of state — New Zealand Republic

New Zealand Republic’s latest poll shows a majority of New Zealanders support an independent head of state

www.republic.org.nz

Not exactly an impartial source but fair enough, if that's the feeling im sure we'll see change before long

Fair enough.

Personally, I think it's exactly the right time for the debate. If anything was shown yesterday and the last week the monarchy and in turn the media know how to exploit their right to make themselves relevant.

I see it like the gun debate after a mass shooting when the gun lobby argue that it's not the right time to debate banning assault weapons. Just the same ploy to delay the debate and then make people forget about the issue in hand IMO.

I think the transition to Charles is an obvious time for the discussion…but waiting for the dust to settle wouldn't have hurt and I think would possibly have won more people over

 

[Welsh Exile]

I'm sure that would make a huge difference


Not exactly an impartial source but fair enough, if that's the feeling im sure we'll see change before long


I think the transition to Charles is an obvious time for the discussion…but waiting for the dust to settle wouldn't have hurt and I think would possibly have won more people over

Yeah, not the most objective but I'm sure they're not completely fabricating the numbers. It is from 2019 as well so not the most up to date.

I think Ardern said it will happen eventually but not anytime soon.

 

[Which Tyler]

Fair enough.

Personally, I think it's exactly the right time for the debate. If anything was shown yesterday and the last week the monarchy and in turn the media know how to exploit their right to make themselves relevant.

I see it like the gun debate after a mass shooting when the gun lobby argue that it's not the right time to debate banning assault weapons. Just the same ploy to delay the debate and then make people forget about the issue in hand IMO.

My two pennethworth...

I think the right time for the debate starts today. We've done the 10 days mourning, and we (should have*) done that without bringing it up. But it needs to be discussed whilst thoughts are still on the subject.

Unlike the gun debate in the US - it's highly unlikely that there's going to be another change in the monarch this month, so we can afford that 10 days to be respectful to the individual who's died, the family and friends of the individual, and indeed, those who do like the monarchy as a whole, and allow them a little space to process the whole thing. 10 days was the allotted time for that, and now the debates should start.

For myself, I hadn't given it too much thought before this last week - I'm generally much more interested in reforming the houses of commons and lords and going from there.


* FTR, given that this didn't happen, and that I have commented on it - I disapprove of the timing and location of the protests; but, to butcher a paraphrase - I would happily fight for their right to protest where and when they did.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

My two pennethworth...

I think the right time for the debate starts today. We've done the 10 days mourning, and we (should have*) done that without bringing it up. But it needs to be discussed whilst thoughts are still on the subject.

Unlike the gun debate in the US - it's highly unlikely that there's going to be another change in the monarch this month, so we can afford that 10 days to be respectful to the individual who's died, the family and friends of the individual, and indeed, those who do like the monarchy as a whole, and allow them a little space to process the whole thing. 10 days was the allotted time for that, and now the debates should start.

For myself, I hadn't given it too much thought before this last week - I'm generally much more interested in reforming the houses of commons and lords and going from there.


* FTR, given that this didn't happen, and that I have commented on it - I disapprove of the timing and location of the protests; but, to butcher a paraphrase - I would happily fight for their right to protest where and when they did.

My issue is that I am not in mourning. Initially sad when I heard she died, end of an era and all that but got over it within a few minutes. I am not anti Elizabeth the person or her family, who have every right to mourn. Just anti the notion of monarchy in our day and age, the hereditary wealth and prestige and media's over the top wall to walk coverage in last 10 days to brain wash us into "mourning".

Her death is only prominent because of her position as monarch for 70 years, if she was anyone else no one would bat an eyelid.

10 days was just social convention rather than set rule everyone has to follow. Those who choose to "mourn" or I would say want to be part of something more than themselves/history.
Some of the mawkishness from those saying what effect she had on them was eye rolling.
Going into London to queue for up to 2 days for me is just bay **** crazy.

Also I worked on Monday so that bank holiday didn't make much difference or benefit either way.

Time for debate is for those who want to debate rather than those who don't so shouldn't impact on timing of when.

I only likened it to gun debate as form in terms of chilling effect of debate of "now is not the time".

 

[Kiwiwomble]

My issue is that I am not in mourning. Initially sad when I heard she died, end of an era and all that but got over it within a few minutes. I am not anti Elizabeth the person or her family, who have every right to mourn. Just anti the notion of monarchy in our day and age, the hereditary wealth and prestige and media's over the top wall to walk coverage in last 10 days to brain wash us into "mourning".

Her death is only prominent because of her position as monarch for 70 years, if she was anyone else no one would bat an eyelid.

10 days was just social convention rather than set rule everyone has to follow. Those who choose to "mourn" or I would say want to be part of something more than themselves/history.
Some of the mawkishness from those saying what effect she had on them was eye rolling.
Going into London to queue for up to 2 days for me is just bay **** crazy.

Also I worked on Monday so that bank holiday didn't make much difference or benefit either way.

Time for debate is for those who want to debate rather than those who don't so shouldn't impact on timing of when.

I only likened it to gun debate as form in terms of chilling effect of debate of "now is not the time".

look, thats fair enough...but you didn't start your own for those that wanted to debate, you came into the one i started to celebrate her life and with others started the debate whether i and others wanted to read it or not

basic tact would suggest have the debate elsewhere or wait until after the actual funeral, on other forums 2/3 of this thread would have been moved as off topic, implied if not specific

 

[Bada-Bing!]

look, thats fair enough...but you didn't start your own for those that wanted to debate, you came into the one i started to celebrate her life and with others started the debate whether i and others wanted to read it or not

basic tact would suggest have the debate elsewhere or wait until after the actual funeral, on other forums 2/3 of this thread would have been moved as off topic, implied if not specific

Fraid as long as I stay on topic then for me it's fair comment. QE2 was head of the monarchy and relevant.

Last 10 days here it's been blanket coverage of her funeral, which has done my head in. No paper or news programme without it.

But I will no longer post anything more on her here after this. It is done.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Tuning in to sky sports for the funeral - do you think they had the football commentators doing play by play analysis?

 

[ncurd]

Tuning in to sky sports for the funeral - do you think they had the football commentators doing play by play analysis?

The numbers will be impossible we streamed live on iplayer. I suspect at least half the country watched it when it all shakes out. Possibly more.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

The numbers will be impossible we streamed live on iplayer. I suspect at least half the country watched it when it all shakes out. Possibly more.

Yeah he says further down the thread that streaming numbers will be out eventually but take longer to collate

 

[Welsh Exile]

look, thats fair enough...but you didn't start your own for those that wanted to debate, you came into the one i started to celebrate her life and with others started the debate whether i and others wanted to read it or not

basic tact would suggest have the debate elsewhere or wait until after the actual funeral, on other forums 2/3 of this thread would have been moved as off topic, implied if not specific

Sorry bud, I didn't realise this was a thread purely for posts to celebrate her life. I thought it was a thread to discuss the Queen and the monarchy in general. I don't think anyone has been disrespectful towards her personally but if you've taken any offence then my apologies.

As I said in my first post. She seemed alright, always conducted herself pretty well in public but I definitely object to the "she was an amazing woman" narrative and that's only because I have to constantly listen to people go on about her like she was Jesus ******* Christ. I don't think that's hyperbole either, the way people talk about her was biblical. She died a billionaire and one of the, if not the, biggest landlord in the world, that alone rules her out for "most amazing person the world has ever seen" award, at least in my view but I'll defend you right to think she was the best thing since sliced bread even though I totally disagree with it.

One last point, that I'm sure you're aware of but I don't think has been mentioned and it's important and needs to chang, but the Royals are exempt from inheritance tax. You couldn't make it up. The one family that we should be taxing after they die is the one family we leave alone, because……..they're the royals and they're special. You could bust your ass all your life, save up £100k to leave your kids and the government takes £40k of it. The queen, who has billions gets to pass all of it down. It's disgusting and I don't know how anyone can defend that (they won't) Joe blogs and his family can go get ****** but not some of the richest people in the world. There's just so much stuff they could change, without getting rid of them, that would go a long way to appeasing people like me but due to the overwhelming popularity of them in this country there's no appetite for it. People genuinely believe they deserve special treatment.

 

[ncurd]

You could bust your ass all your life, save up £100k to leave your kids and the government takes £40k of it.

Huge misconception of inheritance tax by many many people its only on assets above 325k the rest of that is tax free, its free to spouses, civil partners and grows to 500k for children and grandchildre). Median wealth on over 65's peaks at 350k in the 65-69 bracket those older have even less. Meaning well over 50% of the population will not pay a penny of inheritance tax.

Don't get be wrong its stupid the royals don't but its a tax on high wealth not a tax on low wealth at all. The way conservatives talk about it you'd think otherwise.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Huge misconception of inheritance tax by many many people its only on assets above 325k the rest of that is tax free, its free to spouses, civil partners and grows to 500k for children and grandchildre). Median wealth on over 65's peaks at 350k in the 65-69 bracket those older have even less. Meaning well over 50% of the population will not pay a penny of inheritance tax.

Don't get be wrong its stupid the royals don't but its a tax on high wealth not a tax on low wealth at all. The way conservatives talk about it you'd think otherwise.

Thanks for correcting. Assets are where it's at though. So if you pay off a mortgage on a house that's worth £400k and want to leave that to your kids your paying 40% on that but not on any liquid savings under £325k?

I guess this is why they won't tax the royal assets as that's where the real money lies and if you did within a few decades they'd be ******.

 

[ncurd]

Thanks for correcting. Assets are where it's at though. So if you pay off a mortgage on a house that's worth £400k and want to leave that to your kids your paying 40% on that but not on any liquid savings?

I guess this is why they won't tax the royal assets as that's where the real money lies and if you did within a few decades they'd be ******.

Its based on value of estate so all assets whether liquid or solid.

So you pay nothing as its a 500k limit on leaving stuff to children. And then its only on every penny above that limit like income tax.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

Sorry bud, I didn't realise this was a thread purely for posts to celebrate her life. I thought it was a thread to discuss the Queen and the monarchy in general. I don't think anyone has been disrespectful towards her personally but if you've taken any offence then my apologies.

As I said in my first post. She seemed alright, always conducted herself pretty well in public but I definitely object to the "she was an amazing woman" narrative and that's only because I have to constantly listen to people go on about her like she was Jesus ******* Christ. I don't think that's hyperbole either, the way people talk about her was biblical. She died a billionaire and one of the, if not the, biggest landlord in the world, that alone rules her out for "most amazing person the world has ever seen" award, at least in my view but I'll defend you right to think she was the best thing since sliced bread even though I totally disagree with it.

One last point, that I'm sure you're aware of but I don't think has been mentioned and it's important and needs to chang, but the Royals are exempt from inheritance tax. You couldn't make it up. The one family that we should be taxing after they die is the one family we leave alone, because……..they're the royals and they're special. You could bust your ass all your life, save up £100k to leave your kids and the government takes £40k of it. The queen, who has billions gets to pass all of it down. It's disgusting and I don't know how anyone can defend that (they won't) Joe blogs and his family can go get ****** but not some of the richest people in the world. There's just so much stuff they could change, without getting rid of them, that would go a long way to appeasing people like me but due to the overwhelming popularity of them in this country there's no appetite for it. People genuinely believe they deserve special treatment.

I'll leave the thread after this but…I never said she was the best thing since sliced bread, someone passed and some good and interesting stories came to the surface, I didn't know her to say she was the best thing since sliced bread

But I know she's had to endure some **** over the years. Some self imposed…some inherited…and some just dumped on her…and buy and large she seemed to handle it well…or at least much better than she might have

You seem to think being a land lord makes you a bad person…I'm sure there are lots of bad one…but there are lots of good…they're not inherently linked, it starts to come across more as your bias than anything

I was raised, when someone passes you tend to stick to the "if you can't say something nice…" rule for a period, that's was the intent