English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It is all a duplication of what we already have in place.

2007-01-02 07:14:18 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

12 answers

its worth thinking about, as rgards democracy, we dont have one anyway, we have three main parties we have been crying out for a proper vote on europe for thirty years and never got one, the politicians are dictators, if we could vote for a monarchy, we would have the democratic right for one and it would not be undemocratic if foulk wanted it, as regards the queen robbing all our money, she has a long way to go to catch up with the tax mad labour party or the tories, the queen has been betrayed by these people and so have the people of britain, like i said its worth thinking about, depends whats on offer.

2007-01-02 07:51:02 · answer #1 · answered by trucker 5 · 0 1

Trust you to set me of on this one
Why is it that people can`t seem to grasp that the Queen gets NO money from income tax not even expenses for representing the country Its the other way round ,she gets an allowance out of the privy purse. The privy purse is the revenue of the crown estates (land and holdings owned by the Queen) This revenue is paid to Parliament to help fund the government .The amount paid is about 170 million a year and the amount Parliament gives her back out of it is about 7 or 8 million a year before tax for her expenses any thing else she spends is from her private money .all that would happen by getting rid of the Queen is she would be able to keep the whole 170 million a year for herself because the crown estates are hers and can`t be taken from her and if she wasn`t queen the revenue would be hers aswell ,apart from tax
After all that
if she wasn`t so old i think i would rather be ruled by the Queen she`s never humiliated this country and i think she would put the countries interests in front of her own and i would trust her more than that mob in Downing street
But that goes for the Queen i`m not so sure the rest of the royals would be any more trust worthy than politicians but i don`t see how they could be any more deceitful

2007-01-02 20:09:31 · answer #2 · answered by keny 6 · 0 0

Who would Her Maj actually rule over?.. Scotland? Wales? Northern Ireland? england?

I have to question your "direct rule" scenario..

There is no more "UNITED" Kingdom.. as prooved by lack of support for troops in Afghanistan who,Tony Bliar had sent there to assist his mate George W Bush out, BEFORE USA withdrew 77% of US troops leaving UK/NATO troops to clear the mess up and fight the REAL source of terrorism today...even though UK troops are GROSSLY under-manned and under-resourced

Troops in Iraq are dominating all media outlets, when the terrorists are allegedly trained and hiding out in Afghanistan - THE REAL reason for TONY Bliar agreeing to deploy UK troops to help the USA out in the aftermath of 9/11 !!

Our UK troops are coming home in body bags from Afghanistan because Tony Bliar promised troops on OCT 6th 2006 that whatever our troops NEEDED they would get... They NEED about 50,000 extra troops at least, and for each service man and women to have a flak jacket that can stop a small arms bullet !!

Would Her Majesty have allowed such a diabolical travesty to occur? Or would She have stuck to the original mandate of allowing Her troops to be deployed to Afghanistan ONLY?

2007-01-02 16:19:30 · answer #3 · answered by Hello 3 · 0 0

The last monarch in Britain who tried to rule without a parliament had his head chopped off and I wouldn't wish that on our Queen or her heirs. No, we must just be more particular in whom we vote into power in the next elections until a better system is invented and put into use.

2007-01-02 15:25:31 · answer #4 · answered by blondie 6 · 0 0

Authoritarian monarchy is outdated. Direct rule by the people through use of technology will eventually replace the need for representatives, and true democracy can be born.

2007-01-02 15:16:38 · answer #5 · answered by eatmorec11h17no3 6 · 1 0

Because that is not democratic. She's only there because she's rich (stole all our money over the last xxx centuries). However bad they might be, or seem to be, at least the elected politicans are accountable and can be kicked out at the next election. A monarch is in situ until death. And who, for effs sake, wants that idiot Charles to make decisions for us all?

2007-01-02 15:18:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Ever heard of something called the Magna Carta?

2007-01-02 16:00:33 · answer #7 · answered by Jude 7 · 0 0

i agree that or a much much better party there are three parties all offering the same bull we need either one strong fair leader or a a good ACTIVE party

2007-01-02 16:17:33 · answer #8 · answered by alex k 1 · 1 0

I get it, heck no, the hildabeast will never obtain the crown. I agree that all these politicians ought to be replaced with non lawyer American citizens!

2007-01-02 15:19:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I think we should chuck out her maj she is living on tax payers money---chuck her out!!!!!!

2007-01-02 15:23:40 · answer #10 · answered by "*♥*Nafisa*♥*" 4 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers