Re Crumbling Palaces and failure of owner to conduct repairs for 50 years.
Posted by: DAVOhorn on 01 July 2008
Dear All,
It seems Her Majesty is down to her last 700 million and is asking that the British Taxpayer help fund much needed urgent repairs to her homesssss.
Now most home owners are required to ensure the upkeep of their homes without the subsidy of the UK taxpayer.
So why should the UK taxpayer subsidise a multi millionaire in the maintainance of their homes.
Perhaps the Royal Family could donate all their properties and lands to the people, who would then be responsible for the upkeep.
The Royals could then pay a commercial rent to live in these beautiful buildings.
The result would be the buildings restored and maintained for posterity and the Royals become Council Tennents in these properties.
The rents raised would include costs for maintainance and upkeep.
Seems fair to me.
After all the Royal Family by their own admission have not conducted the required maintainance on these properties and as result they have fallen into disrepair.
I read that Princess Anne was nearly hit by falling masonry once. Could have proved fatal if she had been hit on the head.
Any comments?
regards David
It seems Her Majesty is down to her last 700 million and is asking that the British Taxpayer help fund much needed urgent repairs to her homesssss.
Now most home owners are required to ensure the upkeep of their homes without the subsidy of the UK taxpayer.
So why should the UK taxpayer subsidise a multi millionaire in the maintainance of their homes.
Perhaps the Royal Family could donate all their properties and lands to the people, who would then be responsible for the upkeep.
The Royals could then pay a commercial rent to live in these beautiful buildings.
The result would be the buildings restored and maintained for posterity and the Royals become Council Tennents in these properties.
The rents raised would include costs for maintainance and upkeep.
Seems fair to me.
After all the Royal Family by their own admission have not conducted the required maintainance on these properties and as result they have fallen into disrepair.
I read that Princess Anne was nearly hit by falling masonry once. Could have proved fatal if she had been hit on the head.
Any comments?
regards David
quote:
Someone is about to point out how many billions in tourist cash the Royal Family is worth to the UK.
That really winds me up. I always think of the potential billions in tourist cash we could get if the places were opened up for tours. We could have Charles & Camilla stuffed.
Maybe we should have a referendum on whether the taxpayer should help towards the upkeep of royal palaces. I think that would send a very clear message to them of exactly what we think of them. - it would be a popularity vote in effect (I'll accept the outcome..honest).
No...I mustn't start on the royals. It just raises my blood pressure. Bloody parasites.
Parasites IMO too.
No he doesn't have a good point....you have to look a lot deeper than the superficial view of tourist's paying their sixpence at the door of Windor castle....you need to look at the hotel income, restaurant bar income, spending income etc...a much larger number.
As to me being overseas I could equally argue back that you are too close to it to see the value or recognise the overseas perception of the "brand".
This is a debate that will always be tainted by emotion I think....and that is a general statement not a jibe at anyone on here
Cheers
Jim - an SNP supporter for the record
So hardly a royalist.
As to me being overseas I could equally argue back that you are too close to it to see the value or recognise the overseas perception of the "brand".
This is a debate that will always be tainted by emotion I think....and that is a general statement not a jibe at anyone on here
Cheers
Jim - an SNP supporter for the record
So hardly a royalist.I think Bob has a good point Jim, because it is an indicator of the tourism generated by the RF. How many Tourists would no longer visit the UK if the Monarchy was abolished?
BTW I have looked deeper, & there seems to be a dearth of information regarding what the RF brings the the UK economy. I can't help thinking HM would have the figures plastered all over her website if they existed. No doubt we will draw our own conclusions from this.
Regarding overseas support for the RF I was thinking along the lines of who pays for them?
I wonder how many tourists would not visit if they had to pay a 'royal' arrivals tax?
I agree it's an emotive subject, but that's because the Monarchy have been fleecing the ordinary people for hundreds of years IMO.
Seems to be lots of overseas support for the SNP too!
BTW I have looked deeper, & there seems to be a dearth of information regarding what the RF brings the the UK economy. I can't help thinking HM would have the figures plastered all over her website if they existed. No doubt we will draw our own conclusions from this.
Regarding overseas support for the RF I was thinking along the lines of who pays for them?
I wonder how many tourists would not visit if they had to pay a 'royal' arrivals tax?
I agree it's an emotive subject, but that's because the Monarchy have been fleecing the ordinary people for hundreds of years IMO.
Seems to be lots of overseas support for the SNP too!
quote:Originally posted by 555:
Seems to be lots of overseas support for the SNP too!
Shurly shum mishteak...
Ian
PS Welcome home Jim, when you get back.
Has Sing Canary done a U turn?
quote:
Is that the best view you got on your trip Jim?
Back on topic ...
Seems to me if wheeling out a Royal makes or breaks a business deal it's a pretty strange form of commerce. How many business deals get done due to mega-backhanders, apparently with uk.gov.con approval?
I think £40m is a bit more than a drop in the ocean, even in terms of the national economy,
but the civil list is the tip of the iceberg.
The RF bring much to the economy, but it's intangible
Not a dig a you Jim,
but this type of argument for the Monarchy is regularly made & is a cop-out IMHO.
If they do significantly benefit the economy surely the figures would be relatively easy to produce?
As the figures aren't in the public domain I conclude the argument a red herring,
or the numbers aren't published as they would be damaging to the RF.
555
By far the best view - as part of me is in the pic!
40M is not a lot....I regularly spend seven figures in deal pursuits (not my money of course)....it's the cost of doing business so 40M is not much....IMO. That comes across as arrogant or big headed but I don't mean it that way.
As for intangible I really meant hard to accurately calculate...it will be tangible so a bad choice of word and not meant to be a cop out.
Cheers
Jim
By far the best view - as part of me is in the pic!
Well, when I do deals (which is what I do for a living) I figure out the best time to wheel out our CEO or someone other body for Exec level dialogue (that won't be detailed "deal" discussion as such) and it is all part of getting the buyer comfortable - so using HRH as part of the overall deal closure cycle is not unusual and it happens a fair amount. At the highest level these deals concluded for all sorts of reasons...and I'm not talking about shady business deals here.quote:Seems to me if wheeling out a Royal makes or breaks a business deal it's a pretty strange form of commerce
40M is not a lot....I regularly spend seven figures in deal pursuits (not my money of course)....it's the cost of doing business so 40M is not much....IMO. That comes across as arrogant or big headed but I don't mean it that way.
As for intangible I really meant hard to accurately calculate...it will be tangible so a bad choice of word and not meant to be a cop out.
Cheers
Jim
quote:ROTF said: I was always a fan of the 3rd Earl of Harrow.
What instrument does he play in HMHB then? Or is he a football kicker from some out of the way team?
