It's an antiquated and expensive tradition at best. These inbreds couldn't lead anyone with half a brain. You have at least that much don't you?
Monarchy
- Thread starter danmand
- Start date
It's an antiquated and expensive tradition at best. These inbreds couldn't lead anyone with half a brain. You have at least that much don't you?
Not nearly so expensive as the trappings of either the French or American Presidencies.
As to leadership
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...an-in-the-UK&p=4989305&viewfull=1#post4989305
Another post on this topic you say you care so little about.
Replace it how? Like electing Nixon, or Berlusconi or BushII kept whoremongers, crooks and draft-dodgers outta the top job? Having someone still in office who actually conferred with every PM—bad and good—from Churchill on has something to be said for it. I see no inherent virtue in handing over the entire kit and kaboodle every four years to a novice who has to learn everything on the job.
But surely it's time to hear what you actually think on the topic. Don't be shy, even applying a teensy bit of brainpower should do.
You are definitely on to something. Hereditary jobs are much preferable to democratic elections or any other method for that matter.
Why not expand this wonderful "selection by vaginal birth" to mayors of cities, police chiefs, presidents of public companies etc. The list is endless and the benefits would be staggering. Humanity would enter a whole new aera of prosperity and peace. We should all look forward to Mr. Ford's first born child as future mayor of Toronto.
Last edited:
I see your comprehension skills haven't improved. I never said anything about replacing the monarchy - and I'm only speaking from a Canadian perspective - I'd like to see it abolished. I't been all sizzle and no steak for years...look in the mirror, you'll understand what I mean.
Of course the French and American Presidents actually show up for work every day (OK maybe not the French). I'm sure oldjones is extremely proud of Phil and the rest of the inbred royal fam...wonder why...
That means replacing it. Even if your replacement already has a job in the system, you're still handing her all those functions the monarch (or her representative) used to perform.
As for steak and sizzle, Ms. Jean—speaking only in the Canadian context—continues to offer plenty in her work and in her person even after leaving office, while the current salesman in chief hasn't made even his name memorable, though the PM claims he moves lotsa Canadian beef. I note you carefully ignored some prime examples of elected top jobbers who might have left everyone better off by staying away from work.
I guess I was wrong about a smidge having sufficient power, but let me point out, you were wrong about not caring.
Yes, a real brain twister...how to replace someone that does nothing...perhaps you could apply? You seem well-suited.
As I pointed out, Harper found that so-called do-nothing of yours extremely useful to save his government and allow him to call a couple of snap elections after he claimed he'd 'usefully' eliminated such possibilities. Give me Ms. Jean's honourable 'nothing' over that sort of dishonest skullduggery from The Right Honourable PM any day.
I assume your disagreement with Mr Harper about the GG's usefulness doesn't twist your brain too much.
I'm not easily swayed by politicians, so no, Harper's disagreements with anyone don't twist me at all. You on the other hand seem concerned about (mentioned it a few times). Having troubles are you? Perhaps it's nap time...
Read again. Harper and the GG agreed on their useful course. It's you who disagreed with both the elected and appointed top dogs, but far be it from me to say your opinions aren't as useful as theirs, or call you a do-nothing.
Still your nap may do you good.
Then you don't pay much attention.
Number of public engagements not counting tours of other Realms and foreign visits as of two years ago:
The Queen - 370
Duke of Edinburgh - 330
Prince of Wales - 601
Duchess of Cornwall - 250
Duke of York - 455
Earl of Wessex - 374
Countess of Wessex - 191
Princess Royal - 568
Duke of Gloucester - 251
Duchess of Gloucester - 155
Duke of Kent - 211
Princess Alexandra - 118
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge - 100
Over how many years? Seems that if some do 600 engagements the ones under 200 are doing a third the work.
Also, showing up for a few hours to a dinner is hardly a full days work. Some of them may be working a full day but I don't believe for a second that most of them are.
Also, showing up for a few hours to a dinner is hardly a full days work. Some of them may be working a full day but I don't believe for a second that most of them are.
These parasites could at least do us a favour to stay put in their welfare housing and not spend any more money flitting around.
I went on a tour of India and Nepal, and later went on a tour through Germany, Austria, Slovakia and Hungary. Where is my $4,000,000.00 welfare cheque???
When the people want the elect to son of a past politician, I think that they really want royalty. Does Justin have any special talent or skill that warrants having him elected as PM. No. It's just because he's got genes related to PET. Same in the US. We got George HW Bush, and presto! he begat George Dubya Bush in the presidency. The kennedy's were reputed to be the first American royal family... all by virtue of being related by blood.
Snickering against the royalty because they have some cash is just class envy. If they weren't there for some to whine against them, it would be against somebody else. Don't believe that some sort of utopian society would follow their removal. it would be somebody else. Concentration of weath is happening, and multinational corporations busting unions so they can squeeze more cash from workers should be a far more important topic than bashing an institution that is over one thousand years old.
To propound such an erroneous opinion, I take it you either never read, or didn't understand those provisions of the Elections Act.
I simply took the new PM at his word whenm he told us the Act he'd just gotten signed would make it impossible for PMs to play politics by calling self-serbing elections.
I do understand that he worded his law so it was utterly ineffective, but I'd prefer to take him at his word and say he simply broke it and his well-intentioned promise to the electorate than to call him an barefaced conniving liar from the get-go when he proposed it.
Similar threads
