Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 52

Thread: At least some of that 350m "for the NHS" won't now be going there...

  1. #1
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    6,306

    At least some of that 350m "for the NHS" won't now be going there...

    Seems like 369 Million will be going to renovate Buckingham Palace. And, what, do we get in return?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38025513

    Surely it's time for the Government to take over control and ownership of it...like the National Trust at Chartwell, Kedleston and Etc., and other than a small number of private apartments it be FULLY open to the public, except on certain occasions, all year around.

    Like Versailles in France which is open all year around except Mondays and on certain occasions.

    I am no at all anti-monarchy but this sort of one sided bargain does beggar belief. And isn't exactly good PR for the Royal Family either.

  2. #2
    disagree , there is far more serious wastes of taxes to consider first in my opinion
    Right where's those stones , I'll start !

  3. #3
    I think the Royal Family need to get their hands in their pockets and sort out their own ruddy gaff. They've certainly never offered to rewire MY house
    A Man should be wise, but never too wise. He who does not know his fate in advance is free of care

  4. #4
    According to what you read, where, sustaining the Royal Family costs between 53p and 2.12 per person per year

    Well as far as I am concerned she can have a tenner if she needs it

    It is estimated that the Royal Family can be attributed to 500 million per annum in tourism income so we get a very good return on our investment in pure monetary terms

    but the money is also irrelevant, she is head of our state, has pretty much sacrificed her life to public duty, maintaining the highest of standards and so deserves to live somewhere commensurate with this and her standing. If the Palace needs to replace some 60 year old piping and boilers this can hardly be deemed to be wasteful, if they had been installed last year maybe.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by N1mr0d View Post
    According to what you read, where, sustaining the Royal Family costs between 53p and 2.12 per person per year

    Well as far as I am concerned she can have a tenner if she needs it

    It is estimated that the Royal Family can be attributed to 500 million per annum in tourism income so we get a very good return on our investment in pure monetary terms

    but the money is also irrelevant, she is head of our state, has pretty much sacrificed her life to public duty, maintaining the highest of standards and so deserves to live somewhere commensurate with this and her standing. If the Palace needs to replace some 60 year old piping and boilers this can hardly be deemed to be wasteful, if they had been installed last year maybe.
    Totally agree. Far too many moaning and whinging posts on here recently. I know the weather isn't great but maybe some need to get out stalking more or post some good news instead.

  6. #6
    About bloody time - the place is falling down...

  7. #7
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    6,306
    According to what you read, where, sustaining the Royal Family costs between 53p and 2.12 per person per year
    It's not IMHO a valid counter argument. Everything if broken down like that, and I see the reasoning, then always becomes only pennies, per person, per year.

    You might as well say that funding Syrian refugees cost every person 5p only per year, or funding sex changes or tatto removal on the NHS costs every person only 1p per year. This "so many pence per year" retort is always trotted out by the Government when it's actual argument is bankrupt.

    Fact is, the bottom line, is it is still 369 Million no matter how you try to disguise it. Spend it, yes, but in return take ownership of the Palace from the Royals.

    Same old "smoke, mirrors" and obfuscation that went on over the Royal Yacht. The US doesn't have one, France doesn't have one, Germany, Etc., Yet we had to have one?
    Last edited by enfieldspares; 18-11-2016 at 15:36.

  8. #8
    Enfieldspares, I'm sorry, but what is the relevance of this post on The Stalking Directory? Am I missing something? Would you not be better to rant on Facebook which is more suited to this sort of tosh?

  9. #9
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    6,306
    It's called OFF TOPIC isn't it? Same as threads on Jury Service, Trump, Shark Teeth, Boxing Day Petition, John Lewis Advert, Satellite Broadband, FIFA and Poppies, and all the rest. Off Topic!

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by enfieldspares View Post
    Fact is, the bottom line, is it is still 369 Million no matter how you try to disguise it. Spend it, yes, but in return take ownership of the Palace from the Royals
    369M is just the repair bill. How on earth would you value the property for purchase? Double, triple, more? Cheaper to just keep funding repairs.

Similar Threads

  1. For Sale SealSkinz "Hunter" & "Sporting" Gloves
    By Monarch Country Products in forum Clothing & Footwear
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 23-01-2018, 17:38
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 25-04-2016, 14:59
  3. *SOLD* Hunter's Video DVDs: "Hunting in Poland" and "Up High in Norway"
    By Pine Marten in forum Other Items
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-08-2015, 18:55
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 23-08-2014, 14:54
  5. Of "Bulk" Densities, "Solid" Densities, "Energy" Densities & Precision Reloading
    By gitano in forum Ammunition, Reloading & Ballistics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 22-01-2012, 17:01

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •