Lifes work.

[Rich]

I've just watched a trailer concerning HRH the "Duke" and says it will show his lifes work, now I am a royalist and lizzie is good value for money as far as I am concerned, but as for lifes work, WHEN did he ever do any work in his life? I'm willing to be educated here, but I'm not holding my breath,
regards,

Rich.

 

[Anonymous]

Rich

Works takes many forms and comes in many guises. One could say that he and his wife work every waking moment at one level.

Having been involved at a high level in companies and an English university, meeting important dignitaries/foreign visitors/customers etc. is a very stressful and tiring form of work that leaves me far more exhausted after a day, than a hard day in the workshop

 

[Digit]

I would say that at her level of effort at her age she needs the support of someone who isn't on the make in one way or another.

Roy.

 

[chunkolini]

I reckon that all the royal family are parasites and and should be made to get jobs and pay something back to the poor suckers who support them.

A disgraceful anachronism.

let alone the remainder of the so called aristocracy.

Chunko'.

 

[Digit]

I would be tempted to agree with you Chunko. What stops me from doing so is the terrifying idea of President Thatcher or President Blair to replace her Maj.

Roy.

 

[chunkolini]

And if they lived in council houses they would be labelled britains most dysfunctional family, not one of them has ever held down a job, all in broken marriages, a national disgrace.

Chunko'.

ps, at least a president is just for christmas, not for life, or even generations.

Just how did the so caled aristrocracy get into power? through lies and murder or back handers the lot of them. as bad as any third world tin pot dictator, but we we call it history.

 

[Digit]

ps, at least a president is just for christmas, not for life, or even generations.

Unless you live in Zimbabwe of course.

Roy.

 

[Anonymous]

And if they lived in council houses they would be labelled britains most dysfunctional family, not one of them has ever held down a job, all in broken marriages, a national disgrace.
.

And this is your well reasoned argument? :roll: :lol:

I am not particulalry a royalist nor against them.

Your supporting statements do not uphold your conclusion (and are factually incorrect).
True, they don't live in council houses. The monarchy living in a council house is an odd concept. The Queen is the head of state and as such is likely to require a high degree of security, not to mention it might be difficult for her to do her job when foreign dignatories with their entourages visit. Might get crowded in a two-up-two-down eh? Imagine the tourists queueing outside a council house for just a glimpse :lol:

Britain's most dysfunctional family?
Really? THE most dysfunctional? Not very well informed are you?

None of them have held a job down?
Aren't several of them serving members of our armed forces? Doesn't Prince Charles own and manage a farm? etc.

Isn't the monarchy, head of state a job?
At 80 years old (will you still be working aged 80 :?: ) by 2006 she had:
Conferred over 387,700 honours and awards
personally held over 540 Investitures
Received over 3 million items of correspondence during her reign
1.1 million people have attended garden parties at Buckingham Palace hosted by her
She has given regular Tuesday evening audiences to 10 British Prime Ministers
The Queen is patron of more than 620 charities and organisations
the Queen has undertaken over 256 official overseas visits to 129 different countries
The Queen has opened 15 bridges in the United Kingdom
The Queen has given over 91 State banquets during her reign
The Queen has undertaken 78 State Visits
etc. etc.
I would class the above as work as she certainly wouldn't do all that for a hobby!!!!.


All in broken marriages?
Hasn't the Queen been married to the same man since 1947????? :shock:


I think ignorant, ill informed bigots who anonymously attack people on an Internet forum with factually incorrect statements and who present arguments that are not upheld by their supporting statements are the "national disgrace."

 

[Digit]

And going by the manner in which the 'democratically elected' occupiers in the Palace of Westmister seem to fiddle every penny they can get their mucky hands on she's probably a damn site cheaper to run than a 'democratically elected' President.

Roy.

 

[Digit]

Just found this from Hansard, the cost to the tax payer for the running of 10 Downing Street.

22 Feb 2008 : Column 1099W

The Prime Minister: As a result of accounting changes it is not possible to provide comparable figures for the financial year 2005-06.

The figure for the financial year 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2007 are set out in the table as follows:
Running costs £ million

2006-07


21.9

The figure includes for the first time the full costs of security, Information and Communications Technology and part of the Government News Network budget previously held by the Cabinet Office.

Figures for 2007-08 will be available when the Cabinet Office Annual Resource accounts have been audited.

Maybe the old lady ain't that pricey after all.

Roy.

 

[woodbloke]

And if they lived in council houses they would be labelled britains most dysfunctional family, not one of them has ever held down a job, all in broken marriages, a national disgrace.
.

And this is your well reasoned argument? :roll: :lol:

I am not particulalry a royalist nor against them.

Your supporting statements do not uphold your conclusion (and are factually incorrect).
True, they don't live in council houses. The monarchy living in a council house is an odd concept. The Queen is the head of state and as such is likely to require a high degree of security, not to mention it might be difficult for her to do her job when foreign dignatories with their entourages visit. Might get crowded in a two-up-two-down eh? Imagine the tourists queueing outside a council house for just a glimpse :lol:

Britain's most dysfunctional family?
Really? THE most dysfunctional? Not very well informed are you?

None of them have held a job down?
Aren't several of them serving members of our armed forces? Doesn't Prince Charles own and manage a farm? etc.

Isn't the monarchy, head of state a job?
At 80 years old (will you still be working aged 80 :?: ) by 2006 she had:
Conferred over 387,700 honours and awards
personally held over 540 Investitures
Received over 3 million items of correspondence during her reign
1.1 million people have attended garden parties at Buckingham Palace hosted by her
She has given regular Tuesday evening audiences to 10 British Prime Ministers
The Queen is patron of more than 620 charities and organisations
the Queen has undertaken over 256 official overseas visits to 129 different countries
The Queen has opened 15 bridges in the United Kingdom
The Queen has given over 91 State banquets during her reign
The Queen has undertaken 78 State Visits
etc. etc.
I would class the above as work as she certainly wouldn't do all that for a hobby!!!!.


All in broken marriages?
Hasn't the Queen been married to the same man since 1947????? :shock:


I think ignorant, ill informed bigots who anonymously attack people on an Internet forum with factually incorrect statements and who present arguments that are not upheld by their supporting statements are the "national disgrace."

Tony - excellent, very well put...my thoughts exactly. Many thanks - Rob

 

[harryc]

I am with Chunko on this one.

Tony you say you are not much of a realist - that's a fair amount of facts you know about her Maj.
"Some of them serve in the armed forces" - Give me a break you really think they are allowed to see active service.
You also number the hundreds of outings she manages, god that that must be oh so difficult shaking a few hands and scoffing free buffets.

Harry.

 

[StevieB]

Like Tony I am neither strongly for nor against the royal family. To a large extent they are irrelevant to my life to be honest. I dont have to swear alligence to them, I am never likely to meet them and they certainly have never heard of me. On balance I guess I am not in favour of hereditary patronage since there is a black sheep in every family and he might just end up being in charge, but as royalty has no real power these days its not a major problem.

The main benefit of them as far as I can tell is in boosting tourism, both within and from outside the UK. This brings money into UK plc and helps offset the cost of the establishment. If you were setting up a country from scratch and justifying costs and benefits then on balance perhaps having a royal family would not be top of the must have list, but we are not.

No idea what the monarchy costs, but in the grand scheme of things not that much I would think. Was the Queen not some way down the recent Times rich list? Who works harder, the Queen or JK Rowling?

The country seems to be now fixated on the cult of celebrity, Amy Wnehouse, Britney Spears, Posh and Becks. To me these people are much less 'hard working' than the Queen and I wouldnt give tuppence to go and see any of them. Yet they are held up as idols and paragons of virtue (wasnt Beckham voted Dad of the year recently ?). Society is shifting and the royals sometimes get seen as representing a past era and lacking any function in a modern world. Doesnt mean they do not work hard at what they do though.

Have to admit I find the continual stories of Prince Harry and William annoying, rank and status still gets an awful lot these days, but that always has been and is present all through society - think private school and Oxford for example, it matters not what grade you got but where you got it.

Royals - take em or leave em, but not because they dont do anything, just because they are largely irrelevant to me.

Steve.

 

[woodbloke]

harryc wrote:

they are allowed to see active service

...forgetting of course that Prince H has just returned from theatre. You should also remember his uncle, the DofY, who did quite a good job flying choppers at Fitzroy in '82...or had you forgotton that as well? - Rob

 

[wizer]

This sounds like a(nother) rule breaking, argumentative, political, non-woodworking-related, pointless thread.

 

[Anonymous]

...forgetting of course that Prince H has just returned from theatre. Rob

Did he get a Brain implant? :lol:

 

[Slim]

I don't think it is pointless and it is in the off-topic forum, so I don't see what woodworking has got to do with it. However, it is in danger of being turned political.

As for the original question, the "Duke" has done more than a few days work in his life. He was on active service with the Royal Navy throughout WW2. This alone should demand our respect.

He fulfils an average of 371 official engagements each year and has written several books. He founded and is quite active in the DofE awards scheme.

I could go on, but you might want to read this instead.

Don't get me wrong, I am not a massive fan of the guy. I think if he was allowed to be, he would be a raving racist. However, those are the facts.

Chunkolini. I find your views quite incredible! Do you judge people on whether their marriage is intact? Especially those people who are forced into marriage with someone they don't necessarily love. Which is exactly what has happened to the members of the royal family. Or do you think that they should have stayed in a loveless relationship in order to keep up appearances?

I am also willing to bet that the Royal family bring more money into this country through tourism than we spend to support them. So they are paying back to the "poor suckers who support them".

I have to agree with Tony and this statement: "I think ignorant, ill informed bigots who anonymously attack people on an Internet forum with factually incorrect statements and who present arguments that are not upheld by their supporting statements are the "national disgrace."

 

[Vormulac]

This sounds like a(nother) rule breaking, argumentative, political, non-woodworking-related, pointless thread.

Sorry WiZeR, but I thought the title of this forum was:
"General Chat (Off-Topic)
For non-woodworking related topics - yes I know it's a scary thought but there is a life outside woodworking"

I don't see much of a political bent in this thread, it's of a non-woodwork related nature (therefore in the right place) and if you consider it pointless why comment on it??

 

[Anonymous]

I am with Chunko on this one.

Tony you say you are not much of a realist - that's a fair amount of facts you know about her Maj.

Harry.

I said I am not much of a royalist

The facts came from a quick google search for the official site.
Surely every educated person knows that she has worked hard throughout her life, that Charley has a farm and that some of the lads serve in the armed forces? - although I imagine the daily tabloids might want you to believe otherwise.

"Some of them serve in the armed forces" - Give me a break you really think they are allowed to see active service.

:shock: :shock: Don't you watch the news, read a paper or listen to the radio?
Members of the royal family served in Iraq and the Falklands!! Harry was dragged back when the press told the world he was out there (not really surprising as he instantly became every insurgents target), but up until then he served with his regiment on active service. OK, they are not 'cannon fodder' as they are royalty which by its very nature must carry some benefits. However, members of his regiment are on record that the group came under fire most days.

Besides that, serving in the armed forces does not require that one fights wars. Would you say that the mechanics who repair the army's cars are not actually working for the army?????
Active service or not, they are employed by and work in the armed forces.

 

[chunkolini]

But what do they do?
The royal princelings? Andrew? Edward? Anne? (Ok, she seems like a real person) The wivelings? Fergie? Sophiepoos? The extended family? Mikey and mrs Kent? Charlieboy? a farmer? he owns Cornwall, recognised as being probably the most deprived part ofthe Uk, some farm, and half of Herefordshire.

Aside from military service (and skiving around visiting upper class gurrlies in choppers) have any of the Royals ever held down a job? and financed them selves.

'They bring in tourists?' I imagine that people come to see the buildings and stuff, the bits mere peasants are allowed to see, do many people actually see THEM?

Carity donations? Hmm, there are some, but Mrs Queen and her lad are among the richest people in the land, and share a minute amount of it with the people, usually money that they have raised from us in the first place.

No I dont judge people on the state of their marriages, but I have heard talk of family values from some of them, but they done seem very keen to lead by example.

Re Rich's original point, regards Phillip 'WHEN did he ever do any work in his life' he does a sterling job of reminding the population what a bunch monkey brained of inbred toffs the royals are. Eg shooting tigers, yes a long time back but he did it, calling the japanese 'a bunch of slant eyed nips' again a while back but he did it, there were reports a year or so back of similar behaviour, and generally being kept out of the way as an embarrasment.

I am not making an anonymous attack on the royals, my name is Alan Ross, I have no shame re my opinions on the royal family. So there.