|
||||||||
Queen Unwell |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#726 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London
Posts: 41,694
|
Quote:
You do realise that Princess Alice died in 1981, don't you? Can you not find a more recent and relevant source than this?
![]() That report is from 2002. Reports on the finances of the RF from any era are very scarce. The Royal Family being exempt from Freedom of Information requests does not help. I think they would be well advised to demand this protection be removed. Their power to control material reported by the BBC is also unhelpful, to put it politely. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#727 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
|
Quote:
We could all get out of most of our taxes if we were rich and hired expensive accountants, most of whom were once worked for the tax office. Just because there are ways round something it does not mean you should do it.. And asking silly questions of normal people does not make any excuse that a very rich woman who gets richer every day should not pay more tax than she does. Its bloody immoral and just because we have a huge amount of cap doffers on this forum who would be howling for blood of anyone else, will defend the queen for no other reason than she is the queen.
So to that end, the monarch is exempt from taxation, but reportedly pays the voluntary sum equivalent to what she would be taxed at. So it wasn't a silly question, it was a valid one. Also, you don't need to be rich and have an expensive accountant to minimise your tax liability. You just need to be not a) in the PAYE scheme b) apathetic |
|
|
|
|
|
#728 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London
Posts: 41,694
|
Quote:
Victoria and Edward VII paid tax but George V stopped paying income tax on his Civil List income upon his accession and George VI stopped paying income tax on his private income when he became King.
As I said before, every monarch since George III in 1760 has had differing financial and taxation arrangements made with their governments at some stage in their reigns. Each time, the taxation arrangement have formed part of a much bigger set of financial arrangements between monarch and government, with various changes and concessions on both sides. When such an agreement between monarch and government has been mutually AGREED, it is a legal agreement. Dodging would be operating outwith the terms of an agreement. I accept that there will be many people who do not like the idea of some such agreement but it doesn't change the fact that the Queen has not avoided or "dodged" the payment of taxes. If she was not asked to pay them, they she cannot have dodged them. There was simply was no provision made for her to be required to pay. What this all illustrates is that the Queen is as self interested as many other people. I have no problem with that reality but many do. |
|
|
|
|
|
#729 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,746
|
Quote:
Do you have any comment on the substance?
That report is from 2002. Reports on the finances of the RF from any era are very scarce. The Royal Family being exempt from Freedom of Information requests does not help. I think they would be well advised to demand this protection be removed. Their power to control material reported by the BBC is also unhelpful, to put it politely. I happened to know that Princess Alice was dead by then, but a lot of other people would not necessarily have known anything about her. If they had been relying on that source for information, it was hardly very reliable if it was over 20 years out of date, was it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#730 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 242
|
Quote:
I will not dispute that there is a history of her family choosing to pay or not pay tax as they think appropriate. It is fortunate that such an option is not available to the rest of us or we would not be able to afford a State; let alone a Head of State.
What this all illustrates is that the Queen is as self interested as many other people. I have no problem with that reality but many do. |
|
|
|
|
|
#731 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
|
Quote:
I would not have a problem with it and indeed I didn't for most of my life. But now seeing what is going on with the vulnerable in our country those who we should be looking after, I now have a big problem with her and others like her. The system is broken and something needs to be done about it. She could if she wanted do something about it but chooses not to. I choose to show no respect for her or her family any longer, they are leaches and her and others like her are killing this country and its people
|
|
|
|
|
|
#732 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 953
|
Quote:
I will not dispute that there is a history of her family choosing to pay or not pay tax as they think appropriate. It is fortunate that such an option is not available to the rest of us or we would not be able to afford a State; let alone a Head of State.
What this all illustrates is that the Queen is as self interested as many other people. I have no problem with that reality but many do. |
|
|
|
|
|
#733 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,746
|
Quote:
I will not dispute that there is a history of her family choosing to pay or not pay tax as they think appropriate. It is fortunate that such an option is not available to the rest of us or we would not be able to afford a State; let alone a Head of State.
What this all illustrates is that the Queen is as self interested as many other people. I have no problem with that reality but many do. The structure of the Royal Family is vastly different now from how it was 100 or so years ago, when there were endless annuitants and hard-up cousins, aunts and uncles to support and consider.... and it continues to move into a very much more streamlined direction as time goes by. It does not cost us as taxpayers very much at all. They help to generate more wealth than they cost. I think that if anyone believes that abolition of the Royal Family would benefit the country, if they imagine that the proceeds from the disposal of the Crown Estates would suddenly result in greater wealth and prosperity for every man, woman and child in Britain, they are probably delusional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#734 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 242
|
Quote:
What should she be doing about it now apart from voluntarily paying tax on her income which by law, she doesn't actually even owe?
Queen has a cold she is told to rest man has terminal cancer or a weak heart and is told he is fit for work then dies and no one gives a shite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#735 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London
Posts: 41,694
|
Quote:
To repeat what has been said on more than one occasion on this thread, they do not choose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#736 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 953
|
Quote:
You may want to take that up with the posters who have been saying that the Queen pays tax voluntarily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#737 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,746
|
Quote:
I would not have a problem with it and indeed I didn't for most of my life. But now seeing what is going on with the vulnerable in our country those who we should be looking after, I now have a big problem with her and others like her. The system is broken and something needs to be done about it. She could if she wanted do something about it but chooses not to. I choose to show no respect for her or her family any longer, they are leaches and her and others like her are killing this country and its people
So, because successive governments voted in by the people of this country have continually eroded the lifestyles and living standards of the less well-off and vulnerable in society and continue to penalise the sick and disabled, you think it's appropriate to instead blame the Queen - who has no say whatsoever in which political party is voted into power and who cannot veto her own government. You're actually blaming the Queen and her family for the societal effects of political mismanagement by both Tory and Labour governments over many administrations .... and she doesn't even get a vote! Perhaps you ought to find out a little about the respective roles of Government and Monarchy and Royal Prerogative because your post makes it appear as if you have very little understanding of the Queen's role or the power she holds. |
|
|
|
|
|
#738 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London
Posts: 41,694
|
Quote:
She does. Think we are at cross purposes here....
|
|
|
|
|
|
#739 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 242
|
Quote:
Good grief!
So, because successive governments voted in by the people of this country have continually eroded the lifestyles and living standards of the less well-off and vulnerable in society and continue to penalise the sick and disabled, you think it's appropriate to instead blame the Queen - who has no say whatsoever in which political party is voted into power and who cannot veto her own government. You're actually blaming the Queen and her family for the societal effects of political mismanagement by both Tory and Labour governments over many administrations .... and she doesn't even get a vote! Perhaps you ought to find out a little about the respective roles of Government and Monarchy and Royal Prerogative because your post makes it appear as if you have very little understanding of the Queen's role or the power she holds. I have the right to blame any one who sits and is silent when their subjects are drying from poverty . I have the right to blame anyone who sits on a fortune while others go hungry. I would give my last penny and slice of bread to those who have nothing. If everyone did that then there would be no one dying of cold and hunger.. I don't care what she is supposed to do or not do, she has the money and the power to change things if she wanted. She chooses not to. |
|
|
|
|
|
#740 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
|
Quote:
Oh, to once again be so blind, would be a blessing . Sadly though I am no longer blind to the absolute crap those who are rich can and will get away with. while those who are vulnerable are dying. And even their peers don't stick up for them and defend what really is indefensible
Queen has a cold she is told to rest man has terminal cancer or a weak heart and is told he is fit for work then dies and no one gives a shite. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#741 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 953
|
Quote:
No you appear to be saying she pays tax voluntarily but not by choice. Perhaps you can explain how that works?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#742 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 242
|
Quote:
Why don't you answer the question posed instead of going off on a tangent with rhetoric?
she could if she wanted, help those who very badly need help. she could think oh I have more than I or my family could ever spend i'm going to use this money for the good of my people. she could set a good example and pay tax at the same rate as those who are being crippled just trying to stay afloat She wont though, and all the foolish will still stick up for her, after all she is the queen |
|
|
|
|
|
#743 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
|
Quote:
Erm OK, if you cannot understand what I am getting at
she could if she wanted, help those who very badly need help. she could think oh I have more than I or my family could ever spend i'm going to use this money for the good of my people. she could set a good example and pay tax at the same rate as those who are being crippled just trying to stay afloat She wont though, and all the foolish will still stick up for her, after all she is the queen |
|
|
|
|
|
#744 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,746
|
Quote:
Its OK you think the queen has no power (just like I once did) you think its OK for people to be starving and dying of cold while the queen and others live in luxury and even drive past them and not even see them.
I have the right to blame any one who sits and is silent when their subjects are drying from poverty . I have the right to blame anyone who sits on a fortune while others go hungry. I would give my last penny and slice of bread to those who have nothing. If everyone did that then there would be no one dying of cold and hunger.. I don't care what she is supposed to do or not do, she has the money and the power to change things if she wanted. She chooses not to. There always have been poor and vulnerable people in this country and there probably always will be. Whilst I am not saying that this is right, nor do I think that it's the fault of the Queen or the Royal Family. Republics have poor people too, don'tcha know? If you want a change in the way that poor people, sick people, disabled people and vulnerable people are treated in this country, you have a vote and the option to change the situation by telling our politicians that this is unacceptable. Singling the Royal Family out as the cause of this is both naive and ridiculous. |
|
|
|
|
|
#745 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London
Posts: 41,694
|
Quote:
Your concern for the homeless and the hungry is commendable but it doesn't alter the fact that even if the Queen abdicated tomorrow, the monarchy was abolished, and all the wealth of the Royal Family was taken by the Treasury there would still be homeless and hungry people in Britain. Do you seriously imagine that the government would immediately redistribute that wealth among the needy and underprivileged? Not a chance!
There always have been poor and vulnerable people in this country and there probably always will be. Whilst I am not saying that this is right, nor do I think that it's the fault of the Queen or the Royal Family. Republics have poor people too, don'tcha know? If you want a change in the way that poor people, sick people, disabled people and vulnerable people are treated in this country, you have a vote and the option to change the situation by telling our politicians that this is unacceptable. Singling the Royal Family out as the cause of this is both naive and ridiculous. To expect anything more than pot luck from an hereditary system is ridiculous. We have a Monarch who has looked out for herself and her family and mostly kept her head down. She has done what is expected of her nothing more. However in the specific context of setting an example of financial sacrifice; which the State frequently demands of the rest of us; then she could have done quite a bit more. But personally I see no reason to expect her to be any better in this regard than many others of her class and education. I don't think for one minute that abolishing the Monarchy would provide a substantial financial benefit for all of us but a little more realism about the RF and less sycophancy (esp. from the BBC) would be good. Reducing the pressure for them to pretend to having exceptional qualities and being above human failings might even make their task easier. BTW One of my main objections to this hereditary system is the heavy expectations it places; from birth & without their consent; on a series of heirs and 'spares'. Sorry Moany that above is not directed at you; I am not saying you are a sycophant; they are general observations. |
|
|
|
|
|
#746 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 623
|
If the Queen insists on roaming around the Palace grounds in the middle of the night she can expect to catch colds
"The Queen Was Almost Shot By One Of Her Own Guards Whilst Taking A Late-Night Stroll" http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews...cid=spartandhp |
|
|
|
|
|
#747 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,211
|
Quote:
What???
![]() I said that her behaviour has been piss poor and when asked in what way I cited her non payment of tax and the Burrell case, off the top of my head. That some people think it's absolutely fine for her to not pay her fair share of tax and that her amnesia suddenly clearing when Burrell was about to start talking proves my point that her bad behaviour is excused because she's the queen. Anyone else not paying their taxes is pretty much always seen as a bad person, for example. Nothing subjective about it and it's not just my opinion. So I'm not sure what you're not seeing or what you want me to link to. As I see it she's done nothing wrong. Her behaviour is exemplary, and always has been throughout 65 years on the throne. |
|
|
|
|
|
#748 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: the cleaning cupboard
Posts: 25,209
|
Quote:
Something that says she's broken the law.
Quote:
As I see it she's done nothing wrong. As I keep saying, that's my point being made for me - she has used her position as head of state to first pay no tax, and when that became untenable to pay some. The exact same behaviour but without the royal bit would attract almost universal criticism.
Her behaviour is exemplary, and always has been throughout 65 years on the throne. |
|
|
|
|
|
#749 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,746
|
Quote:
Why?
As I keep saying, that's my point being made for me - she has used her position as head of state to first pay no tax, and when that became untenable to pay some. The exact same behaviour but without the royal bit would attract almost universal criticism. There was no requirement for the Monarch to pay tax, therefore it could never have become untenable. |
|
|
|
|
|
#750 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: With MyAndy!
Posts: 15,178
|
Quote:
Erm OK, if you cannot understand what I am getting at
she could if she wanted, help those who very badly need help. she could think oh I have more than I or my family could ever spend i'm going to use this money for the good of my people. she could set a good example and pay tax at the same rate as those who are being crippled just trying to stay afloat She wont though, and all the foolish will still stick up for her, after all she is the queen maybe you need to have a little read up on things to get your facts right. The crown estate would give you a good starting point. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:34.




