Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 61 to 77 of 77

Thread: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

  1. #61
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    15,958
    Thanks
    10,132
    Thanked 6,828 Times in 4,220 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    42

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by Downinfloflo View Post
    I know what you were talking about.

    America was stolen from natives, Then it was stolen from the British.
    No. That's not what I was saying at all.

  2. #62
    Acid Douching Asswipe OpIv37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    87,438
    Thanks
    9,753
    Thanked 18,277 Times in 9,091 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    245

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by notacon View Post
    Which shows that people that are not from, or live in GB, do not have any comprehension or appreciation of the history and depth of the emotional ties between the British people and the Crown.

    Now, certainly, the opinion you express is indeed held by a portion of that society. BUT, and this is a huge but....I though the same thing before I embarked on my British adventure, living with the locals for a full school year.....and the BRITISH people told me and showed me that what you just wrote was DEEPLY insulting to the overwhelming majority of Britons.

    I also was exposed to their perception of America and Americans. Most of it was very positive and curious. Deeply curious....especially our frontier history, and the crudity and arrogance of our society and our attitudes. But they also perceive us as unruly children....crude, arrogant, narcissist, with an unrealistic and undeserved very high opinion of ourselves.

    The statement that you just expressed, in their minds, validates the stereotype of a crude, "Ugly American".
    Well, I can certainly see why the British view Americans as arrogant and crude, but I don't think my statement is an example of that. Maybe it's offensive to many of them because it questions the nature of something that many of them hold dear, but it's a legit point. How much money does the UK spend providing luxury and security to the royal family for something that provides no real value beyond a sense of history? What other things could be done with this money that would actually benefit their citizens?

    And you bring up "the history and depth of the emotional ties," which admittedly I don't understand. I've only been to the UK once- spent a few days in Scotland and a few days in the north of Ireland before going to Ireland proper. The Queen was in Edinburgh the same time we were there and we talked to some Scottish people who had just come from some luncheon she hosted and they were ecstatic, but I wasn't there long enough and didn't talk to enough locals to get a real sense of it. Additionally, we were in South Africa when the queen was there and in Australia when the queen had either just left or was just about to arrive (I can't remember- it was 2006). I was very surprised that people in those two former colonies were so excited about the queen. So clearly I don't get it.

    That being said, justifying the expense of the royal family with "history and emotional ties" is essentially justifying an action with "well because we've always done it that way."

  3. #63
    The Meathead of Muslims! ticatfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    ottawa valley
    Posts
    24,781
    Thanks
    6,441
    Thanked 2,805 Times in 2,198 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    73

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by OpIv37 View Post
    Well, I can certainly see why the British view Americans as arrogant and crude, but I don't think my statement is an example of that. Maybe it's offensive to many of them because it questions the nature of something that many of them hold dear, but it's a legit point. How much money does the UK spend providing luxury and security to the royal family for something that provides no real value beyond a sense of history? What other things could be done with this money that would actually benefit their citizens?

    And you bring up "the history and depth of the emotional ties," which admittedly I don't understand. I've only been to the UK once- spent a few days in Scotland and a few days in the north of Ireland before going to Ireland proper. The Queen was in Edinburgh the same time we were there and we talked to some Scottish people who had just come from some luncheon she hosted and they were ecstatic, but I wasn't there long enough and didn't talk to enough locals to get a real sense of it. Additionally, we were in South Africa when the queen was there and in Australia when the queen had either just left or was just about to arrive (I can't remember- it was 2006). I was very surprised that people in those two former colonies were so excited about the queen. So clearly I don't get it.

    That being said, justifying the expense of the royal family with "history and emotional ties" is essentially justifying an action with "well because we've always done it that way."
    The way governments blow money, I don't mind spending some on the queen. Bur harry and his wife should be paying everything if they want to live here. She is already crying about the media, to bad you should have thought about that before you made the decision. Don't come here and the say leave us alone , as long as you are here you will be news. They both should just move to Hollywood.
    I admire china because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime.
    PM Justin Trudeau.

  4. #64
    Acid Douching Asswipe OpIv37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    87,438
    Thanks
    9,753
    Thanked 18,277 Times in 9,091 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    245

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by ticatfan View Post
    The way governments blow money, I don't mind spending some on the queen. Bur harry and his wife should be paying everything if they want to live here. She is already crying about the media, to bad you should have thought about that before you made the decision. Don't come here and the say leave us alone , as long as you are here you will be news. They both should just move to Hollywood.
    They're gonna have to when they run out of money and she has to go back to acting because he has no real-world skills.

  5. Post thanked by:

    ticatfan (01-23-2020)

  6. #65
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    15,958
    Thanks
    10,132
    Thanked 6,828 Times in 4,220 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    42

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by OpIv37 View Post
    Well, I can certainly see why the British view Americans as arrogant and crude, but I don't think my statement is an example of that. Maybe it's offensive to many of them because it questions the nature of something that many of them hold dear, but it's a legit point. How much money does the UK spend providing luxury and security to the royal family for something that provides no real value beyond a sense of history? What other things could be done with this money that would actually benefit their citizens?

    And you bring up "the history and depth of the emotional ties," which admittedly I don't understand. I've only been to the UK once- spent a few days in Scotland and a few days in the north of Ireland before going to Ireland proper. The Queen was in Edinburgh the same time we were there and we talked to some Scottish people who had just come from some luncheon she hosted and they were ecstatic, but I wasn't there long enough and didn't talk to enough locals to get a real sense of it. Additionally, we were in South Africa when the queen was there and in Australia when the queen had either just left or was just about to arrive (I can't remember- it was 2006). I was very surprised that people in those two former colonies were so excited about the queen. So clearly I don't get it.

    That being said, justifying the expense of the royal family with "history and emotional ties" is essentially justifying an action with "well because we've always done it that way."
    I didn't say that you observations were not "legit". Just that you don't get it...as you admitted....just like I did not "get it" until I lived, among the locals FAR away from any touristy areas.

    Even with your limited experience, you have validated my point.

    It's MUCH more than "well because we've always done it that way.", and the expense concern is shared by many Britons, but not nearly as prevalent or important as you think.

    From their point of view....your concerns about "
    justifying the expense of the royal family" is none of your business....and just another example of American arrogance and crudity.

    Just sayin'.

  7. #66
    Acid Douching Asswipe OpIv37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    87,438
    Thanks
    9,753
    Thanked 18,277 Times in 9,091 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    245

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by notacon View Post
    I didn't say that you observations were not "legit". Just that you don't get it...as you admitted....just like I did not "get it" until I lived, among the locals FAR away from any touristy areas.

    Even with your limited experience, you have validated my point.

    It's MUCH more than "well because we've always done it that way.", and the expense concern is shared by many Britons, but not nearly as prevalent or important as you think.

    From their point of view....your concerns about "
    justifying the expense of the royal family" is none of your business....and just another example of American arrogance and crudity.

    Just sayin'.
    I just find it hard to believe that they're not more conscious about how taxpayer money is spent. I mean, Democrats get mad when Republicans spend too much money on tax cuts for the rich and the military, Republicans get mad when Democrats spend on social programs, Democrats complain when a Republican president vacations too much and vice versa- people here have different things where they think spending is appropriate and where it's not but everyone is concerned with how much taxpayer money the government is spending.

    I can't see a rural farmer who's 30 year old tractor barely runs, or a factory worker taking the tube to his graveyard shift because he can't afford a car, looking at the royal family taking private jets all over the world and wearing designer clothes and being driven around in limos and being happy with how their taxes are being spent.

  8. #67
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    15,958
    Thanks
    10,132
    Thanked 6,828 Times in 4,220 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    42

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by OpIv37 View Post
    I just find it hard to believe that they're not more conscious about how taxpayer money is spent. I mean, Democrats get mad when Republicans spend too much money on tax cuts for the rich and the military, Republicans get mad when Democrats spend on social programs, Democrats complain when a Republican president vacations too much and vice versa- people here have different things where they think spending is appropriate and where it's not but everyone is concerned with how much taxpayer money the government is spending.

    I can't see a rural farmer who's 30 year old tractor barely runs, or a factory worker taking the tube to his graveyard shift because he can't afford a car, looking at the royal family taking private jets all over the world and wearing designer clothes and being driven around in limos and being happy with how their taxes are being spent.
    I know you have a hard time believing "that they're not more conscious about how taxpayer money is spent., because you don't understand the underlying relationship between the British people and the Crown. We have already established that.

    Additionally, you grossly overestimate how much taxpayer money is spent on the Royal Family. Americans spend more on Trump's golf trips ALONE (and that is the nominal cost, the real costs are much greater) than the British spend on the Royal Family.
    Last edited by notacon; 01-23-2020 at 02:49 PM.

  9. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    15,958
    Thanks
    10,132
    Thanked 6,828 Times in 4,220 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    42

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Plus the fact that the Royal Family has crushing commitments and responsibilities for the British. You yourself, in you very limited interaction, cited THREE separate places where the Queen herself was visiting....Edinburgh, South Africa and Australia.

    Plus the fact that they don't really have personal lives. You could not pay me enough money to live the prison type life they have to endure.

    The fishbowl existence never ends....and every shred of privacy and freedom is NON EXISTENT for them.

  10. Post thanked by:

    ticatfan (01-23-2020)

  11. #69
    The Meathead of Muslims! ticatfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    ottawa valley
    Posts
    24,781
    Thanks
    6,441
    Thanked 2,805 Times in 2,198 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    73

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Like to see Greta try and keep up with the queen.

  12. #70
    Acid Douching Asswipe OpIv37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    87,438
    Thanks
    9,753
    Thanked 18,277 Times in 9,091 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    245

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by notacon View Post
    I know you have a hard time believing "that they're not more conscious about how taxpayer money is spent., because you don't understand the underlying relationship between the British people and the Crown. We have already established that.

    Additionally, you grossly overestimate how much taxpayer money is spent on the Royal Family. Americans spend more on Trump's golf trips ALONE (and that is the nominal cost, the real costs are much greater) than the British spend on the Royal Family.
    Do you have a source on the bolded part? I know Trump travels with an entourage of security and advisors, but I still have a hard time believing that Trump's golf trips alone cost more than keeping the entire royal family in the lap of luxury on the taxpayer dole.

    And I agree with you that the lack of privacy aspect would totally suck. I'd love to be rich but I'd hate to be famous- I value my privacy too much. And the royal family is like uber next level internationally famous- there's only maybe 50 or 100 people in the world on that level. It's literally no privacy ever.

  13. #71
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    15,958
    Thanks
    10,132
    Thanked 6,828 Times in 4,220 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    42

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by OpIv37 View Post
    Do you have a source on the bolded part? I know Trump travels with an entourage of security and advisors, but I still have a hard time believing that Trump's golf trips alone cost more than keeping the entire royal family in the lap of luxury on the taxpayer dole.

    And I agree with you that the lack of privacy aspect would totally suck. I'd love to be rich but I'd hate to be famous- I value my privacy too much. And the royal family is like uber next level internationally famous- there's only maybe 50 or 100 people in the world on that level. It's literally no privacy ever.
    From the Express:

    The MILLIONS of pounds the British Royal Family costs UK taxpayers - and it's going UP



    So how much does the Royal Family cost us?

    £67 million (2019)
    £47.4 million (2018)
    £41.9 million (2017)
    £39.8 million (2016)
    £35.7 million (2015)
    £35.7 million (2014)
    £33.3 million (2013)
    £32.4 million (2012)


    From Forbes:

    Trump’s Golf Trips Could Cost Taxpayers Over $340 Million

    So far Trump’s golf trips have cost at least $105 million
    Trump’s trips to his golf courses are very expensive and much more than Obama’s since Trump’s have been more frequent and usually requires Air Force One and all the accompanying security arraignments.

    From a combination of an analysis from the HuffPost, the GAO or General Accounting Office, Politico and the Washington Post using costs from both Obama and Trump golf trips the estimated cost of Trump’s visits so far come to a range of $105 to $108 million. When you extrapolate the $105 million estimate to eight years, assuming Trump is re-elected, the total cost is over $340 million.


    The GAO report estimated that just four of Trump’s trips to Mar-a-Lago cost:

    • $13.6 million
    • Do not “capture all of the total expenditures by the government”
    • Do not “include certain classified cost information”
    • $60,000 in expenses paid to Mar-a-Lago (there have been 24 so far)
    • Were not able to identify meals and incidental expenses, if any, that may have been incurred at the Mar-a-Lago club

  14. #72
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    15,958
    Thanks
    10,132
    Thanked 6,828 Times in 4,220 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    42

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    I know you "still have a hard time believing that Trump's golf trips alone cost more than keeping the entire royal family in the lap of luxury on the taxpayer dole. ", because you don't have the knowledge or awareness of facts.


    Most of the money to support the Royal Family does not come from the government, but rather the income realized from the estates that have been in the Royal Family for centuries.



  15. #73
    Proudly victimizing the victimizer's victimizer and cracking soreheads Tailgunner Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    1,105
    Thanks
    1,223
    Thanked 687 Times in 419 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    3

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by ticatfan View Post
    I would die for the queen, but meghan and harry can go **** themselves.
    Are you for or against welfare? The Saxe-Coburgs don't work, live in government subsidized housing, and receive tax money even though they don't work. So if you are against welfare layabouts why the **** do you care about the world's true welfare queens?

  16. #74
    Legendary Zoner coastal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,712
    Thanks
    15,970
    Thanked 9,984 Times in 5,850 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    48

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by Haile SpikedLemonade View Post
    Not sure why we should.

    They have had nothing to do with Canada.
    enjoy the Queen’s fur burger

  17. Post thanked by:

    Haile SpikedLemonade (01-24-2020)

  18. #75
    Sab and TD are insignificant ublinkwescore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Atwater, Ca.
    Posts
    23,966
    Thanks
    4,042
    Thanked 1,905 Times in 1,287 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    67

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by ticatfan View Post
    I would die for the queen, but meghan and harry can go **** themselves.
    Why?
    www.gamersconspiracy.com - where gamers conspire

  19. #76
    Sab and TD are insignificant ublinkwescore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Atwater, Ca.
    Posts
    23,966
    Thanks
    4,042
    Thanked 1,905 Times in 1,287 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    67

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by Downinfloflo View Post
    Americans have been doing it for the last 20 years.

    They use a different "Queen" tho, They do it for someone named "Freedom."
    No, they do it for Israel and the Military Industrial Complex.

  20. #77
    The Meathead of Muslims! ticatfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    ottawa valley
    Posts
    24,781
    Thanks
    6,441
    Thanked 2,805 Times in 2,198 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    73

    Re: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will no longer use royal titles

    Quote Originally Posted by Tailgunner Joe View Post
    Are you for or against welfare? The Saxe-Coburgs don't work, live in government subsidized housing, and receive tax money even though they don't work. So if you are against welfare layabouts why the **** do you care about the world's true welfare queens?
    The Queen I said. You deaf?

Posting Permissions

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