Oh fuck if this is true...

[Vendetta]

They haven't performed any renovations to the Palace since it was built?

Not the kind of major structural work required to land sodding great Blackhawks on the roof...

Y'see, we have old buildings in this country, the kind that are older than some of your countries (notably, in my home town, we have some of the oldest pubs in he entire world).

If you're going to pull the "My local pub is older than your nation" line, I'll have to charge you royalties.

Sorry, Nottingham has the higher claim. We have the oldest pubs in England too...

[MKSheppard]

A lot more then that, take Longwood Gardens for example. Simply its yearly budget is over 40 million dollars, and it cost millions to build in the early 20th century. Though its also considerably more elaborate and larger then what the queen has.

HOW, HOW do you know this kind of shit, Skimmer?

[Admiral Valdemar]

A lot more then that, take Longwood Gardens for example. Simply its yearly budget is over 40 million dollars, and it cost millions to build in the early 20th century. Though its also considerably more elaborate and larger then what the queen has.

HOW, HOW do you know this kind of shit, Skimmer?

General knowledge is a beautiful thing.

I also live near a national garden flower show and just the small displays there can be tens of thousands of pounds.

[HemlockGrey]

Out of similar curiosity, how much does a single Blackhawk helicopter cost?

[MKSheppard]

General knowledge is a beautiful thing.

Bring Weaselly back! I hate your disco avatar!

[Darth Wong]

A lot more then that, take Longwood Gardens for example. Simply its yearly budget is over 40 million dollars, and it cost millions to build in the early 20th century. Though its also considerably more elaborate and larger then what the queen has.

HOW, HOW do you know this kind of shit, Skimmer?

He must have a photographic memory or something.

Anyway, while I am nominally a member of the Commonwealth and should be siding with the Queen on this, I have two questions:

1. How much work did the Queen do in order to earn these properties?
2. Why should George W. Bush do any more work to compensate her for the damage than she did to earn the property in the first place?

Since the answer to the first question appears to be "being born into the right family", I feel that George W. Bush has discharged his compensatory duties by also being born into the right family. Therefore, no more compensation is warranted.

I'm sorry, but I just can't get broken up when a flithy rich heir tramples on a filthy rich heiress's flowers.

[TheDarkling]

Hmm so anything inherited or given as a gift is fair game for other people to destroy.

[Darth Wong]

Hmm so anything inherited or given as a gift is fair game for other people to destroy.

If the owner invited the person to come and said nothing during the supposedly horrifying events in question, absolutely. Did she order them off her property as soon as it was obvious what they were doing? No. So why complain now? Stupidity? Delayed reaction? Just general bitchiness?

Also, when the ratio of one's inherited possessions to one's lifetime contributions to the economy are as obscenely imbalanced as they are in this case, who gives a fuck? Do not generalize; a gift given to Billy the Welfare Kid is hardly the same as tens of billions of dollars given to somebody who essentially does nothing but wave at people.

[TheDarkling]

If the owner invited the person to come and said nothing during the supposedly horrifying events in question, absolutely. Did she order them off her property as soon as it was obvious what they were doing? No. So why complain now? Stupidity? Delayed reaction? Just general bitchiness?

That would all be true if she sweated blood for her money, it still wouldn't make any sense to have this delayed reaction when she didn't complain earlier.

Also, when the ratio of one's inherited possessions to one's lifetime contributions to the economy are as obscenely imbalanced as they are in this case, who gives a fuck? Do not generalize; a gift given to Billy the Welfare Kid is hardly the same as tens of billions of dollars given to somebody who essentially does nothing but wave at people.

Sorry I disagree, just because she inherited her money and gets paid futher money for perfomring her role as head of state doesn't mean it isn't still hers. Exactly how much effort does one have to put in to get rights of ownership for their property, is playing the stock market enough effort? what if you hire a broker to do it for you, it seem rather silly to suggest protection of your proprty is directly realted to how much you own or how much you work for it.

[Darth Wong]

That would all be true if she sweated blood for her money, it still wouldn't make any sense to have this delayed reaction when she didn't complain earlier.

Exactly. I just mention it as yet another reason not to shed tears over this or demand compensation.

Sorry I disagree, just because she inherited her money and gets paid futher money for perfomring her role as head of state doesn't mean it isn't still hers. Exactly how much effort does one have to put in to get rights of ownership for their property, is playing the stock market enough effort? what if you hire a broker to do it for you, it seem rather silly to suggest protection of your proprty is directly realted to how much you own or how much you work for it.

In this case, why not? There are reasonable questions as to the legitimacy of her property claim. Much of the royal family's inheritance is not legitimate in any modern ethical sense of the word, since it comes from the past spoils of greedy dictatorships and blood money from plundering other nations. Since when can we not point out that she really doesn't deserve any of it in any way?

[Admiral Valdemar]

General knowledge is a beautiful thing.

Bring Weaselly back! I hate your disco avatar!

Hold your horses, I'll make a new sig banner with them on if you like.

I much preferred your Excel sig banner too.

[TheDarkling]

In this case, why not? There are reasonable questions as to the legitimacy of her property claim. Much of the royal family's inheritance is not legitimate in any modern ethical sense of the word, since it comes from the past spoils of greedy dictatorships and blood money from plundering other nations.

Most of the Royals money comes from te efact that they own huge amounts of land, I very much doubt the current royals got any more money from plundering other nations than the various presidents of other nations - i.e. not directly but through various deals cut and so on.

Also the above argument reaches too far back into history, the US plundered lands where they had no right to do so, does that mean I can claim that US citizens shouldn’t build horses their because the government didn't have the right to sell them the land in the first place - plunder from wars was perfectly legitimate and trying to right the balance now is rather unproductive.

Since when can we not point out that she really doesn't deserve any of it in any way?

It does matter if she doesn't deserve it, I don't think various sports or movies stars deserve the amount of money they get compared to the amount of work they do however I won't dispute that they do have a right to expect their property to be treated as theirs.

[Andrew J.]

If the owner invited the person to come and said nothing during the supposedly horrifying events in question, absolutely. Did she order them off her property as soon as it was obvious what they were doing? No. So why complain now? Stupidity? Delayed reaction? Just general bitchiness?

It might be senility. The queen's been around for a while now, and has been under a lot of stress her whole life.

[David]

Doesn't the hosting nation decide where visiting dignitaries will be greeted? Whose idea was it to have him land in the Queen's garden? Let them pay for the damage.

[Darth Wong]

If the owner invited the person to come and said nothing during the supposedly horrifying events in question, absolutely. Did she order them off her property as soon as it was obvious what they were doing? No. So why complain now? Stupidity? Delayed reaction? Just general bitchiness?

It might be senility. The queen's been around for a while now, and has been under a lot of stress her whole life.

If she's senile, then just tell her the flowers always looked like that.

This is the problem with England and Europe; every damned thing seems to be "irreplaceable" and "historic". And delicate too.

[His Divine Shadow]

How about the Brits finally dump the royal family like the useless appendage they are?

How about not you boring geezer?
It's the only really cool thing they have left, a 1000 year old monarchy.

[Uraniun235]

How about the Brits finally dump the royal family like the useless appendage they are?

Concept of tourism passed you by, eh?

[Dahak]

If the owner invited the person to come and said nothing during the supposedly horrifying events in question, absolutely. Did she order them off her property as soon as it was obvious what they were doing? No. So why complain now? Stupidity? Delayed reaction? Just general bitchiness?

It might be senility. The queen's been around for a while now, and has been under a lot of stress her whole life.

This is the problem with England and Europe; every damned thing seems to be "irreplaceable" and "historic". And delicate too.

Possibly because such things *are historic?
It's not a bad thing to have historic things, and be proud of them.

[Stuart Mackey]

How about the Brits finally dump the royal family like the useless appendage they are?

How about the yanks dump their constituion like the inflexible archaic noncense it is?

[Stuart Mackey]

snip
Anyway, while I am nominally a member of the Commonwealth and should be siding with the Queen on this, I have two questions:

1. How much work did the Queen do in order to earn these properties?
2. Why should George W. Bush do any more work to compensate her for the damage than she did to earn the property in the first place?

Since the answer to the first question appears to be "being born into the right family", I feel that George W. Bush has discharged his compensatory duties by also being born into the right family. Therefore, no more compensation is warranted.

I'm sorry, but I just can't get broken up when a flithy rich heir tramples on a filthy rich heiress's flowers.

The nature of Monarchy is not the point, in this case. Whatever the weath of the Queen is, her family, she has to live there and has for most of her life, its kind of hard to have your home screwed over and not be a tad upset, esp when the people who did it did so without so much as a breif apology or offer to help fix it up.

[Stuart Mackey]

Hmm so anything inherited or given as a gift is fair game for other people to destroy.

If the owner invited the person to come and said nothing during the supposedly horrifying events in question, absolutely. Did she order them off her property as soon as it was obvious what they were doing? No. So why complain now? Stupidity? Delayed reaction? Just general bitchiness?

Mike, I think you misunderstand how the Westminster sysrem works. With this type of constitional Monarchy, the Queen cannot go around doing that given that a state visit is a choice of a democraticaly elected government.

Also, when the ratio of one's inherited possessions to one's lifetime contributions to the economy are as obscenely imbalanced as they are in this case, who gives a fuck? Do not generalize; a gift given to Billy the Welfare Kid is hardly the same as tens of billions of dollars given to somebody who essentially does nothing but wave at people.

The British government makes more money out of the Monarchy's assets, in this case the Crown estate, than the Royals get on the civil list. The Queens job, incidentally, is to advise, encourage and warn the government of the day. The Monarch is also, in the last instance, the final check on scoundrels {I do so love that word} in government.

[Stuart Mackey]

In this case, why not? There are reasonable questions as to the legitimacy of her property claim. Much of the royal family's inheritance is not legitimate in any modern ethical sense of the word, since it comes from the past spoils of greedy dictatorships and blood money from plundering other nations. Since when can we not point out that she really doesn't deserve any of it in any way?

The Royal family at the Time of George 4 (1820-1830} was broke and in return for the civil list turned over revenue from the crown estates to the government. The crown estate was the result of various civil conflicts and the appropriation of church lands during Henery 8's reformation of the Church of England.
Any revenue from overseas would have been from tax on companies like the East India Company and from trade in general. I wont comment on the ethical nature of such trade during the formation of the British empire after the loss of the American colonies, but I will say that during its formation the Monarchy was, more or less, the constitiional monarch that we now know it as and had no claim on tax.
Most of the Royal weath is not he property of the Monarch but rather the Monarchy and is in effect part of the function of state.

[Stuart Mackey]

This is the problem with England and Europe; every damned thing seems to be "irreplaceable" and "historic". And delicate too.

Generally they are historic and irreplacable. And there is nothing problematic with that

[h0rus]

well, this gives the bush bashers alot more material to use. i can just imagine what leno's going to be doing with it. . . .

As he has shown he needs no help to be comedy material. Leno be damned.

[h0rus]

He must have a photographic memory or something.

Seems like a fairly trivial thing to pull out.

Why should George W. Bush do any more work to compensate her for the damage than she did to earn the property in the first place?

Since the answer to the first question appears to be "being born into the right family", I feel that George W. Bush has discharged his compensatory duties by also being born into the right family. Therefore, no more compensation is warranted.

I'm sorry, but I just can't get broken up when a flithy rich heir tramples on a filthy rich heiress's flowers.

Ha. Funny. Where I come from destruction of property is generally frowned upon. Still, it does seem strange that the valuable garden was never brought up when the visit was talked about.