Jump to content

Are we Overgoverned?


Dave225

Recommended Posts

Dave225 - 2017-03-12 7:26 PM

It is also the Prime Minister who declares war these days, and as with the case of Blair, they may not even advise parliament.

 

The Prime Minister is granted enormous powers by her unelected majesty under the Royal Prerogative, ensuring she maintains the support of the Prime Minister.

Why do we need an unelected Monarch to oversee our elected representatives - let alone the hideously expensive retinue of family and hangers on that go with her?.

What if her descendants turn out much worse than her how could their subjects get rid of them?

(Oh and I have given up responding to your Ad hominem RogerC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pity we don't have an avenue whereby boring ....really boring anti monarchists who live in fantasy land  can't be locked up in the Tower.

No one minds a bit of an opposite opinion vis a vis the Monarchy but some take it to the extremes of obsession.............
....and we appear to have one here.  

At risk of getting 'incoming' from a compulsive user of foul language on the forum I feel this image extracted from the internet to be appropriate...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/48/da/9e/48da9e11087ac75c0c88a69088270d9d.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RogerC - 2017-03-12 8:24 PM

 

Pity we don't have an avenue whereby boring ....really boring anti monarchists who live in fantasy land  can't be locked up in the Tower

Good to know Her Majesty's Armed Forces are so dedicated to protecting our freedom of speech *-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally i do not mind having a Head of State, to do all the handshaking things. Whether it is a monarch or a president to me is immaterial, just as long aspeople have a say in who it should be. what i cannot accept is a monarchy with umpteen hangers on and a right based on birth, so i guess i am more in the republican camp.

 

I guess a prsident would have to be more involved in actual government, probably a step up from PM, but as long as the costs are controlled I see no real problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I can recall any incidents in my lifetime where the armed forces have been turned onto the British people, but I can recall a number of instances where anarchists and other minority groups have attempted to use illegal force and co-ersion to subvert the law and impose their own undemocratic will on the general public.

AGD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

joe66 - 2017-03-13 7:44 PM

 

The OPs post forgot the add

1 local councils and county councils

2 the EU politicians

All are paid from our tax revenue, none of them are wealth producing

 

More like wealth destroying when decisions are placed in the hands of local Nimbs who do whats best for them rather than the country as a whole. :-S

But thats certainly suited the landlord class in Government as its created the housing crisis and made them extremely wealthy. Or MP's with second homes in London bought for them. But what of those working all hours and still having to rely on housing benefit to rent a shoe box, with no hope of owning their own home?

Suits council tax payers in Westminster too as the council draws income from stealth taxes on visiting motorists (at the expense of the economy) to reduce council tax for locals - resulting in the council tax on a 3 bed semi in poor areas being higher than Buckingham Palace (the highest council tax band in Westminster)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archiesgrandad - 2017-03-13 9:05 PM

 

impose their own undemocratic will on the general public.

AGD

Isn't that what the Monarchists are doing now?

I accept the current Monarch doesn't use her power because things are going her way. But its a real stretch to suggest having an unelected hereditary person at the head of Europe's most expensive armed forces who can over rule our hundreds of elected representatives somehow makes us safer.

What will future monarchs be like?

How can their subjects get rid of them if they turn out to be monsters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John52 - 2017-03-14 6:41 AM

 

 

Suits council tax payers in Westminster too as the council draws income from stealth taxes on visiting motorists (at the expense of the economy) to reduce council tax for locals - resulting in the council tax on a 3 bed semi in poor areas being higher than Buckingham Palace (the highest council tax band in Westminster)

 

Judging by the cars you see parking in Westminster I would say that the owners are well able to afford to pay parking charges. I think that a lot of the drivers would rather be seen dead than go on public transport. I agree with your point about B Pal, I just think that the parking issue is irrelevant. If I had my way it would be made more difficult to drive in Central London.....and price is not the solution because it doesn't bother the wealthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Muswell - 2017-03-14 9:15 AM

 

John52 - 2017-03-14 6:41 AM

 

 

Suits council tax payers in Westminster too as the council draws income from stealth taxes on visiting motorists (at the expense of the economy) to reduce council tax for locals - resulting in the council tax on a 3 bed semi in poor areas being higher than Buckingham Palace (the highest council tax band in Westminster)

 

Judging by the cars you see parking in Westminster I would say that the owners are well able to afford to pay parking charges. I think that a lot of the drivers would rather be seen dead than go on public transport. I agree with your point about B Pal, I just think that the parking issue is irrelevant. If I had my way it would be made more difficult to drive in Central London.....and price is not the solution because it doesn't bother the wealthy.

 

 

When people say the Congestion Charge is a success doesn't that mean its better for me and I don't think about anyone else?

What of those who need to go into London but are excluded because of the charges?

Or those businesses that have to send people into London (because the Government chooses to site their offices etc in the most expensive part of the country at our expense) - the extra cost to businesses and the economy of sending people in there?

Wheras those who can afford to live in Westminster should be able to afford to pay as much Council Tax as those in poor areas do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...