Queen to receive £6 million pay rise

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

www.sxolsout.org.uk...

British Head of State, Queen Elizabeth II alone appoints military commanders.

British Head of State, Queen Elizabeth II presides over a weekly meeting of the Joint Intelligence Committee, (JIC) where she - and not her passing Prime Mouthpiece - is fully briefed on the activities of all of the British Secret Services. No British agents, or British troops, carry out a single act, overt or covert, without direct orders signed by the British Head Of State.

With Rothschilds acting as her principle-nominee-bankers Queen Elizabeth II has become the wealthiest women in the world. In financial circles the Queen is known as the world's "ultimate insider trader.'' Not only is she advised by the world's richest financiers she also has full access to all British State Secrets, through the daily Red Boxes. The Queen has 455 military advisers in 30 countries. If the Queen learns that some country, lets say Nigeria, is about to be destabilized, she can immediately sell her Nigerian oil shares and invest that money in Arms sales to Nigeria.

The only people who know the murky details of royal insider dealing are those on the same gravy train. It is presently impossible, for anyone (especially a royal banker), to press charges of decades of insider trading and conflict of interest against the Queen in her own courts.

a reply to: tadaman

I'd have to say it seems ok but we all know humans corrupt easily , I wouldnt trust one person with so much power and authority
I know you could have checks in place to ensure that this doesnt happen but giving anyone that much power is dangerous

my main beef with this pay rise, is how the # you giving a pay rise to a woman and a family who live in luxury , when I havent had a pay rise in 8 years and I work for the UK government

its #ing shocking

I can barely afford to feed myself never mind afford toilet paper to wipe my arse when it comes oot the other end

the queen on the other hand never needs worry about where her next meal is coming from
or if she has enough bog roll or dog food for her corgies, of if her electricity is paid , or the internet bill is paid to support my own personal business etc

you know what I mean , there is her in her absolute luxury in multiple homes with no concerns in the #ing world
then there is the population of the UK who for the most live in poverty or are close to it and live from hand to mouth
pay check to pay check hoping for a break.

So you can see why many want this to end
there is no #ing reason what so ever to continue giving any of them money
if they had any #ing sense they would use some of that crown estate money to invest in the UK to fix our problems but naw!

how about farming industrial hemp or even mary jane on all that land and making millions for the UK economy
but no that would be using common sense

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

originally posted by: ISeekTruth101
We should get rid of the monarchy once and for all.

"We should get rid of Muslims once and for all"

Sounds insane innit?

Yes mate, attempting to get rid of Muslims is insane.

Actually the correct term is Genocide.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

and getting rid of the monarchy is just par for the course Regicide is far easier and costs less than genocide !

we have been offing monarchies in Europe for a long time , maybe its about time we kicked them to the curb

a reply to: sapien82

I'm sure the Queen & Co, will be just fine. They have enough cash to tide them over for the next winter at least.

Let's use the tax money we give them to benefit those whom Queen & Co are out of touch with in the UK.

Let's fund the vulnerable, the elderly, the disabled ...as they have seen drastic cuts in benefit over the past few years, and they don't exactly have access to a world renowned doctor that resides in Cuba, who specializes in prolonging life and genetic therapy... like the Queen probably has.

I was thinking about this.

Cant she just be asked to negotiate a trade deal or something for the UK and possibly EARN a commission on the deal?

I know I am suggesting actual work, but if they need more money then the same advice given to everyone else in similar situations should apply.

Their salary should be based on performance as well.

I fear they wouldnt earn enough for a bag of crisps /chips if that were the case.

a reply to: tadaman

The Queen makes enough money as it is, she has plenty of income sources. She's got stocks and shares in blue chip companies, several financial and political advisers. She most likely has more insight on the financial market than most financial investors in the world given her wide global network.

And all I'm arguing for is we get rid of the monarchy, and cut the taxpayers money that we give to the government to give to her.

As a human being she, and her family will be financially sound. Which is more than most families can ask for today. Why should a single family get so much attention and so much handouts from civil servants. I know she probably works hard at her age, and so do her family etc. but hey... welcome to humanity.

The day of kingdom and queen is long gone, age old traditions and customs. Do we keep their ceremonies on TV to give people Hope? and a sense of British identity?

No thanks, let's get the money to those that need it more. And we're being generous at that, she can keep her royal antiquities.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

That reay is fair. I am not well informed on the subject but it seems that Europe as a whole is rejecting the notion of national identity through royal representation.

Electing a leader really is the cats meow.

They shouldnt get public money IMO. They should be solvant and independant.

Beyond the buildings and physical assets THEY DONT OWN but hold in trust for the citizens of the UK, nothing should be publicly funded.

Edit to add:
Even her ceremonial ornaments and regalia arent hers or her familys. Those are national treasures and always belong to the people. If anything the royal /national wealth is there for future rulers and generations to come as a forethought.

yeh you both raise very good points, if the queen given her network of contacts, was given the opportunity to invest her wealth to benefit the UK would she do it ?

doubt it

hey lizze we have to speculate to accumulate

so get speculating with our money like the banks do !

go to work and get us some good trade deals with your cash and power
give it to the poor , the hungry the disabled , you know like real queens are meant to do and look after their subjects
they are meant to be the shining light for the weak ,poor and hungry instead they arent , they are rather dull and uninspiring
Diana was the only royal I actually liked and she wasnt even one of them!

a reply to: sapien82

Agreed, Diana was a good soul. She was in touch with the people. You could just tell that she would happily invest for her country.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101


Did you not get the bit about how the huge income/profit from the Crown Estate goes to the Treasury from which she gets 15%? And that she does not own Crown Estate property?

It's a common misconception that she is funded by the taxpayer.

a reply to: oldcarpy

did you not get the bit that she is human just like the rest of us and prone to the same behaviours as everyone else

you trying to tell me she doesnt trade as mentioned above when she knows she can make cash , she wont lift a finger of course she will have her aids do it for her but the queen is probably so #in rich that she wipes her ass with £100 note
then burns it .

We give her money from the crown estate but you honestly believe she doesnt use her own wealth or the wealth we give her to make money for herself !

hahaha

thats like asking a wall street trader who is already rich not to play the market and hedge funds etc!

a reply to: sapien82


Reminds me of the Barrister in Court who has just tried to explain a complex point of law to a Judge:-


Judge: "I'm afraid I am none the wiser."

Counsel: "No, my Lord, but perhaps better informed?"

a reply to: oldcarpy

aye very good

a reply to: oldcarpy

Ah okay, so none of my tax payer money, or the rest of the tax payers money reaches the Queen in anyway.

That is good to know. Thank you for the education.

I think you missed all the points we've made here, about one royal family, and all them profits.

Anyways I'm done looking at the figures, not much I can do except continue to watch other families in Britain suffer needlessly when we could do more to help them. If there's a referendum to get rid of the Monarchy, that'll be a chance for me.

I think one thing people would do well to remember is that although the Queen is fairly rich by the average citizen's standards, that wealth wouldn't go very far at all if the Queen were suddenly overthrown and her bank account was emptied.

£340m would pay for around 12 hours of the NHS. Then it would be gone. It wouldn't even pay one year's-worth of Birmingham's child benefit bill.

It angers people that the Queen is rich, but the cost of the monarchy is pretty low, considering. For contrast, the Obama family cost the US purse $2bn a year (yes, billion, not million).

There's no guarantee that a UK presidency would be cheaper than the monarchy, and it would probably be a lot more expensive because the presidency wouldn't have a private income to augment the salary attached to the role.

Get rid of the monarchy, and you would still have the same poverty in the UK as you did before. It's a symbolic distraction, because the Queen is highly-visible and the real 'enemies of the poor' are not. In Britain, they are the Conservative Party, the bankers, and the billionaires, roughly in that order

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

you know how quickly the referendum on monarchy petitions last , well they only run for a week
but they quickly get squashed because its anti British to remove the queen and you will be hounded by monarchy lovers everywhere , up here in scotland its worse because if a rangers fan hears you say anything about the queen you are in for some real fun as you are then hounded by one bigot and then before you know it a whole gang of bigots are shouting you down for having an opinion on the queen!


People obviously dont pay attention to the history of our nations , as we wouldnt be having this conversation if it wasnt for us sticking it to the king !

we'd be on london bridge in a cage having our eyes and spleen pecked out by some crows

a reply to: audubon

I agree with some points, and disagree with others. Not saying presidency will be cheaper, but you've given some moot suggestions as to how the money could be better spent. I for one know it would get gobbled up by the NHS and public sectors.

But having it go into a fund, to help the most vulnerable in Britain would go a long, long way. Like giving grants to those who are elderly, disabled in order to build care facilities in their home that they could use to the end of their lifetime.

Those are the type of causes I for one, would like to see the money better spent on. That is a big issue, that is silent, I don't hear people shouting about the lack of legal aid and health care grants for people that really needed, and you'd be making a huge change in those lives almost immediately. While the rest of us healthy folk can at least walk to work, take exams, and make bread.

I get that you want to defend the Monarchy, as you feel we get more value out of it then we put in. But it boils down to one royal family, being handed that much profit, for what reason?

369 Million refurbishment of Buckingham palace... what the actual F. Tourists will still come here, so see worn down castles, and royal monuments. The Queen is too busy to meet tourists anyway.


Yeah there are a million things that need fixing in the UK, and the government. But in this thread, and on this topic, we can solve one problem and help other families.

a reply to: sapien82

I agree with you man, but slowly and slowly public perception is changing. The new generations are just losing touch with the whole Monarchy thing, and the landscape is changing drastically.

I feel the Monarchy days are numbered. It' 2017, and opinions have changed greatly with each passing decade. The youths of tomorrow are going to have their plate full with paying more taxes and getting less in return from the Goverment, and enough will be enough in having the Royal family doused with cash and lavishly spending on building repairs, royal ceremonies and expensive trips.

a reply to: ISeekTruth101

I come back to the monarchy being a distraction. Some £30bn of tax is evaded in Britain every year, chiefly by the super-rich.

There's no need to abolish the monarchy to provide anything for the needy. Enforce existing tax-collection laws properly and the problem is solved several times over.

But they won't be enforced properly because the people doing the evasion are the billionaires. It is no coincidence that their friends in the Conservative Party have forced so many job cuts on the tax-collection arm of HMRC that they can barely pick pennies up in the street these days.