TDF-Stage 16: Carcassonne–Bagnères-de-Luchon: *Spoiler*

1…678911

Comments

  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    RichN95 wrote:
    Talking of the Royal Family, the curse of Will and Kate has been in full effect. They shook hands with seven riders in Leeds - Froome, Cavendish, Contador, Schleck, Costa and Yates are all gone. Only Geraint Thomas remains.

    (And judging by the rate that Welsh Commonwealth medal hopes are dropping like flies at the moment I don't hold out much hope of him seeing Paris)

    That's terrible. :(:)
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    She is pregnant again. Another round of wall to wall press coverage to look forward to :roll:
    Contador is the Greatest
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    frenchfighter wrote:
    She is pregnant again. Another round of wall to wall press coverage to look forward to :roll:
    Will Peter Sagan never learn to leave the podium girls alone?
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    Urgh, the royals. The French had the right idea about royalty. Scrounging, pointless t*ssers.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Joelsim wrote:
    Urgh, the royals. The French had the right idea about royalty. Scrounging, pointless t*ssers.
    To be fair to the recent generation, William flies helicopter rescue and Harry flew Apaches in Afghanistan, which I'm sure as hell I would never do. There's plenty of rich kids who spend their life coked up doing nothing.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    RichN95 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    Urgh, the royals. The French had the right idea about royalty. Scrounging, pointless t*ssers.
    To be fair to the recent generation, William flies helicopter rescue and Harry flew Apaches in Afghanistan, which I'm sure as hell I would never do. There's plenty of rich kids who spend their life coked up doing nothing.
    Not just the recent generation, Prince Andrew was flying helicopters in the Falklands and in general they've got a decent history of military service, even the current Queen was in uniform in WW2 (although of course not in combat).

    "Scrounging, pointless t*ssers" could equally well describe the entire government...
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    RichN95 wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    Urgh, the royals. The French had the right idea about royalty. Scrounging, pointless t*ssers.
    To be fair to the recent generation, William flies helicopter rescue and Harry flew Apaches in Afghanistan, which I'm sure as hell I would never do. There's plenty of rich kids who spend their life coked up doing nothing.

    It's a bit of fun for those boys and they don't have to do that every day of a working life. They can stop and start whenever it pleases them. Again it is about trying to develop a link to the people which is total PR.

    Good on them for doing that and not being frivolous with tax payers money and hoards of money from centuries of oppression but what would you do if you had everything on a silver spoon, no real life responsibilities, zero financial worries, privileges and open doors above every other person in the land?
    Contador is the Greatest
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    I just don't get it at all. Loads of working class people worshipping the royals.

    Get rid.

    Mind you I think it will all come tumbling down when the Big Phil revelations come out.
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    Big Phil revelations?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    coriordan wrote:
    Big Phil revelations?
    He's the real father of Grant's children.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • mm1
    mm1 Posts: 1,063
    coriordan wrote:
    Big Phil revelations?

    Is that why Butler Schloss ran a mile?
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    RichN95 wrote:
    coriordan wrote:
    Big Phil revelations?
    He's the real father of Grant's children.

    It's something to do with children. Allegedly.
  • ben@31
    ben@31 Posts: 2,327
    adr82 wrote:
    Politicians waste much more of your money than the royal family do.

    At least the politicians have been democratically elected and you have some say. A politician only lasts a few years before they need to be re-elected.

    With the monarchy we have no vote, no say. Yet we still are paying for them.

    Today Britain is a multi-cultural country but we will never have a black or asian head of state, they are excluded from the royal family.

    Yet if you disagree with your politician and think you can do a better job, you are able to stand for election yourself.
    "The Prince of Wales is now the King of France" - Calton Kirby
  • Art Vandelay
    Art Vandelay Posts: 1,982
    dish_dash wrote:
    Mighty shame if this is true... though I gather that Albasini spoke to Reza this morning to resolve the issue.

    http://road.cc/content/news/124595-euro ... ini-racism

    Latest: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/ori ... zw7l9.html

    Bernadeau, 'The case is closed.'
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    Apologies to everyone else for cluttering up this thread
    ben@31 wrote:
    adr82 wrote:
    Politicians waste much more of your money than the royal family do.

    At least the politicians have been democratically elected and you have some say.

    A politician only lasts a few years before they need to be re-elected.

    With the monarchy we have no vote, no say. Yet we still are paying for them.
    Yes, we have such a wonderful choice between two nearly indistinguishable parties who for some reason aren't keen on changing the vote counting system to give smaller parties a chance. How lucky we are! In value for money terms the royals are clearly ahead, the Queen has been going for decades while you're lucky to get 5 years out of a politician.
    ben@31 wrote:
    Today Britain is a multi-cultural country but we will never have a black or asian head of state, they are excluded from the royal family.
    Utter horsesh*t. Even the law written in 1772 makes no mention whatsoever of race. Believe it or not, "hasn't happened yet" is not the same as "can never happen".
    ben@31 wrote:
    Yet if you disagree with your politician and think you can do a better job, you are able to stand for election yourself.
    Sure, all you need to have any chance of getting somewhere is the same sort of money and power that you're complaining the royals enjoy. Otherwise you're at best going to have to spend years before you obtain any real influence. It's a piss-take. Prove me wrong though - go start a party with the sole aim of abolishing the royal family. I'll check back in a few decades to see how it's going.
  • frisbee
    frisbee Posts: 691
    Is there a difference between royalty and politicians? They both put expense claims in the moat cleaning...
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Art Vandelay wrote:
    dish_dash wrote:
    Mighty shame if this is true... though I gather that Albasini spoke to Reza this morning to resolve the issue.

    http://road.cc/content/news/124595-euro ... ini-racism

    Latest: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/ori ... zw7l9.html

    Bernadeau, 'The case is closed.'

    A reporter should ask hom whether he nade similar bad comments to the ton of other riders not pulling.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • Runtothehills
    Runtothehills Posts: 184
    ben@31 wrote:

    With the monarchy we have no vote, no say. Yet we still are paying for them.

    No we're not, they are paying for us:

    http://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/the-true-co ... ained.html

    Thanks to George III the Queen effectively pays 80% income tax.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Runtothehills wrote:
    ben@31 wrote:

    With the monarchy we have no vote, no say. Yet we still are paying for them.

    No we're not, they are paying for us:

    http://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/the-true-co ... ained.html

    Thanks to George III the Queen effectively pays 80% income tax.

    Read this for some legitimate information rather than one royalist's opinion.
    http://republic.org.uk/sites/default/fi ... ypenny.pdf
    Contador is the Greatest
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,435
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Runtothehills wrote:
    ben@31 wrote:

    With the monarchy we have no vote, no say. Yet we still are paying for them.

    No we're not, they are paying for us:

    http://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/the-true-co ... ained.html

    Thanks to George III the Queen effectively pays 80% income tax.

    Read this for some legitimate information rather than one royalist's opinion.
    http://republic.org.uk/sites/default/fi ... ypenny.pdf

    Not that I entirely disagree with you, but you can hardly claim that's unbiased information either.

    Part of the problem is it's pretty much impossible to get impartial information.
  • Runtothehills
    Runtothehills Posts: 184
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Runtothehills wrote:
    ben@31 wrote:

    With the monarchy we have no vote, no say. Yet we still are paying for them.

    No we're not, they are paying for us:

    http://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/the-true-co ... ained.html

    Thanks to George III the Queen effectively pays 80% income tax.

    Read this for some legitimate information rather than one royalist's opinion.
    http://republic.org.uk/sites/default/fi ... ypenny.pdf

    An entertaining read if nothing else.

    My personal favourite was the bit at the end saying that even if the £500 million in additional tourism was correct it wasn't worth bothering about because it was only 0.03% of GDP, but the cost of the Royal family (£299 million according to them) is 0.02% of GDP and definitely worth bothering about...?
    (plus even if the true figure is 1/5 of that and they have their costs right: Total cost of Royals = £299 million-£200 million (crown estate income)-£100 million (tourism)= -£1 million) Hmmm.

    I'm not sure about their claim that the revenue from the crown estates would go to the state anyway if the monarchy was abolished. Looking at the terms of the original agreement I'm not sure-would probably revert to the Royals unless they were still paid an annual sum.

    Edit: I'm not particually pro-Royal, but I do have an interest in figures and how our first perceptions are very often right but just occasionally can be way off (biggest bugbear is nuclear power, probably kills fewer people per GWhr then wind but still is viewed as more dangerous, seriously a holiday in Cornwall is more dangerous then camping outside Sellafield for a year).
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Of course it will be arguing for its cause but it is referenced information. The amount they cost is not relevant, 1p is too much. They are net drain, see my other posts a couple pages back.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    Why do you lot keep posting this in a race thread?
  • nic_77
    nic_77 Posts: 929
    Pah.
    All these people complaining about what the Royals 'have' would sure like it for themselves...
    (Except of course the lack of privacy and the thankless responsibility).

    How do we feel about bankers' bonuses being subsidised with tax payers' money?
    (As it happens I'm in favour of both, as they both result in a net gain for the economy)
    Strava
    Race reports
    Bike Aero Data
  • dsoutar
    dsoutar Posts: 1,746
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Of course it will be arguing for its cause but it is referenced information. The amount they cost is not relevant, 1p is too much. They are net drain, see my other posts a couple pages back.

    Just like the tens of thousands (or probably much more) that sit on their fat arses milking the state for all it's worth. They cost us far more than the Royal family do.

    I'm pretty much neutral on the royals by the way; not a fan but not a rabid hater either.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    nic_77 wrote:
    Pah.
    All these people complaining about what the Royals 'have' would sure like it for themselves...
    (Except of course the lack of privacy and the thankless responsibility).

    Speak for yourself.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • KnightOfTheLongTights
    KnightOfTheLongTights Posts: 1,415
    ThomThom wrote:
    Why do you lot keep posting this in a race thread?

    Indeed. Though I can almost understand it as the two Pyrrenean stages so far have not been the most thrilling compared to the incredible first two weeks of the tour ...
    And am I imagining it or are the hilltop crowds much thinner / less crazy than usual?
  • nic_77
    nic_77 Posts: 929
    frenchfighter wrote:
    nic_77 wrote:
    Pah.
    All these people complaining about what the Royals 'have' would sure like it for themselves...
    (Except of course the lack of privacy and the thankless responsibility).

    Speak for yourself.
    #logicfail

    I wasn't complaining.
    Strava
    Race reports
    Bike Aero Data
  • ben@31
    ben@31 Posts: 2,327
    dsoutar wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Just like the tens of thousands (or probably much more) that sit on their fat arses milking the state for all it's worth.

    Just like the royals do.
    "The Prince of Wales is now the King of France" - Calton Kirby
  • DeadCalm
    DeadCalm Posts: 4,249
    Runtothehills wrote:
    seriously a holiday in Cornwall is more dangerous then camping outside Sellafield for a year).
    Which is why you so rarely see citizens from Chernobyl on camping holidays in Cornwall.

Categories