Harry and Meghan stepping aside
Comments
-
They spent 5 weeks over xmas on Vancouver island in a remote town. The local press didn't even report where they were staying. Simply put canadians tend not to be interested in private lives of public figures. An interviewer had a few local vox pops about press intrusion and the locals all replied along the lines of it being non of their business what they were up to on holiday.
Not all press and not all nations have an interest in salacious gossip like the pathetic masses in the UK. If there's no interest there's no intrusion of the media.0 -
Nope, try again. It doesn't matter what Chas gets or is worth.rjsterry said:
If I give my daughter £475 and she gets a £25 from a friend then I have given her 95% of her income (and will think I'm a bit heartless). The proportion of Charles's income from the Duchy of Cornwall is more relevant.ballysmate said:
95% is 95%rjsterry said:
That would be the difference of scale bit. It still boils down to helping your offspring beyond absolute necessity.ballysmate said:So when RJ junior is married with a sprog you expect to pay 95% of their expenses?
Have you told them the good news?
The amounts may differ but the scale is consistent.
Edited to correct the figures.
How can Harry or your daughter for that matter claim to be living by independent means if they are getting a 95% subsidy from their parents?
In the example you gave of your daughter, would you describe her as being self sufficient.
Or if you prefer, if you had to give her 2.3m to make ends meet, would yo say she was self sufficient?0 -
Why does it bother you so much Bally?
His dad is minted and he wants to spend it on his son.
I thought you were all about being able to give money to your kids without the state butting in?0 -
If only she could've foreseen how the British Tabloid Press operated? Maybe if there were clues from some previous examples of women who had married into the Royal Family to go on? Lucky for Diana, Fergie and Camilla that they escaped such close scrutiny. As it is the poor girl fell into this marriage quite by accident and then only discovered what it was like to be on the receiving end after her multi million pound fairy tale wedding and house refurbishment at tax payers expense. The wicked press Barons turned on her simp!y because she tried introducing some progressive values about the environment and educating her subjects on her favourite woke causes, thus bringing the decaying and reactionary institution into the 21st century. That she did this from the comfort of private jets, palaces and the Hollywood mansions of her billionaire friends is neither here nor there. How evil and racist of the Mail and Murdoch tabloids to round on her this way, and so too the whole of the British public who obviously lap it all up. The least we can now do is to indulge her cakeism and let her and her C̶u̶c̶k̶ husband keep their titles, security, privilege and stay on the public payroll until they've wrapped up some lucrative endorsement deals. There, there.pinno said:
Uh?! A click of a camera every where you go, every move, every action. Worried that you my be pictured doing something quite benign turned into a story riddled with bollox.surrey_commuter said:...but can not see why that would have any impact on MM as she has no reason to read it.
So it's the intrusion that is the issue.
We're all human. People and politicians in public view have to behave in a way that is well, superhuman?
Take political affairs for example, I couldn't give a monkey's as to who is shagging who as long as they are doing their job properly.0 -
As I said, he can stay or go, matters not to me. But he seems to want to take the wee wee.rick_chasey said:Why does it bother you so much Bally?
His dad is minted and he wants to spend it on his son.
I thought you were all about being able to give money to your kids without the state butting in?
If he wants to go, he should leave his titles and privilege behind.
If Chas wants to bail him out with his own dosh then it is up to Chas, but he can't call that financial independence and keep a straight face.
He may well find it a different world without his PPO and CPOs.
Time will tell.1 -
Why not? Trump did.ballysmate said:but he can't call that financial independence and keep a straight face.
You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.0 -
You mean he shouldn't get privileges and titles just because of who his family is, but he should have to work for them?ballysmate said:
As I said, he can stay or go, matters not to me. But he seems to want to take the wee wee.rick_chasey said:Why does it bother you so much Bally?
His dad is minted and he wants to spend it on his son.
I thought you were all about being able to give money to your kids without the state butting in?
If he wants to go, he should leave his titles and privilege behind.
If Chas wants to bail him out with his own dosh then it is up to Chas, but he can't call that financial independence and keep a straight face.
He may well find it a different world without his PPO and CPOs.
Time will tell.
0 -
IIRC, they want to be financially independent from the public purse, no claims of being completely financially independent.
I’d have thought the most vocal would applaud that stance.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.1 -
You not got a cat to kick?Longshot said:
Why not? Trump did.ballysmate said:but he can't call that financial independence and keep a straight face.
0 -
He has had 35 ish years to decide what he wanted. He could have said, 'Look i' ve met the love of my life and I want to settle down and do my own thing ' and that would have been it. Especially after his brother married and produced kids.kingstongraham said:
You mean he shouldn't get privileges and titles just because of who his family is, but he should have to work for them?ballysmate said:
As I said, he can stay or go, matters not to me. But he seems to want to take the wee wee.rick_chasey said:Why does it bother you so much Bally?
His dad is minted and he wants to spend it on his son.
I thought you were all about being able to give money to your kids without the state butting in?
If he wants to go, he should leave his titles and privilege behind.
If Chas wants to bail him out with his own dosh then it is up to Chas, but he can't call that financial independence and keep a straight face.
He may well find it a different world without his PPO and CPOs.
Time will tell.
Instead, he accepted his role, accepted titles, a fairytale wedding at great expense and even spent millions of public money on a "cottage' be a use he wasn't satisfied with a palace. All this in exchange for cutting a few ribbons.
Now he says thanks but no thanks, I'm off. BTW I want to keep the titles, cottage and the rest of it as I can milk that in this celebrity hungry world.
I say again, 'You cheeky bastard!'1 -
Apparently they look forward to being members of the Royal Family with financial independence. Not just from the public purse.pblakeney said:IIRC, they want to be financially independent from the public purse, no claims of being completely financially independent.
I’d have thought the most vocal would applaud that stance.0 -
Why do you care?You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.0
-
IIRC he's only suggested being independent of public money. I think it's you interpreting it as entirely independent. But in any case, beyond public funds, who gives a monkeys if he's living off his dad's estate income anyway?ballysmate said:
Nope, try again. It doesn't matter what Chas gets or is worth.rjsterry said:
If I give my daughter £475 and she gets a £25 from a friend then I have given her 95% of her income (and will think I'm a bit heartless). The proportion of Charles's income from the Duchy of Cornwall is more relevant.ballysmate said:
95% is 95%rjsterry said:
That would be the difference of scale bit. It still boils down to helping your offspring beyond absolute necessity.ballysmate said:So when RJ junior is married with a sprog you expect to pay 95% of their expenses?
Have you told them the good news?
The amounts may differ but the scale is consistent.
Edited to correct the figures.
How can Harry or your daughter for that matter claim to be living by independent means if they are getting a 95% subsidy from their parents?
In the example you gave of your daughter, would you describe her as being self sufficient.
Or if you prefer, if you had to give her 2.3m to make ends meet, would yo say she was self sufficient?
And to think you complain about Cake Stop being full of people moaning about nothing.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I think you’re just quibbling over a different definition of what being financially independent means.ballysmate said:
As I said, he can stay or go, matters not to me. But he seems to want to take the wee wee.rick_chasey said:Why does it bother you so much Bally?
His dad is minted and he wants to spend it on his son.
I thought you were all about being able to give money to your kids without the state butting in?
If he wants to go, he should leave his titles and privilege behind.
If Chas wants to bail him out with his own dosh then it is up to Chas, but he can't call that financial independence and keep a straight face.
He may well find it a different world without his PPO and CPOs.
Time will tell.
Isn’t it the entire point of the royals that you’re relying on their character to do the right thing?
You can’t chose to get rid of them if they behave you don’t like - unless you’re a republican.
He’s a royal. Within reason he can do what he likes, including rinsing his family and privilege for all it’s worth.
It’s obviously unfair but that’s the entire premise of having a monarchy.0 -
Yep, we should have an elected head of state. After all, it works for America doesn't it?0
-
Over the heads of most Bompy.bompington said:Yep, we should have an elected head of state. After all, it works for America doesn't it?
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
No bitterness or cynicism there Shorty.shortfall said:
If only she could've foreseen how the British Tabloid Press operated? Maybe if there were clues from some previous examples of women who had married into the Royal Family to go on? Lucky for Diana, Fergie and Camilla that they escaped such close scrutiny. As it is the poor girl fell into this marriage quite by accident and then only discovered what it was like to be on the receiving end after her multi million pound fairy tale wedding and house refurbishment at tax payers expense. The wicked press Barons turned on her simp!y because she tried introducing some progressive values about the environment and educating her subjects on her favourite woke causes, thus bringing the decaying and reactionary institution into the 21st century. That she did this from the comfort of private jets, palaces and the Hollywood mansions of her billionaire friends is neither here nor there. How evil and racist of the Mail and Murdoch tabloids to round on her this way, and so too the whole of the British public who obviously lap it all up. The least we can now do is to indulge her cakeism and let her and her C̶u̶c̶k̶ husband keep their titles, security, privilege and stay on the public payroll until they've wrapped up some lucrative endorsement deals. There, there.
I don't suffer envy. I do not envy their lives. I would hate to be living in a world where you are a potential terrorist target, where every public move (and if they can get access with their zoom lenses), private lives, the marauding press take pics and write columns of sh*i*t), where you are obligated into all manner of public engagements, commitments and where (on the whole), conducting a 'normal life' is practically impossible.
Imagine not being able to simply pop on your bike and go for a spin or walk down to the pub. Never mind actually courting someone.
I don't envy all those millions. As Woody Allen said "Money doesn't buy you happiness, it buys you a different form of misery". With all that money comes responsibility and liability.
As for the press; they can tear people and lives apart just to sell papers, just to get the latest 'juicy' scoop. If the Murdoch press wanted x as PM, they would do it - Blair?
Take that Odious kunt Piers Morgan, these people have 0 scruples, think often that they are above the law, bleat nonsense in defence of 'freedom of speech' when there are complaints upheld regarding them'. Total and utter hypocrites who expect public figures to live in a manner which is un achievable.
As for Harry and Megan; errare humanum est.
John Lennon: " A working class hero is something to be, they hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool".
I'm not a Royalist. I'm indifferent to them. On the one hand a President would be a better state representative leaving the PM to deal with domestic issues but on the other, the most stable societies exist under a benign monarchy.
As to their millions - we should be more concerned about the wealth and source of income of resident Oligarchs and the likes of Amazon, Starbucks, The Boots chain (moved head office to Switzerland) etc exploiting loopholes in the taxation system, leeching money out of many economies. Foreign investors buying up expensive residential houses. I could go on.
At least our Royal Family's wealth is retained within the United Kingdom.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!1 -
It's only 3 of them.Stevo_666 said:
Not if they move to Canada.pinno said:
At least our Royal Family's wealth is retained within the United Kingdom.
The ££figures they generate is eye watering before anyone jumps on the cost bandwagon:
https://www.fastcompany.com/40571590/british-royals-by-the-numbers-what-they-cost-and-bring-inseanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from Pinno but it boils down to this, half the country think MM is a woman of colour who has been singled out for appalling treatment by a racist press and media simply because.of her skin colour. The other half see her as a cynical social climber who has made an informed decision as an adult to join the Royal family with all that entails in terms of press intrusion, public service and sacrifice but who after only a couple of years has decided she only wants to keep the half of the bargain that bestows her with fabulous wealth, privilege, servants and palaces. I know where I am on the debate, and yes you're right, I'm a cynic.pinno said:
No bitterness or cynicism there Shorty.shortfall said:
If only she could've foreseen how the British Tabloid Press operated? Maybe if there were clues from some previous examples of women who had married into the Royal Family to go on? Lucky for Diana, Fergie and Camilla that they escaped such close scrutiny. As it is the poor girl fell into this marriage quite by accident and then only discovered what it was like to be on the receiving end after her multi million pound fairy tale wedding and house refurbishment at tax payers expense. The wicked press Barons turned on her simp!y because she tried introducing some progressive values about the environment and educating her subjects on her favourite woke causes, thus bringing the decaying and reactionary institution into the 21st century. That she did this from the comfort of private jets, palaces and the Hollywood mansions of her billionaire friends is neither here nor there. How evil and racist of the Mail and Murdoch tabloids to round on her this way, and so too the whole of the British public who obviously lap it all up. The least we can now do is to indulge her cakeism and let her and her C̶u̶c̶k̶ husband keep their titles, security, privilege and stay on the public payroll until they've wrapped up some lucrative endorsement deals. There, there.
I don't suffer envy. I do not envy their lives. I would hate to be living in a world where you are a potential terrorist target, where every public move (and if they can get access with their zoom lenses), private lives, the marauding press take pics and write columns of sh*i*t), where you are obligated into all manner of public engagements, commitments and where (on the whole), conducting a 'normal life' is practically impossible.
Imagine not being able to simply pop on your bike and go for a spin or walk down to the pub. Never mind actually courting someone.
I don't envy all those millions. As Woody Allen said "Money doesn't buy you happiness, it buys you a different form of misery". With all that money comes responsibility and liability.
As for the press; they can tear people and lives apart just to sell papers, just to get the latest 'juicy' scoop. If the Murdoch press wanted x as PM, they would do it - Blair?
Take that Odious kunt Piers Morgan, these people have 0 scruples, think often that they are above the law, bleat nonsense in defence of 'freedom of speech' when there are complaints upheld regarding them'. Total and utter hypocrites who expect public figures to live in a manner which is un achievable.
As for Harry and Megan; errare humanum est.
John Lennon: " A working class hero is something to be, they hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool".
I'm not a Royalist. I'm indifferent to them. On the one hand a President would be a better state representative leaving the PM to deal with domestic issues but on the other, the most stable societies exist under a benign monarchy.
As to their millions - we should be more concerned about the wealth and source of income of resident Oligarchs and the likes of Amazon, Starbucks, The Boots chain (moved head office to Switzerland) etc exploiting loopholes in the taxation system, leeching money out of many economies. Foreign investors buying up expensive residential houses. I could go on.
At least our Royal Family's wealth is retained within the United Kingdom.0 -
If that was aimed at me - I’m not that fussed either way but complaining that a royal is treated unfairly well and they are sponging off privilege kinda misses the point of royals, no?bompington said:Yep, we should have an elected head of state. After all, it works for America doesn't it?
That *is* the entire premise.0 -
This is entirely a guess. You are presenting the issue as two absurdly polarised clichés.shortfall said:
Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from Pinno but it boils down to this, half the country think MM is a woman of colour who has been singled out for appalling treatment by a racist press and media simply because.of her skin colour. The other half see her as a cynical social climber who has made an informed decision as an adult to join the Royal family with all that entails in terms of press intrusion, public service and sacrifice but who after only a couple of years has decided she only wants to keep the half of the bargain that bestows her with fabulous wealth, privilege, servants and palaces. I know where I am on the debate, and yes you're right, I'm a cynic.pinno said:
No bitterness or cynicism there Shorty.shortfall said:
If only she could've foreseen how the British Tabloid Press operated? Maybe if there were clues from some previous examples of women who had married into the Royal Family to go on? Lucky for Diana, Fergie and Camilla that they escaped such close scrutiny. As it is the poor girl fell into this marriage quite by accident and then only discovered what it was like to be on the receiving end after her multi million pound fairy tale wedding and house refurbishment at tax payers expense. The wicked press Barons turned on her simp!y because she tried introducing some progressive values about the environment and educating her subjects on her favourite woke causes, thus bringing the decaying and reactionary institution into the 21st century. That she did this from the comfort of private jets, palaces and the Hollywood mansions of her billionaire friends is neither here nor there. How evil and racist of the Mail and Murdoch tabloids to round on her this way, and so too the whole of the British public who obviously lap it all up. The least we can now do is to indulge her cakeism and let her and her C̶u̶c̶k̶ husband keep their titles, security, privilege and stay on the public payroll until they've wrapped up some lucrative endorsement deals. There, there.
I don't suffer envy. I do not envy their lives. I would hate to be living in a world where you are a potential terrorist target, where every public move (and if they can get access with their zoom lenses), private lives, the marauding press take pics and write columns of sh*i*t), where you are obligated into all manner of public engagements, commitments and where (on the whole), conducting a 'normal life' is practically impossible.
Imagine not being able to simply pop on your bike and go for a spin or walk down to the pub. Never mind actually courting someone.
I don't envy all those millions. As Woody Allen said "Money doesn't buy you happiness, it buys you a different form of misery". With all that money comes responsibility and liability.
As for the press; they can tear people and lives apart just to sell papers, just to get the latest 'juicy' scoop. If the Murdoch press wanted x as PM, they would do it - Blair?
Take that Odious kunt Piers Morgan, these people have 0 scruples, think often that they are above the law, bleat nonsense in defence of 'freedom of speech' when there are complaints upheld regarding them'. Total and utter hypocrites who expect public figures to live in a manner which is un achievable.
As for Harry and Megan; errare humanum est.
John Lennon: " A working class hero is something to be, they hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool".
I'm not a Royalist. I'm indifferent to them. On the one hand a President would be a better state representative leaving the PM to deal with domestic issues but on the other, the most stable societies exist under a benign monarchy.
As to their millions - we should be more concerned about the wealth and source of income of resident Oligarchs and the likes of Amazon, Starbucks, The Boots chain (moved head office to Switzerland) etc exploiting loopholes in the taxation system, leeching money out of many economies. Foreign investors buying up expensive residential houses. I could go on.
At least our Royal Family's wealth is retained within the United Kingdom.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The polarisation may actually be true of the (made up figure alert) 27,424 people in the country who actually give a fcuk either way.rjsterry said:
This is entirely a guess. You are presenting the issue as two absurdly polarised clichés.shortfall said:
Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from Pinno but it boils down to this, half the country think MM is a woman of colour who has been singled out for appalling treatment by a racist press and media simply because.of her skin colour. The other half see her as a cynical social climber who has made an informed decision as an adult to join the Royal family with all that entails in terms of press intrusion, public service and sacrifice but who after only a couple of years has decided she only wants to keep the half of the bargain that bestows her with fabulous wealth, privilege, servants and palaces. I know where I am on the debate, and yes you're right, I'm a cynic.0 -
I wasn't being entirely literal, although it does feel that way reading Twitter and TV and radio phone ins. I dare say millions have either no opinion or something in between.rjsterry said:
This is entirely a guess. You are presenting the issue as two absurdly polarised clichés.shortfall said:
Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from Pinno but it boils down to this, half the country think MM is a woman of colour who has been singled out for appalling treatment by a racist press and media simply because.of her skin colour. The other half see her as a cynical social climber who has made an informed decision as an adult to join the Royal family with all that entails in terms of press intrusion, public service and sacrifice but who after only a couple of years has decided she only wants to keep the half of the bargain that bestows her with fabulous wealth, privilege, servants and palaces. I know where I am on the debate, and yes you're right, I'm a cynic.pinno said:
No bitterness or cynicism there Shorty.shortfall said:
If only she could've foreseen how the British Tabloid Press operated? Maybe if there were clues from some previous examples of women who had married into the Royal Family to go on? Lucky for Diana, Fergie and Camilla that they escaped such close scrutiny. As it is the poor girl fell into this marriage quite by accident and then only discovered what it was like to be on the receiving end after her multi million pound fairy tale wedding and house refurbishment at tax payers expense. The wicked press Barons turned on her simp!y because she tried introducing some progressive values about the environment and educating her subjects on her favourite woke causes, thus bringing the decaying and reactionary institution into the 21st century. That she did this from the comfort of private jets, palaces and the Hollywood mansions of her billionaire friends is neither here nor there. How evil and racist of the Mail and Murdoch tabloids to round on her this way, and so too the whole of the British public who obviously lap it all up. The least we can now do is to indulge her cakeism and let her and her C̶u̶c̶k̶ husband keep their titles, security, privilege and stay on the public payroll until they've wrapped up some lucrative endorsement deals. There, there.
I don't suffer envy. I do not envy their lives. I would hate to be living in a world where you are a potential terrorist target, where every public move (and if they can get access with their zoom lenses), private lives, the marauding press take pics and write columns of sh*i*t), where you are obligated into all manner of public engagements, commitments and where (on the whole), conducting a 'normal life' is practically impossible.
Imagine not being able to simply pop on your bike and go for a spin or walk down to the pub. Never mind actually courting someone.
I don't envy all those millions. As Woody Allen said "Money doesn't buy you happiness, it buys you a different form of misery". With all that money comes responsibility and liability.
As for the press; they can tear people and lives apart just to sell papers, just to get the latest 'juicy' scoop. If the Murdoch press wanted x as PM, they would do it - Blair?
Take that Odious kunt Piers Morgan, these people have 0 scruples, think often that they are above the law, bleat nonsense in defence of 'freedom of speech' when there are complaints upheld regarding them'. Total and utter hypocrites who expect public figures to live in a manner which is un achievable.
As for Harry and Megan; errare humanum est.
John Lennon: " A working class hero is something to be, they hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool".
I'm not a Royalist. I'm indifferent to them. On the one hand a President would be a better state representative leaving the PM to deal with domestic issues but on the other, the most stable societies exist under a benign monarchy.
As to their millions - we should be more concerned about the wealth and source of income of resident Oligarchs and the likes of Amazon, Starbucks, The Boots chain (moved head office to Switzerland) etc exploiting loopholes in the taxation system, leeching money out of many economies. Foreign investors buying up expensive residential houses. I could go on.
At least our Royal Family's wealth is retained within the United Kingdom.0 -
Quite.hopkinb said:
The polarisation may actually be true of the (made up figure alert) 27,424 people in the country who actually give a fcuk either way.rjsterry said:
This is entirely a guess. You are presenting the issue as two absurdly polarised clichés.shortfall said:
Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from Pinno but it boils down to this, half the country think MM is a woman of colour who has been singled out for appalling treatment by a racist press and media simply because.of her skin colour. The other half see her as a cynical social climber who has made an informed decision as an adult to join the Royal family with all that entails in terms of press intrusion, public service and sacrifice but who after only a couple of years has decided she only wants to keep the half of the bargain that bestows her with fabulous wealth, privilege, servants and palaces. I know where I am on the debate, and yes you're right, I'm a cynic.0 -
Princes today, don't know they're born. He should do what the queen says, because she's got that sort of power and all the castles because of.. erm.. entirely good reasons.rick_chasey said:
If that was aimed at me - I’m not that fussed either way but complaining that a royal is treated unfairly well and they are sponging off privilege kinda misses the point of royals, no?bompington said:Yep, we should have an elected head of state. After all, it works for America doesn't it?
That *is* the entire premise.0 -
Not aimed at you or anyone - in fact I agree entirely with your assessment of what the implications of having a monarchy are, I just made a facetious observation that, I suppose, has its roots in the fact that every society has people with excessive privilege, and different ways of delaing with that have their own pros and cons.rick_chasey said:
If that was aimed at me - I’m not that fussed either way but complaining that a royal is treated unfairly well and they are sponging off privilege kinda misses the point of royals, no?bompington said:Yep, we should have an elected head of state. After all, it works for America doesn't it?
That *is* the entire premise.0 -
Paddy Power are offering 5/2 on a divorce in next 5 years.
If people want to be really cynical they may look at Harry having no independent income as a bit of a bummer for someone wanting a big payoff.
Just saying....0 -
Right, I see where you're coming from and if you still want a fight; back of Gregg's at 6pm?shortfall said:
Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from Pinno but it boils down to this, half the country think MM is a woman of colour who has been singled out for appalling treatment by a racist press and media simply because.of her skin colour. The other half see her as a cynical social climber who has made an informed decision as an adult to join the Royal family with all that entails in terms of press intrusion, public service and sacrifice but who after only a couple of years has decided she only wants to keep the half of the bargain that bestows her with fabulous wealth, privilege, servants and palaces. I know where I am on the debate, and yes you're right, I'm a cynic.
I question this whole idea of privilege. Servants, heaps of money... sounds great but is it?
No freedom. Out of touch with reality. Tons of Royal engagements - did you click on that link? 3000 Royal engagements per annum. I don't know by whom but even if you spread it out amongst the 27 (?), that's a hell of a schedule.
Not for me thanks. Yes, be a multimillionaire with a house in Monaco ~ (if that's your thing) without notoriety but would you ever know who your friends are or even if your wife/partner loves you?
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
That is about 100 engagements each, allow a couple of hours for each and it does not sound to onerous in exchange for several properties and a shedload of cashpinno said:
Right, I see where you're coming from and if you still want a fight; back of Gregg's at 6pm?shortfall said:
Not sure if you understand where I'm coming from Pinno but it boils down to this, half the country think MM is a woman of colour who has been singled out for appalling treatment by a racist press and media simply because.of her skin colour. The other half see her as a cynical social climber who has made an informed decision as an adult to join the Royal family with all that entails in terms of press intrusion, public service and sacrifice but who after only a couple of years has decided she only wants to keep the half of the bargain that bestows her with fabulous wealth, privilege, servants and palaces. I know where I am on the debate, and yes you're right, I'm a cynic.
I question this whole idea of privilege. Servants, heaps of money... sounds great but is it?
No freedom. Out of touch with reality. Tons of Royal engagements - did you click on that link? 3000 Royal engagements per annum. I don't know by whom but even if you spread it out amongst the 27 (?), that's a hell of a schedule.
Not for me thanks. Yes, be a multimillionaire with a house in Monaco ~ (if that's your thing) without notoriety but would you ever know who your friends are or even if your wife/partner loves you?
0
