Bloody council tax!

Sponsored Links
Oh haha. An idiot yank cartoonist is how you educate yourself. What a load of Bullshite this bloke talks.

Hey, it also appears he knows real stuff about the law that you're not even allowed to know!




I can't believe how off-topic this has gone over a joke. You either like it or you don't. End of. You don't need to get all nit-picky, just move on and troll something else.
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
Why don't you "own" huge tracts of land, then?
I bought my land off a guy who bought it off another guy....
who bought it off a guy who broke his land into smaller pieces...
who bought it off another guy who broke his land into smaller pieces...
who bought it off a guy who bought it off a guy...
eventually you get back to some guy in the mists of time who basically just decided a load of land was his to sell.

The royal family were among many early, lucky, land grabbers. They just happen to have survived history where others failed. *shrug*
 
The royal family were among many early, lucky, land grabbers. They just happen to have survived history where others failed. *shrug*
RUBBISH.

William the Conqueror STOLE it ALL.

He kept half himself - the Crown, gave a quarter to the Church, and a quarter to his Barons.

80% of the Barons' still "belongs" to their descendents. French names like Grosvenor, Montague for example.
 
Actually I was educating you... Don't you believe it? BBC does... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36643314

You need to start reading the W O R D S in your own links before posting.

"It comes ahead of a review of the Sovereign Grant - taxpayers' money given to the Queen by the Treasury"

Hey, I've just been over my local shop and I thought I saw a loaf of bread named after you! Unfortunately, on closer inspection, it said Thick CUT.
 
"It comes ahead of a review of the Sovereign Grant - taxpayers' money given to the Queen by the Treasury"
I think it's much easier to say the Royals pay £300M in, and get some of it back again.
But if you want to call the big pool of money 'taxpayers money' just so you can claim you personally have given the Royals some grant money (and likewise say that the Royals are taxpayers with near 100% income tax who are subsidising your own, lower tax contribution) then I guess you can. Seems like a convoluted way to divvy up the numbers, though. But maybe it suits a divvy.
 
They didn't "buy" any of it.
"Legally" doesn't count if someone passes a law stating "this is mine now".
So why did you say my chain of events was 'rubbish'? You just agreed with me that, at some point in the long past, somebody simply claimed the land for himself.
And by the long chain of events, the Royals ended up with a lot and I ended up with a little. Lucky them. So what?
 
So why did you say my chain of events was 'rubbish'? You just agreed with me that, at some point in the long past, somebody simply claimed the land for himself. And by the long chain of events, the Royals ended up with a lot and I ended up with a little. So what?
Because you said:

"The royal family were among many early, lucky, land grabbers. They just happen to have survived history where others failed."
There were no others. They (The Crown) stole it ALL.

Like someone just stating they now own your house and you now have to pay them taxes to continue living there.

If you are happy with such a system and being a serf, that is up to you.
 
"The royal family were among many early, lucky, land grabbers. They just happen to have survived history where others failed."
There were no others. They (The Crown) stole it ALL.
And who stole it before them? And before them?

If you are happy with such a system and being a serf, that is up to you.
I'm happy with what happened a thousand years ago if that's what you mean?
 
Just don't post any more propaganda that the Queen pays for anything herself.
But she does. It's her land as much as my hammer is mine, even though I inherited it, even if my great-grandfather nicked it off someone else. Eventually enough time passes that the sins of our fathers no longer warrant punishment under the present-day law and perception. No one remembers the status quo before the sin happened; the 'victims' are long gone. I think hundreds of years is more than enough. (Now, if she didn't donate all her profits to the treasury I might feel differently about the grant, but the system we have works in my favour so who am I to complain.)

(Before you ask, no I don't think reparations for the great-great-great-grandaughters of slaves, or the repatriation of relics stolen from countries centuries past, is necessary)
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
Back
Top