Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 22.07.2013, 13:47
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
And yet it seems like you've spent your morning doing not much but commenting on this thread...don't you have something more important to spend your time on than this?

Slow monday. Plus, im very good at multitasking.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 22.07.2013, 13:51
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 13,037
Groaned at 1,109 Times in 760 Posts
Thanked 18,689 Times in 7,252 Posts
Chuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
So...in your mind, valuing money excludes you from giving to charity? Cant say im too surprised. The way i see it, 300 spent feeding a family in desperate need is better then spending 300 on a shiny new ipad, when my old one is perfectly fine. Thats what i'd want to impart to my kids. On this, though, i think we will have to agree to disagree.
Prince William and Prince Charles do tons for charity... I thought we were talking (or to be exact: you were bitching) about the Royals here.

Also just out of interest, where do you come from, are you British?
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 22.07.2013, 13:56
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Evian
Posts: 170
Groaned at 3 Times in 3 Posts
Thanked 219 Times in 98 Posts
Lemanglaise is considered knowledgeableLemanglaise is considered knowledgeableLemanglaise is considered knowledgeable
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
...which is in no way connected to royalties, I presume?
British history, even when directly related to a 'royal' family and 'aristocracy', is well-enough established not to need an irrelevant (in my view) and mis-named 'aristocracy' to attract tourists. Or have any inherent value in itself.

And yes, some characters who fill the media are easy to criticise. But they're in the media for a reason other than just existing.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 22.07.2013, 13:57
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
Prince William and Prince Charles do tons for charity... I thought we were talking (or to be exact: you were bitching) about the Royals here.

Also just out of interest, where do you come from, are you British?

Now now, lets be civil. No need to bring female canines into it. expected though, from a man (or woman?) named 'richdog'. The general theme is of the royals, but that particular string of dialogue was on a tangent. I believe it started when i commented that perhaps it wouldnt be that bad if more people experienced living close to poverty. This was in response to somebody elses comment that rich people should be forced to live with poor people. You then engaged in reductio ad abserdum and we got to this point. Do keep up.

Yes, im British. From Lancashire. Not quite sure why that matters though. Would my opinion be worth less if i was, say, bangladeshi? Oh, hang on, is that part of the commonwealth? I cant remember, Damn.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank J2488 for this useful post:
  #85  
Old 22.07.2013, 13:58
Connor MacLeod's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: here
Posts: 778
Groaned at 91 Times in 60 Posts
Thanked 2,485 Times in 821 Posts
Connor MacLeod has a reputation beyond reputeConnor MacLeod has a reputation beyond reputeConnor MacLeod has a reputation beyond reputeConnor MacLeod has a reputation beyond reputeConnor MacLeod has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
British history, even when directly related to a 'royal' family and 'aristocracy', is well-enough established not to need an irrelevant (in my view) and mis-named 'aristocracy' to attract tourists. Or have any inherent value in itself.

And yes, some characters who fill the media are easy to criticise. But they're in the media for a reason other than just existing.
That does not make any sense at all.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:03
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 13,037
Groaned at 1,109 Times in 760 Posts
Thanked 18,689 Times in 7,252 Posts
Chuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
Now now, lets be civil. No need to bring female canines into it. expected though, from a man (or woman?) named 'richdog'. The general theme is of the royals, but that particular string of dialogue was on a tangent. I believe it started when i commented that perhaps it wouldnt be that bad if more people experienced living close to poverty. This was in response to somebody elses comment that rich people should be forced to live with poor people. You then engaged in reductio ad abserdum and we got to this point. Do keep up.

Yes, im British. From Lancashire. Not quite sure why that matters though. Would my opinion be worth less if i was, say, bangladeshi? Oh, hang on, is that part of the commonwealth? I cant remember, Damn.
Well you said "shucks", so I just wondered if you were American. And yes, it would have obviously made a difference.

And lets face it, the only absurd arguments in this thread have come from your side, with the opening post of: "the royals sponging off of our taxes", followed by the "celebrating theyre not impotent", which set the tone for the rest of the ranty rubbish you wrote.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank Chuff for this useful post:
  #87  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:10
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,713
Groaned at 521 Times in 338 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
Well you said "shucks", so I just wondered if you were American. And yes, it would have obviously made a difference.

And lets face it, the only absurd arguments in this thread have come from your side, with the opening post of: "the royals sponging off of our taxes", followed by the "celebrating theyre not impotent", which set the tone for the rest of the ranty rubbish you wrote.
I have to keep dipping in here because some of the comments baffle me.

I think you have made some equally absurd arguments though, just depends on the beliefs and opinions of those listening.

You wrote for example about " increasing the lineage and longevity aforementioned culturally significant, worldwide famous, and revenue-generating royal family".

What is beneficial about any of this? Except revenue generating, which is easily replaced, with less taking and less perverse grandeur.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:17
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Formerly in Neuchatel
Posts: 2,997
Groaned at 231 Times in 158 Posts
Thanked 5,672 Times in 2,110 Posts
porsch1909 has a reputation beyond reputeporsch1909 has a reputation beyond reputeporsch1909 has a reputation beyond reputeporsch1909 has a reputation beyond reputeporsch1909 has a reputation beyond reputeporsch1909 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
I have to keep dipping in here because some of the comments baffle me.

I think you have made some equally absurd arguments though, just depends on the beliefs and opinions of those listening.

You wrote for example about " increasing the lineage and longevity aforementioned culturally significant, worldwide famous, and revenue-generating royal family".

What is beneficial about any of this? Except revenue generating, which is easily replaced, with less taking and less perverse grandeur.
How would you replace the Royal family's revenue generation?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank porsch1909 for this useful post:
  #89  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:20
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 13,037
Groaned at 1,109 Times in 760 Posts
Thanked 18,689 Times in 7,252 Posts
Chuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
I have to keep dipping in here because some of the comments baffle me.

I think you have made some equally absurd arguments though, just depends on the beliefs and opinions of those listening.

You wrote for example about " increasing the lineage and longevity aforementioned culturally significant, worldwide famous, and revenue-generating royal family".

What is beneficial about any of this? Except revenue generating, which is easily replaced, with less taking and less perverse grandeur.
With all due respect JBZ, I am not going to waste time replying in any depth to your equally ridiculous arguments. Think about what I wrote that you quoted, and I am sure how you can follow the (very, very obvious) line of logic posed by your own question.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:22
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,713
Groaned at 521 Times in 338 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
With all due respect JBZ, I am not going to waste time replying in any depth to your equally ridiculous arguments. Think about what I wrote that you quoted, and I am sure how you can follow the (very, very obvious) line of logic.
That sounds like you realize there is no real worth, but ingrained somewhere is your love for the royals, because its what the public like to do and you do not have an answer.

Fair enough. If I just say your arguments are ridiculous then it must be true too.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:25
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 13,037
Groaned at 1,109 Times in 760 Posts
Thanked 18,689 Times in 7,252 Posts
Chuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
That sounds like you realize there is no real worth, but ingrained somewhere is your love for the royals, because its what the public like to do and you do not have an answer.

Fair enough. If I just say your arguments are ridiculous then it must be true too.
No, it's because you are asking something that is to me and it seems 95% of the other people in the thread completely obvious, and from previous experience reading your endlessly looping posts I just don't value your opinions enough to see them as worth investing time in countering. Sorry.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:26
cannut's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: canada
Posts: 6,874
Groaned at 180 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 6,137 Times in 3,367 Posts
cannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

I am switching to a new TV provider today ,So no TV . Keep me informed please
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:29
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
Well you said "shucks", so I just wondered if you were American. And yes, it would have obviously made a difference.

And lets face it, the only absurd arguments in this thread have come from your side, with the opening post of: "the royals sponging off of our taxes", followed by the "celebrating theyre not impotent", which set the tone for the rest of the ranty rubbish you wrote.
-so...If i was, say, bangladeshi, i shouldnt be allowed to have an opinion, and consequently, should be banned from expressing said opinion on the internet?

-A point I conceded in the following post, no? I admitted it was a poor comment to make.

-The impotent comment was slightly toungue in cheek, but it raises a point...had the royal couple been impotent, and had to resort to adoption, would said adopted baby be afforded all the same rights as a royal baby? would said adopted baby be king or queen one day? Would people be just as enamoured with an adopted royal baby? I think not.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:29
cannut's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: canada
Posts: 6,874
Groaned at 180 Times in 140 Posts
Thanked 6,137 Times in 3,367 Posts
cannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond reputecannut has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
No, it's because you are asking something that is to me and it seems 95% of the other people in the thread completely obvious, and from previous experience reading your endlessly looping posts I just don't value your opinions enough to see them as worth investing time in countering. Sorry.

Gee Poor JBZ86 has been told off again
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:30
Caviarchips's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Basel Stadt
Posts: 3,992
Groaned at 104 Times in 80 Posts
Thanked 6,677 Times in 2,388 Posts
Caviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

There is not a SINGLE piece of data to show that the current existence of the Royal Family generate any revenue at all. They are a net cost to the UK and huge amounts of capital in the form of land and buildings are also owned by them instead of the state.

And before anybody posts some specious tourism argument, it is at best a tenuous argument to suggest that tourists come to England (sic) ONLY because there is a current resident of Windsor Castle that would not also come if it was purely a monument to past Royals.

Similarly, there is a law of diminishing returns here which says that if there was an economic argument to having a monarch (which there isn't) that the ridiculous excesses of things like the Duchy of Cornwall and the estate of the Duke of Westminster, plus the scale of the Royal List and who gets a share of the (Battenburg) cake doesn't add any value that having one single figurehead

So be a supporter or not - doesn't bother me - but unless you can show me a piece of data which proves that a tourist would go to Paris instead of London if there was no current queen, then stop quoting the regurgitated "revenue generating" line which simply isn't true
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank Caviarchips for this useful post:
  #96  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:33
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Zug
Posts: 69
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 44 Times in 26 Posts
Trueblue_2 has no particular reputation at present
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

"For the royal watchers and baby lovers out there"
The OP opened the thread with this.

J2488 since this is obviously not your bag how about starting your own one 'Orf with their Heads" then you can rejoice in everything you hate about the institution of monarchy and the traditions of the UK.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Trueblue_2 for this useful post:
  #97  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:33
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,713
Groaned at 521 Times in 338 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
No, it's because you are asking something that is to me and it seems 95% of the other people in the thread completely obvious, and from previous experience reading your endlessly looping posts I just don't value your opinions enough to see them as worth investing time in countering. Sorry.
Well you are championing something, that to me and it seems 99% of the people I am affiliated with in real life or social media, do not give a shit about and see the relevance in the points that have been made that you feel ridiculous.

95% of the people on this thread, without counting, I would guess to be 20 people. Not very much at all. So, sorry, it does not stop me in my tracks and make me go, oh yeah preserving the royals in this modern day is soooooooooooo cool and great. It's not, it is perverse when you actually sit down and think about it.

I get that experience of other threads might make you tentative, but the point in those threads is relevant here. I am not often proved wrong, and you have yet to do that.
__________________
Small minds are concerned with the extraordinary, great minds with the ordinary, Blaise Pascal
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank JBZ86 for this useful post:
  #98  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:35
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,713
Groaned at 521 Times in 338 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
Gee Poor JBZ86 has been told off again
Not told off exactly, someone has tried to be dismissive when they struggle to make their point, as the point they can not make.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:37
Homer's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Berner Oberland
Posts: 700
Groaned at 10 Times in 9 Posts
Thanked 797 Times in 361 Posts
Homer has a reputation beyond reputeHomer has a reputation beyond reputeHomer has a reputation beyond reputeHomer has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post

And before anybody posts some specious tourism argument, it is at best a tenuous argument to suggest that tourists come to England (sic) ONLY because there is a current resident of Windsor Castle that would not also come if it was purely a monument to past Royals.
+1

I must admit that I find it amusing how the swiss react to such things. My wife and her three sisters have been iMessaging all lunchtime regarding possible baby names and I (a brit) am just a little perplexed by the interest.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 22.07.2013, 14:38
JBZ86's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Zurich and various mountains
Posts: 3,713
Groaned at 521 Times in 338 Posts
Thanked 4,258 Times in 1,944 Posts
JBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond reputeJBZ86 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Kate (the Duchess of Cambridge) has gone into labour.

Quote:
View Post
There is not a SINGLE piece of data to show that the current existence of the Royal Family generate any revenue at all. They are a net cost to the UK and huge amounts of capital in the form of land and buildings are also owned by them instead of the state.

And before anybody posts some specious tourism argument, it is at best a tenuous argument to suggest that tourists come to England (sic) ONLY because there is a current resident of Windsor Castle that would not also come if it was purely a monument to past Royals.

Similarly, there is a law of diminishing returns here which says that if there was an economic argument to having a monarch (which there isn't) that the ridiculous excesses of things like the Duchy of Cornwall and the estate of the Duke of Westminster, plus the scale of the Royal List and who gets a share of the (Battenburg) cake doesn't add any value that having one single figurehead

So be a supporter or not - doesn't bother me - but unless you can show me a piece of data which proves that a tourist would go to Paris instead of London if there was no current queen, then stop quoting the regurgitated "revenue generating" line which simply isn't true
Happy to do so Sir.

Would you like me to include the additional security costs etc, that are often excluded in these statistical manipulated reports to brainwash the public and are of course an unnecessary expenditure for the taxpayer, or shall I keep them out so it really does look like we're getting a bang for our buck?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank JBZ86 for this useful post:
Reply

Tags
baby, labour, royal




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The EF has turned into an online market place MacGregor's Daughter Forum support 100 14.01.2013 17:24
Duchess of Cambridge hoax call nurse found dead rob1 International affairs/politics 128 12.12.2012 22:41
The world has gone mad...(Well just Somali militants) Upthehatters2008 Football/sports 20 14.06.2010 14:27
Duchess of Cornwall (captions pls) swissotter Jokes/funnies 19 30.11.2009 22:30
Where has the sunshine gone ??? katie Complaints corner 39 05.09.2006 20:47


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:59.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0