This documentary

The place to discuss anything that isn't football or LUFC
User avatar
Selby White
LUFCTALK Moderator
Posts: 17206
Joined: 25 Mar 2012, 11:32

Re: This documentary

Post by Selby White »

rigger wrote:
Selby White wrote: Don't trust her at all, she is using him for her own publicity bandwagon, she wants to be centre of attention and could never be that as a royal so she is using Harry.

Watch this space it will end in divorce and Harry will creep back in the back door.
I'd put money on it.
That's pure speculation because you can't possibly know that.
Why do you feel that way anyway ??
Of course its speculation, based on my personal opinion which in turn is based on my judgement of their personality types.
Of course time will prove me right or wrong.

As i have said would happily put money on it.
Keep your face always toward the sunshine - and shadows will fall behind you.
User avatar
Selby White
LUFCTALK Moderator
Posts: 17206
Joined: 25 Mar 2012, 11:32

Re: This documentary

Post by Selby White »

rigger wrote:
Selby White wrote: From the countries point of view I think having a royal family is a good thing and believe the evidence that it generates significantly more for the economy than it costs.
Again, nobody knows for certain if that's true as they've always been there - here's a report with a different outlook :
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/busi ... 45436.html

The report talks of business and income that may well be displaced by something like a royal wedding or jubilee. In the same way thousands will visit a country for a World Cup, thousands will also stay away and has been demonstrated by various studies, hosting something like that or an Olympic Games is typically a break-even or negligible difference scenario economically : the true gain is the feelgood factor in politics. Wilson said "England only ever win The World Cup under a Labour government" didn't he ?

Anyway the last para sums it up for me :
In the end, the question of whether the Royal Family is worth it, or not, is probably less a financial question than a political, moral and aesthetic one.
I think you all know where I stand on that one .. it's not the middle ages, after all.
Well based on facts the Crown estate raises somewhere between 330mill & 600mill depending on what you read which is all paid into the treasury.
The Queen is then paid 25% of the profits called a Sovereign grant .
That is how it works and has done since 2011.

The Queen as other income sources based on privately owned estates, visitors, farmers paying rent, etc.
She Pays Income Tax on these income sources, not a clue how much that comes to.

Other people mainly in the tourist industry (and media) such as hotels, cafes, restaurants, souvenir shops, etc make a part of their income based because we have a royal family, Palaces, Stately Homes, Historical Parades, etc.

Don't get me wrong I think the Royal Family has too many members, to me its the Queen/King along with direct heirs to the throne.

The "Middle ages" thing is totally wrong I don't see the Queen/King role anything like that we now have a Parliament that now runs the country. Back then they were arguably the best fighter leading the armies into battle. But I'll stop on that one as how that should be run different is a whole new subject.

Its a Head of State that I see purely as a figure head, that is part of our history and heritage.
No different to other ethnic groups trying to keep their heritage alive by keeping their own languages, religions, traditions, etc.
Keep your face always toward the sunshine - and shadows will fall behind you.
Deleted User 728

Re: This documentary

Post by Deleted User 728 »

I'm biting my tongue here.

I'm actually not going to get into a big argument about this because I know I won't change anybody's minds about the royals.
To compare them to "ethnic .. traditions" is wrong : who else but the monarchy stole land from the people ? It's time to give it back.
Also, all the arguments in the world about the financial "benefits" are theoretical. It's like trying to measure how beneficial advertising and marketing is : you simply cannot evaluate something that is, by nature, immeasurable. You cannot say if the monarchy has a net worth until it's no longer there. There's never been a situation when they're not there so we won't know until we become a republic.

There are darker elements of this thread that I really don't like though and I have to address them somewhat : the thing about Meghan.
None of you know her, but it sounds like you want them to fail as a couple. Why is that ?
Why would you wish that on anyone, especially on an institution you hold in such high esteem ??

I don't like that. Without a reason it's too Daily Mail-ish for me to contemplate ..
User avatar
Selby White
LUFCTALK Moderator
Posts: 17206
Joined: 25 Mar 2012, 11:32

Re: This documentary

Post by Selby White »

rigger wrote:I'm biting my tongue here.

I'm actually not going to get into a big argument about this because I know I won't change anybody's minds about the royals.
To compare them to "ethnic .. traditions" is wrong : who else but the monarchy stole land from the people ? It's time to give it back.
Also, all the arguments in the world about the financial "benefits" are theoretical. It's like trying to measure how beneficial advertising and marketing is : you simply cannot evaluate something that is, by nature, immeasurable. You cannot say if the monarchy has a net worth until it's no longer there. There's never been a situation when they're not there so we won't know until we become a republic.

There are darker elements of this thread that I really don't like though and I have to address them somewhat : the thing about Meghan.
None of you know her, but it sounds like you want them to fail as a couple. Why is that ?
Why would you wish that on anyone, especially on an institution you hold in such high esteem ??

I don't like that. Without a reason it's too Daily Mail-ish for me to contemplate ..
The last sentence says it all, sly insult (daily mailish :crazy:) rather than fact, for the record I don't read any papers just deal with facts.

Ironic you start by saying you don't want to argue (I thought it was debate with differing opinions), then include questions.

It's all yours on here now, I'll complete the games I run but will comment no further.
Keep your face always toward the sunshine - and shadows will fall behind you.
Saxon
Allan Clarke's tissue supplier
Posts: 494
Joined: 13 Jun 2020, 15:03

Re: This documentary

Post by Saxon »

No need to see the interview, all in the video.
In the wrong thread, but get a dose of this classic original, maybe splains why or why or why or why, from the family group breakup Queen.
Deleted User 728

Re: This documentary

Post by Deleted User 728 »

Selby White wrote:
rigger wrote:I'm biting my tongue here.

I'm actually not going to get into a big argument about this because I know I won't change anybody's minds about the royals.
To compare them to "ethnic .. traditions" is wrong : who else but the monarchy stole land from the people ? It's time to give it back.
Also, all the arguments in the world about the financial "benefits" are theoretical. It's like trying to measure how beneficial advertising and marketing is : you simply cannot evaluate something that is, by nature, immeasurable. You cannot say if the monarchy has a net worth until it's no longer there. There's never been a situation when they're not there so we won't know until we become a republic.

There are darker elements of this thread that I really don't like though and I have to address them somewhat : the thing about Meghan.
None of you know her, but it sounds like you want them to fail as a couple. Why is that ?
Why would you wish that on anyone, especially on an institution you hold in such high esteem ??

I don't like that. Without a reason it's too Daily Mail-ish for me to contemplate ..
The last sentence says it all, sly insult (daily mailish :crazy:) rather than fact, for the record I don't read any papers just deal with facts.

Ironic you start by saying you don't want to argue (I thought it was debate with differing opinions), then include questions.

It's all yours on here now, I'll complete the games I run but will comment no further.

I'll respond to this later.
Gotta go to work.
Deleted User 728

Re: This documentary

Post by Deleted User 728 »

Selby White wrote:Ironic you start by saying you don't want to argue (I thought it was debate with differing opinions), then include questions.

Well, that's what happens with an emotive topic like this.
You know me well enough to know that I won't back down on something I believe strongly in.

Selby White wrote:The last sentence says it all, sly insult (daily mailish :crazy:) rather than fact, for the record I don't read any papers just deal with facts.
It's not a sly insult at all : it's me saying that without further expansion on what you meant about Meghan and Harry your inference can be taken to be racist in nature. That's why I asked you to explain what you meant because I don't think you are.

Selby White wrote:It's all yours on here now, I'll complete the games I run but will comment no further.
I sincerely hope not.
We're debating a hot topic on a discussion forum. This is what we do.





Right, now everyone take a deep breath .. believe me, I've taken several before sitting down to answer this in earnest.
This is not a personal attack on either SW or John, both of whom I have a lot of respect for : I know you're both intelligent, generous, kind and lovely men. Gentlemen, in fact.
It's very difficult to dissect this kind of thing without causing personal offence, but believe me that's not my intention even if some of the things I'm going to say (and have said already) make difficult reading.
What I found alarming was this statement about Harry and Meghan :
Of course its speculation, based on my personal opinion which in turn is based on my judgement of their personality types.

Now, by your own admission it's speculation, but how can you possibly know what their personality types are ?
Harry : royal, once third in line to the throne, now fifth I think ? Blokey bloke, armed services, private schooling, rugger, polo, that sort of thing, probably drinks beer through a team-mate's sock after the game.
Or, Harry : grew up in a broken marriage, mother tragically died while he was still very young, sent away to school, distant father, older step-mother who seems to have always been in the background, highly sensitive yet a bit of a lad - perhaps over-compensating ? - yet always had a looser rein (pun intended) than older brother due to less responsibility to the nation.
Meghan : successful TV actress with a range of endorsements, an iconic figure known for her poise, beauty and intelligence, retains the common touch with her legion of fans from every corner of the globe, now living a real life fairy-tale, marrying her very own prince charming.
Or, Meghan : mixed-race broken home starlet who made it big in a TV soap who was probably only cast in the role because they needed to up the quota.

Or were you thinking one of the 16 personality types in a Myers-Briggs test ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers%E2% ... _Indicator
I've done them a few times for organisations I've worked for and in the US several companies and corporations base part of their recruitment strategy on the results. If you don't know what they are, you answer a series of seemingly random questions and at the end you are presented with the results which align into four categories : Introversion/Extraversion, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, Judging/Perceiving. Each person is said to have one preferred quality from each category, producing 16 unique types. Check the Wiki link for more.

I think trying to guess what "type" of personality either of them have is really hard and the problem that arises from such casual speculation is that it'll only pick up on one or maybe two things that may have been picked up from a news story or social media or a soundbite from an interview or from some "royal expert" on TV doing a talking head on Channel 5.

So I struggle to see how you can make such a judgment and I'm even more staggered with the speculation that their marriage won't last.
If anything, I would expect it to go the distance precisely BECAUSE of what happened with Charles and Diana : Harry knows what a broken marriage looks like because he was in that household. He'll know the signs. He'll know what not to say and what not to do.
Likewise Meghan who, I understand, doesn't speak to her own father ? I don't know much about her but that's the inference I've taken from whatever guff I've absorbed from just being alive in the last few years.

If I don't speak up and say "You can't say that, mate !" then I'm living a lie.
This is a public forum and we have certain standards and I don't like to let things like that slide without challenging them because anyone reading this thread could take that very darkest meaning from what's been said in here and assume that it's acceptable to say things like that.
It's not acceptable to me, that's why I asked for more of an explanation.

Can everyone see where I am with this ?
Why these things worry me ?

Let's take another example : sexism.
Keys and Gray .. "hangin' out the back of it .." that horror show that was filmed candidly .. you know the one.
Oh, but it was acceptable back then.
Well, it may well have been but the reason feminism exists is to stop that kind of language, that kind of treatment, that kind of attitude "she loves it really, don't you darlin' ?" *squeeze*
No, actually, she doesn't. It's not acceptable. If it was your daughter you'd punch them both on the nose and they wouldn't sue you because you'd have them bang to rights.
These days, because of dinosaurs like Keys and Gray and Harvey Weinstein, it's not acceptable, no matter whose daughter, mother, sister, nan, niece it is .. it's wrong, end of.
What's almost worse is the other men watching and cringeing inside but not doing anything about it.

That's why I won't just sit here when vague statements are made without any substance.


I'd like to reiterate that I am not accusing anyone of racism on this occasion but I am strongly holding up my hand to say "Woah ! You can't just say something like that .. "
I hope I've done enough to explain why in what I've said above.
Sorry for the ramble but this is very important to me and, I think, to the ethos of this board as a welcoming, family-friendly fan forum.
Deleted User 2747

Re: This documentary

Post by Deleted User 2747 »

Thanks for this reply rigger. I support you words and your sentiment.

I admit, I generally tell myself 'don't go there' in such debates on here these days, but I have to admit I was quite alarmed at some of the takes on this subject, that I read on here.

Why are good people on here taking part in the degradation of two other good people??? Why?

The misogyny and often racism aimed at Meghan Markle in this country is shameful. And Harry deserves to be allowed to be happy as someone who has been quite open about his personal struggles.
I am glad they had the courage to leave and make their own life away from here.

Who are we all to judge these people ?
How do we call our country Great Britain when there is so much intolerance towards others?

We teach our children to be kind and to care, we should show them the way.
User avatar
SiMamu
LUFCTALK Moderator
Posts: 10996
Joined: 27 Mar 2012, 14:07

Re: This documentary

Post by SiMamu »

Frankie wrote:Thanks for this reply rigger. I support you words and your sentiment.

I admit, I generally tell myself 'don't go there' in such debates on here these days, but I have to admit I was quite alarmed at some of the takes on this subject, that I read on here.

Why are good people on here taking part in the degradation of two other good people??? Why?

The misogyny and often racism aimed at Meghan Markle in this country is shameful. And Harry deserves to be allowed to be happy as someone who has been quite open about his personal struggles.
I am glad they had the courage to leave and make their own life away from here.

Who are we all to judge these people ?
How do we call our country Great Britain when there is so much intolerance towards others?

We teach our children to be kind and to care, we should show them the way.
Tbf the 'Great' part is founded in misguided ideals of superiority, born from colonialism, and therefore racism.
"A man with new ideas is a madman. Until his ideas triumph."
Sniffer
Arthur Fairclough's milliner
Posts: 2997
Joined: 17 Feb 2013, 17:03

Re: This documentary

Post by Sniffer »

SiMamu wrote:
Frankie wrote:Thanks for this reply rigger. I support you words and your sentiment.

I admit, I generally tell myself 'don't go there' in such debates on here these days, but I have to admit I was quite alarmed at some of the takes on this subject, that I read on here.

Why are good people on here taking part in the degradation of two other good people??? Why?

The misogyny and often racism aimed at Meghan Markle in this country is shameful. And Harry deserves to be allowed to be happy as someone who has been quite open about his personal struggles.
I am glad they had the courage to leave and make their own life away from here.

Who are we all to judge these people ?
How do we call our country Great Britain when there is so much intolerance towards others?

We teach our children to be kind and to care, we should show them the way.
Tbf the 'Great' part is founded in misguided ideals of superiority, born from colonialism, and therefore racism.
The land mass that contains most of England, Wales and Scotland is the largest of the British Isles, hence Great.
Locked