If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Union boss in the UK accuses a 'young woman of having babies to get state handouts'. FARK: Kate Middleton   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 77
    More: Dumbass, Duchess of Cambridge, Ed Miliband, smears, workers' rights, public engagement, press releases, Prince Harry  
•       •       •

7150 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jun 2013 at 6:49 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



77 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-18 06:08:01 PM  
I believe it is treason punishable by death to insult the royal family, is it not?
 
2013-06-18 06:50:45 PM  

Lost Thought 00: I believe it is treason punishable by death to insult the royal family, is it not?


Capital punishment no longer exists in the UK and you can make fun of all the monarchs you want because the EU has your back
 
2013-06-18 06:52:32 PM  
Nope, it's only a treason felony.  If they wanted to go that route, Treason would be levying war, providing aid and comfort to enemies, having unlawful carnal knowledge of the queen, or interfering with the Line of succession and hasn't been a capital crime since 1998.  Last execution was in 1946 for Treason.  William Joyce, and John Amery.
 
2013-06-18 06:52:40 PM  
And that concludes today's episode of "Serious Answers to whimsical questions"
 
2013-06-18 06:53:33 PM  
Hey I learned a chunk of that from King Ralph.
 
2013-06-18 06:55:11 PM  
When did Kate Middleton become a union boss?
 
2013-06-18 06:55:56 PM  
Well... isn't she?
 
2013-06-18 06:57:05 PM  

masterofnothing: And that concludes today's episode of "Serious Answers to whimsical questions"


Dammit, I missed it again?  I still have so many questions.
 
2013-06-18 06:57:29 PM  
Well, duh.
 
2013-06-18 06:57:51 PM  
Disgruntled Dave: ...having unlawful carnal knowledge of the queen...

I was all <quote voice="Austin Powers">Yeah baby!</voice>, until I remembered who the queen is.
 
2013-06-18 07:02:08 PM  
Now THAT is how you troll. Bravo, Mr. Prentis!
 
2013-06-18 07:03:04 PM  
It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.
 
2013-06-18 07:05:43 PM  
Good. More people should be pointing out the absurdity of monarchy.
 
2013-06-18 07:07:27 PM  

cman: Lost Thought 00: I believe it is treason punishable by death to insult the royal family, is it not?

Capital punishment no longer exists in the UK and you can make fun of all the monarchs you want because the EU has your back


Well that takes all the fun out of it
 
2013-06-18 07:22:12 PM  

YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.


Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?
 
2013-06-18 07:22:17 PM  
They provide a valuable service in that they give the common man someone to sing about.  God Save The Queen and all that.
 
2013-06-18 07:30:44 PM  
If she needs a deadbeat dad sometime I'm available to hit it and quit it.
 
kab
2013-06-18 07:35:01 PM  
Nothing about that factual statement deserves the dumbass tag, subby.
 
2013-06-18 07:40:43 PM  

kab: Nothing about that factual statement deserves the dumbass tag, subby.


Does she somehow get paid more now that she's knocked up?  If so, then no dumbass tag.  If not, dumbass tag deserved.
 
2013-06-18 07:55:19 PM  

eiger: Good. More people should be pointing out the absurdity of monarchy.


Says the person from Texas.

/Oh look - it's this thread again!
 
2013-06-18 08:06:42 PM  

globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?


Pretty much, but most of the mouth-breathers on either side of the Atlantic who read the Daily Wail can't wrap their brains around that.
 
2013-06-18 08:07:36 PM  

cman: Lost Thought 00: I believe it is treason punishable by death to insult the royal family, is it not?

Capital punishment no longer exists in the UK and you can make fun of all the monarchs you want because the EU has your back


Prince Phillip is a festering boil on the bottom of Jeremy Clarkson.
 
2013-06-18 08:09:15 PM  
How is he wrong?
 
2013-06-18 08:13:54 PM  

globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?


Lots more.  It's pretty-much a 90/10 split, with 90% going to the State and 10% going to the family.

On another note, when the hell does she stop being Kate Middleton and start being Kate Windsor, Lady Kate, or the Duchess of Cambridge?
 
2013-06-18 08:15:34 PM  

globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?


I'm pretty sure the state could quite easily just call that state property and leave it at that. I'm also pretty sure that if the royals decided to stop "allowing" the state to administer those lands, that would be the end of the monarchy, and good riddance.
 
2013-06-18 08:16:43 PM  
My impression is that Middleton works hard being a kind of ambassador for the UK around the globe.  Constant traveling, meetings, rallies, conferences, and just in general being a constant public face is genuinely tough work.  Considering the financial arrangements between the UK government and the royals based on mutual benefit, I don't see that she, or any of them, is getting any kind of "hand out" at all.  She works.
 
2013-06-18 08:18:58 PM  

malaktaus: globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

I'm pretty sure the state could quite easily just call that state property and leave it at that. I'm also pretty sure that if the royals decided to stop "allowing" the state to administer those lands, that would be the end of the monarchy, and good riddance.


Likely, but the Brits love their tradition.  Don't their bannisters still wear wigs and other nonsense like that?
 
2013-06-18 08:19:46 PM  
Oh please, it's the Daily Mail. It's another feeble attempt to make union bosses look bad - this time by saying they have no respect for British royalty and are willing to publicly attack a pregnant woman. They probably got the idea from all the fuss over people calling whatsherface Kardashian fat while she was pregnant.

Seriously guys, it's not a newspaper. It's what the KKK would be if they went for publishing instead of burning crosses.
 
2013-06-18 08:28:40 PM  

globalwarmingpraiser: Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?


lol. Allow?

Benevolent Misanthrope: eiger: Good. More people should be pointing out the absurdity of monarchy.

Says the person from Texas.


Texas has a monarchy?
 
2013-06-18 08:30:22 PM  

malaktaus: globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

I'm pretty sure the state could quite easily just call that state property and leave it at that. I'm also pretty sure that if the royals decided to stop "allowing" the state to administer those lands, that would be the end of the monarchy, and good riddance.


I'd love to see what would happen if the royal family just took back their lands and money, stopped giving one goddamn cent to the State other than their normal tax rate, and stepped down from all private office.  The PM's office would explode, trying to put together a department to handle all those ceremonial functions.  Taxes would certainly go up, unless the State tried to nationalize all of the family's assets, which sets a dangerous precedent indeed. (No hereditary property rights?  That affects alot more than the royals.)

Whenever I hear people talking about abolishing the monarchy and getting them of the government teat, I know for sure they have no goddamned idea what they're talking about.  The issue is far more complex than simply cutting off the Civil List and abolishing titles.
 
2013-06-18 08:33:46 PM  
Who would know better about doing things to extort people out of money better than a union?
 
2013-06-18 08:34:38 PM  

umad: globalwarmingpraiser: Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

lol. Allow?

Benevolent Misanthrope: eiger: Good. More people should be pointing out the absurdity of monarchy.

Says the person from Texas.

Texas has a monarchy?


Umm.... yeah.  He did live in DC for a while, but... yeah.
 
2013-06-18 08:34:49 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Who would know better about doing things to extort people out of money better than a union?


Bankers?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-18 08:36:36 PM  

Disgruntled Dave: Nope, it's only a treason felony.  If they wanted to go that route, Treason would be levying war, providing aid and comfort to enemies, having unlawful carnal knowledge of the queen, or interfering with the Line of succession and hasn't been a capital crime since 1998.  Last execution was in 1946 for Treason.  William Joyce, and John Amery.


Oh shiat!  I had unlawful carnal knowledge of the queen.

Am I in trouble?
 
2013-06-18 08:39:20 PM  

vpb: Disgruntled Dave: Nope, it's only a treason felony.  If they wanted to go that route, Treason would be levying war, providing aid and comfort to enemies, having unlawful carnal knowledge of the queen, or interfering with the Line of succession and hasn't been a capital crime since 1998.  Last execution was in 1946 for Treason.  William Joyce, and John Amery.

Oh shiat!  I had unlawful carnal knowledge of the queen.

Am I in trouble?


It's cool, man. She said it wasn't large enough to be legally defined as carnal knowledge.
 
2013-06-18 08:45:30 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: umad: globalwarmingpraiser: Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

lol. Allow?

Benevolent Misanthrope: eiger: Good. More people should be pointing out the absurdity of monarchy.

Says the person from Texas.

Texas has a monarchy?

Umm.... yeah.  He did live in DC for a while, but... yeah.


Either you're retarded or trolling.

/still kind of amusing, though
 
2013-06-18 08:49:23 PM  

ronaprhys: Benevolent Misanthrope: umad: globalwarmingpraiser: Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

lol. Allow?

Benevolent Misanthrope: eiger: Good. More people should be pointing out the absurdity of monarchy.

Says the person from Texas.

Texas has a monarchy?

Umm.... yeah.  He did live in DC for a while, but... yeah.

Either you're retarded or trolling.

/still kind of amusing, though


It was attempted humor.  Not my best effort, I grant you.
 
2013-06-18 08:51:57 PM  
Benevolent MisanthropeIt was attempted humor.  Not my best effort, I grant you.

As long as you allow that Illinois/Hawaii is no different, I support your efforts.
 
2013-06-18 08:56:07 PM  

ronaprhys: Benevolent MisanthropeIt was attempted humor.  Not my best effort, I grant you.

As long as you allow that Illinois/Hawaii is no different, I support your efforts.


LOL - when Obama owns a huge business and buys the Cubs, I'll consider it.
 
2013-06-18 08:57:41 PM  

ronaprhys: malaktaus: globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

I'm pretty sure the state could quite easily just call that state property and leave it at that. I'm also pretty sure that if the royals decided to stop "allowing" the state to administer those lands, that would be the end of the monarchy, and good riddance.

Likely, but the Brits love their tradition.  Don't their bannisters still wear wigs and other nonsense like that?



No, no, no.  Their Lannisters wear armor and furs.  Their bannisters don't wear anything but furniture polish and seasonal wreaths.
 
2013-06-18 09:06:28 PM  

globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?


No.

The monarchists claim that, but those are in reality state lands, and when the monarchy is eventually abolished, those properties will all be reverted to the government.

The royals do not actually own anything on their own, but they'll be fine, Britain has a nice welfare system.  They'll be entitled to council housing and their equivalent of food stamps.  Some of them will get military pensions as well.
 
2013-06-18 09:08:08 PM  

YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.


I would have thought so too,
but did you see the comments in the Daily Fail? If the schtick aint broke don't fix it.
 
2013-06-18 09:12:02 PM  

OtherLittleGuy: cman: Lost Thought 00: I believe it is treason punishable by death to insult the royal family, is it not?

Capital punishment no longer exists in the UK and you can make fun of all the monarchs you want because the EU has your back

Prince Phillip is a festering boil on the bottom of Jeremy Clarkson.


Good sir, that is an insult to Jezza. How dare you.

/Fisticuffs...dawn...honour...&c.
//New series of Top Gear (UK--the good one)
///Starts 8 July in the colonies
 
2013-06-18 09:12:53 PM  

DarkVader: globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

No.

The monarchists claim that, but those are in reality state lands, and when the monarchy is eventually abolished, those properties will all be reverted to the government.

The royals do not actually own anything on their own, but they'll be fine, Britain has a nice welfare system.  They'll be entitled to council housing and their equivalent of food stamps.  Some of them will get military pensions as well.


LOL

I'd be interested to see how the courts rule on that.  The idea of the family's private lands and assets has been well-established for many years, and is part of the agreements regarding the Civil List.  If the State were to nationalize all their private property as State Lands, that would set a precedent of the State being able to just take anyone's property, because they said so.  That would be a dangerous thing, indeed, and I'm sure even the dumbest git could tell that would not be good for them any more than for the royals.

The royals don't own everything that's called Crown Land - but they still own a helluva great deal of property.  It's that property that they give 90% of the revenues to the State.  State-owned properties do not get figured into the equation.
 
2013-06-18 09:17:29 PM  
datbum.jpg
 
2013-06-18 09:34:03 PM  

ronaprhys: Benevolent MisanthropeIt was attempted humor.  Not my best effort, I grant you.

As long as you allow that Illinois/Hawaii is no different, I support your efforts.


Hey, Hawaii is a monarchy, which just happens to be under foreign occupation.
 
2013-06-18 09:35:08 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: DarkVader: globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

No.

The monarchists claim that, but those are in reality state lands, and when the monarchy is eventually abolished, those properties will all be reverted to the government.

The royals do not actually own anything on their own, but they'll be fine, Britain has a nice welfare system.  They'll be entitled to council housing and their equivalent of food stamps.  Some of them will get military pensions as well.

LOL

I'd be interested to see how the courts rule on that.  The idea of the family's private lands and assets has been well-established for many years, and is part of the agreements regarding the Civil List.  If the State were to nationalize all their private property as State Lands, that would set a precedent of the State being able to just take anyone's property, because they said so.  That would be a dangerous thing, indeed, and I'm sure even the dumbest git could tell that would not be good for them any more than for the royals.

The royals don't own everything that's called Crown Land - but they still own a helluva great deal of property.  It's that property that they give 90% of the revenues to the State.  State-owned properties do not get figured into the equation.


The courts will rule however the Abolishment of Royalty Act tells them to rule, and that act, when it is eventually passed, will certainly not leave any holdings privately in their hands.  And no, it will have no bearing on anyone's private property, since the royal holdings are in no way private property in the first place, they were all seized either by force or by forfeiture - in other words, the state just took the property many years ago because they said so, and gave it to the crown.
 
2013-06-18 09:46:15 PM  

DarkVader: Benevolent Misanthrope: DarkVader: globalwarmingpraiser: YoOjo: It's a long-standing joke in the UK that the Royals are unemployed and living off the state, this guy needs to get a new writer for his schtick, accurate it may be but he still needs to improve on it.

Doesn't the lands they allow the state to administer earn more money than they are paid including perks?

No.

The monarchists claim that, but those are in reality state lands, and when the monarchy is eventually abolished, those properties will all be reverted to the government.

The royals do not actually own anything on their own, but they'll be fine, Britain has a nice welfare system.  They'll be entitled to council housing and their equivalent of food stamps.  Some of them will get military pensions as well.

LOL

I'd be interested to see how the courts rule on that.  The idea of the family's private lands and assets has been well-established for many years, and is part of the agreements regarding the Civil List.  If the State were to nationalize all their private property as State Lands, that would set a precedent of the State being able to just take anyone's property, because they said so.  That would be a dangerous thing, indeed, and I'm sure even the dumbest git could tell that would not be good for them any more than for the royals.

The royals don't own everything that's called Crown Land - but they still own a helluva great deal of property.  It's that property that they give 90% of the revenues to the State.  State-owned properties do not get figured into the equation.

The courts will rule however the Abolishment of Royalty Act tells them to rule, and that act, when it is eventually passed, will certainly not leave any holdings privately in their hands.  And no, it will have no bearing on anyone's private property, since the royal holdings are in no way private property in the first place, they were all seized either by force or by forfeiture - in other words, the state just took the property many years ago because they said so, and gave it to the crown.


American says /what/
 
2013-06-18 09:51:44 PM  

Summercat: American says /what/


Canadian.  She's Queen of Canada, too.


DarkVader: The courts will rule however the Abolishment of Royalty Act tells them to rule, and that act, when it is eventually passed, will certainly not leave any holdings privately in their hands. And no, it will have no bearing on anyone's private property, since the royal holdings are in no way private property in the first place, they were all seized either by force or by forfeiture - in other words, the state just took the property many years ago because they said so, and gave it to the crown.


So, all the lands of families that gained that land through wars with other families centuries ago are to be forfeit to the state?  Wow.  Glad I live somewhere else, if that's what you guys consider "just".  Go back far enough in any trail of ownership, and you'll see every inch of land in England was at some point gained through war.
 
2013-06-18 09:59:59 PM  
They are the best paid welfare recipients in the world.
 
Displayed 50 of 77 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report