Thursday, July 18, 2013

The prince, the princesses and the newspaper

The newest entrant into the Australian online media is The Guardian. It is the English newspaper I usually look at if I feel the need to find out some detail about what is happening there. Formerly The Manchester Guardian, it carries forward the politics of Manchester, which happily kind of match my own. It has a rich benefactor who is prepared to lose money just for the pleasure of producing such a fine newspaper. If it continues to be free online, it may well spell the demise of Melbourne's The Age which I am finding somewhat tiresome of late, and while I thought I might pay for it online, I am not so sure now.

An English parliamentary committee has been grilling Prince Charles' private secretary about the amount of tax he pays, arguing that HRH should be paying more tax on his Duchy of Cornwall estate. Regardless of  that, and I have heard this before, HRH chooses to pay tax at the highest marginal rate on the simple income from the estate.

Chooses to pay tax? Either he has to pay tax or he doesn't and I assume from the way it is written, he doesn't.

It reminds me of complaints when our local politicians take advantage of benefits available to them. Either it is their entitlement or it isn't. If it is and you don't like it, then that is the point to argue. That is that they shouldn't be entitled, not whether they take advantage.

The same goes for old Charlie. Why would he choose to pay tax? Tax is not normally a choice. You pay what you are obliged to pay. If he pays tax when he does not have to, then he is a fool. For mine, the Royals should be taxed to the billy-oh. They are very rich, live very comfortably, and while I would wear that the British taxpayer might stump up for the maintenance of all their palaces and castles, and possibly pay them for their public appearances when representing Britain, that is about it. They are rich enough on their own.

But to more important royal matters, yesterday I heard that Princess' Beatrice and Eugenie like to get pissed together and then play table tennis in their underwear. Bless.


22 comments:

  1. Well at least the girls are looking a little more photogenic.......underwear or no

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John, don't make me think of them without underwear.

      Delete
    2. ROFLMAO. Ah, but what if they were wearing those hats while playing shuttle oops ping pong?

      Delete
    3. FC, hats, underwear and shuttle cock. Don't get yourself so excited. You are of a certain age.

      Delete
  2. I like a good hat but those two are crazy creations.
    On Tax we don't have a royal family, thank god but they are a drain on the public purse just like the polies here, so they should pay tax as much as we can get out of them.
    Merle............

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet Merle, I doubt I would have ever taken any notice of them if it wasn't for 'that' hat. Agree, tax the rich.

      Delete
  3. The argument is always that the royal family and all its extended branches bring a fortune in tourism and the tourist dollar. Although true, that has nothing to do with equity and social justice. People who earn a fortune must pay their fair share of tax, AT THE HIGHEST HIGHEST MARGINAL RATE!

    Buckingham Palace won't close; Windsor won't lose its importance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quite correct Hels, and I don't know that they do bring in a fortune. As marvellous as London is, it can stand on its own without the royals. People would still go there.

      Delete
  4. What do they like to do in those hats is a query of more interest to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shock people Victor, and they did.

      Delete
  5. I don't know which is Beatrice and which is Eugenie, but the one in the blue looks like she pinned up a fallen hem in a hurry and the one in beige looks like a life sized Barbie doll.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eugenie with the bad skirt, River. I hate myself for knowing that. I do like a lass with too much mascara though.

      Delete
  6. I can't help but like Beatrice and Eugene. They are already doomed for being the kids of the dreaded third child - no chance of throne access there, and the daughters of the notorious Fergie and they're kind of useless and everything (much like all the royals) but bless their cotton socks - aren't they just hilarious?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. M, I find them quite likeable too. I saw them on tv speaking about their 'gran' and they were very warm about her and it seems she likes them too.

      Delete
  7. And how did this titillating piece of Royal News fall into your hands, pray tell??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Red, you may feel titillated, I do not. Absolute Radio Frank Skinner podcast, directly from the mouth of the ever so posh Emily Dean.

      Delete
  8. We deal with that over here in the states as well: The wealthy not paying their fair share of taxes. It's a shame.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Keith, there seems to be some botheration in your country now about the rich getting off scot free after their responsibility for America's problems. I am not well versed in your tax system, but I expect it is as it is here and in the UK, the rich don't pay much and average workers pay a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Chris says: Is there any chance that the 'rich benefactor' who owns the 'Grauniad' is quite happy to see it lose money as that means he or she can reduce his or her tax bill? While there is no doubt some members of the British Royal Family are simply wastrels it should also be remembered, especially in the case of HM the Queen, that she is paid via the 'Civil List', which is voted on and approved by the British Parliament. Should HM decide to invest some of that cash, in art, horse studs or whatever, that returns a dividend, how does that make her different from anyone else? Do you bag someone who uses their tax rebate to buy shares instead of shouting rounds at the local pub? OK, probably yes, you would, but that's the point. The UK monarchy is a constitutional monarchy and, by definition, subject to the whims of the Parliament (of common people, and elected). Like it or not, the Monarchy is one of the biggest things that make Britain work, and Parliament is happy (and correct) in keeping it alive

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can't disagree with you Chris, in that it works for Britain. Is the monarchy relevant to everyone in Britain though?

      Delete
  11. Re FC's comment and your reply hahahahahaha! One thing is for certain all should pay tax relevant to their earnings, it's only fair and just...I know..what world am I living in :))

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grace, yet so few do pay, except those of us who have it extracted from our pay before we see it.

      Delete