State of the parties as 2015 General Election looms.

[Beef Oven!]

Indeed it doesn't; what matters where scroungers are concerned is the ability to indentify them as such and not to tar non-scroungers with the same brush.

Indeed, just because some people are on benefits, doesn't mean they are scroungers. Similarly, just because one might be wealthy, does not mean that one has expropriated that wealth.

[ahinton]

We ALL owned it (along with lots of other things) but they were stolen by an evil witch

NO, WE DIDN'T! That's just what certain governments tried to tell us, but not all were convinced. These things were owned by HM Treasury, which is funded by taxpayers, not shareholders.

[Beef Oven!]

They don't have to own the vast number of square kilometres of land that they do in order to fulfil the functions expected of them, but owning far less of it than they do would not mean them having to live on a council estate! However, since you mention other royal families, consider the amounts of land that those in Europe (those Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain) own compared to the amounts owned by the UK one!

Do those other families have Corgis to exercise? I bet they don't. You're not comparing like with like.

[P. G. Tipps]

NO, WE DIDN'T! That's just what certain governments tried to tell us, but not all were convinced. These things were owned by HM Treasury, which is fuinded by taxpayers, not shareholders.

Hear, hear, ahinton!

[amateur51]

NO, WE DIDN'T! That's just what certain governments tried to tell us, but not all were convinced. These things were owned by HM Treasury, which is fuinded by taxpayers, not shareholders.

Are we not all taxpayers, to a greater or lesser extent?

[Serial_Apologist]

Indeed, just because some people are on benefits, doesn't mean they are scroungers. Similarly, just because one might be wealthy, does not mean that one has expropriated that wealth.

Oh yes it does!

[Serial_Apologist]

Are we not all taxpayers, to a greater or lesser extent?

Indeed we mostly are or have been, and I think we should demand that ahinton's supply of spanners be sequestered as common property so that we can all (not just him) choose when to throw them into the works.

[amateur51]

Indeed we mostly are or have been, and I think we should demand that ahinton's supply of spanners be sequestered as common property so that we can all (not just him) choose when to throw them into the works.

Naughty! :cackle:

[amateur51]

Is Dr Fox planning to jump to the UKIP ship?

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/12/17/senior-tories-speak-at-events-by-group-which-asks-if-gay-marriage-caused-earthquakes/

Sadly the serious NZ earthquakes took place in Christchurch and were in 2010 and 2011, rather than the equal marriage legislation which was passed in 2012 but hey! Never let a few facts get in the way of a good story, eh?

[ahinton]

Do those other families have Corgis to exercise? I bet they don't. You're not comparing like with like.

I have no idea although I doubt it very much - but what has ownership of Corgis to do with ownership of vast tracts of land that the royal family do not actually need in order to fulfil public expectations? We were discussing the ownership of land, a potential public asset worth many millions, not that of dogs, a private non-asset valued at a few thousand.

[ahinton]

Are we not all taxpayers, to a greater or lesser extent?

Most of us are, yes, but that doesn't mean that we "own" these public assets; we may "own" the right to use them, some largely free at the point of use and others (such as the rail network when it was fully nationalised) at our own expense, but that's not the same as "owning" in the sense of having some influence over them as shareholders would do.

[ahinton]

Indeed, just because some people are on benefits, doesn't mean they are scroungers. Similarly, just because one might be wealthy, does not mean that one has expropriated that wealth.

Oh yes it does!

Not necessarily; there will be instances of that, of course, but it does not necessarily follow that all wealth arises solely from unjustiable expropriation - or theft, to put it more bluntly.

[ahinton]

Indeed we mostly are or have been, and I think we should demand that ahinton's supply of spanners be sequestered as common property so that we can all (not just him) choose when to throw them into the works.

!!! Well, much as I disapprove of such sequestration in principle on account of its constituting a parellel to the kind of expropriation meantioned above of which certain wealthy people might justly be accused, better that they be thrown into the works at all by whomsoever might choose to do so than that they be thrown at one another!

[P. G. Tipps]

Don't you or your favourite rag know anything, amateur51 ... ?

The earthquakes were because of that woman bishop what was appointed yesterday in Stockport and had nuffin to do with you gays.

[ahinton]

Is Dr Fox planning to jump to the UKIP ship?

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/12/17/senior-tories-speak-at-events-by-group-which-asks-if-gay-marriage-caused-earthquakes/

Sadly the serious NZ earthquakes took place in Christchurch and were in 2010 and 2011, rather than the equal marriage legislation which was passed in 2012 but hey! Never let a few facts get in the way of a good story, eh?

I tried to open this link and it took my computer into bluescreen mode instantly and it has only just now recovered (I think and hope); I cannot imagine why else this would have happened at this point, so members beware!