My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

MNHQ have commented on this thread

AIBU?

Best name suggestion I've seen for the newborn drain on the taxpayer...

737 replies

SolidGoldBrass · 23/07/2013 23:16

I popped into a pub this afternoon for a wee and a pint and they had a Royal Baby Name sweepstake board behind the bar.

Someone had suggested 'Dodi.' Grin

OP posts:
Report
scottishmummy · 24/07/2013 00:17

There's something v juvenile and socialist worker radge about the op

Report
OrangeLily · 24/07/2013 00:20

FFS. Surely all children are a bloody "drain" on the tax payer. I'm childless, DH is childless yet we both pay taxes which support children's education/health care/welfare services.



Thankfully I've got half a bloody brain and don't actually mean the ridiculous statement above. I also don't insult newborn babies who are completely 100% innocent. Also, have you actually looked at how the royals make money?!

Report
Lora1982 · 24/07/2013 00:21

Doesnt this babies dad work? Seem to remember he does

Report
HaveIGotPoosForYou · 24/07/2013 00:23

Yawn.

Yes, your so clever and interesting, Op.

Next.

Report
brdgrl · 24/07/2013 00:24

why on earth should this thread be deleted?
solidgold, thanks for speaking sensibly.

Report
LegoCaltrops · 24/07/2013 00:24

William works, Kate worked. What's your problem with them OP?

Report
scottishmummy · 24/07/2013 00:27

Thread doesn't need deleted,that'll feed op ego that she sooo radical that mn couldn't cope
It's provocation by numbers,to elicit a response,all v predictable
Provocative title x some obvious titwank about class/ monarchy x

Report
peanutMD · 24/07/2013 00:27

Totally disregarding the despicable title.

Honest question here but whilst I do think James is a lovely name and has royal form wouldn't it be a bit ironic for Charles' sons to call his child that given the while Diana/James Hewitt (i.e Harry) speculation?

I should add I was only born in 86 and have never had much if an interest in the royals so could bee taking out if my arse :o

Report
Leverette · 24/07/2013 00:27

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

MrsWolowitz · 24/07/2013 00:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

cheerfulweather · 24/07/2013 00:31

It's not likely to be James, Prince Edward and Sophie have a James.

Report
scottishmummy · 24/07/2013 00:32

Oh behave,it's not a well composed republican sentiment,it's rowdy blah
To provoke
To get reaction

Report
cheerfulweather · 24/07/2013 00:32

Cannot believe I'm discussing this (I am no royalist). Grin

Report
cheerfulweather · 24/07/2013 00:36

Though Arthur would be nice.

Report
Turniphead1 · 24/07/2013 00:37

Little mite didn't even cost us an NHS birth. (Yeah let's include a debate on private medicine along with tax revenue in this scintillating thread).

Seriously OP. Are you 17?

Report
Turniphead1 · 24/07/2013 00:37

Little mite didn't even cost us an NHS birth. (Yeah let's include a debate on private medicine along with tax revenue in this scintillating thread).

Seriously OP. Are you 17?

Report
Fecklessdizzy · 24/07/2013 00:39

Me neither, I've been avoiding the radio/TV all day and now I'm chuntering about it on here! Madness, I'm going to bed ...

Report
ThingsThatMakeYouGoHmmmmmmmmm · 24/07/2013 01:09

Yaaaawwwwn. Thought I was back in 6th form. Hmm

Report
KhaosandKalamity · 24/07/2013 02:41

Sorry I am a foreigner and kind of don't get it, why is this baby considered such a drain on the tax payer and assumed that he will not work?

As far as I'm aware his father is on maternity leave from his job as a helicopter pilot doing his part to protect his country and yet he and his family are compared to benefit moochers.

I may be wrong about this but as far as I was aware long ago much of the "royal" land was given to parliament to cover a debt and is now rented from your government at a high enough cost that the royal family pays more than it costs leaving your country better off than it would be without them.

Our country is a part of the monarchy but we do not resent the royal family, even if they have no impact on our country, and in the most recent world war America was a better friend to us than Brittan many here are loyal to the Queen and don't care that if we strike oil on our own land it automatically belongs to her.

Report
ChimeForChange · 24/07/2013 03:23

I'm not a royalist by any means, but there was nothing remotely funny about that joke, very poor taste.

Assuming you are a mother OP, not sure how you could find it acceptable to regard a newborn baby in that way either.

Report
LilBlondePessimist · 24/07/2013 03:42

I agree wholeheartedly with scottishmummy. Which is unusual WinkWink.

Report
Flobbadobs · 24/07/2013 06:52

Funny that whenever there's a thread about these 'Royal Parasites' anyone pointing out that some of them like William do actually work are ignored...

Report

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

KingRollo · 24/07/2013 06:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Greythorne · 24/07/2013 07:05

The most popular tourist destination in the world is Paris.

They guillotined their royals.

Just sayin'.

Report
ChippingInHopHopHop · 24/07/2013 07:08

James - yes, I'm not sure why that's such a 'bookies hot one' given the James Hewitt thing... seems odd to me.

I think every twit around has been suggesting 'Spencer' and it would be brilliant, but just not going to happen (except as one of twenty billion middle names).

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.