To not want to pay for another scrounger?

[weatherall]

Poor Kate's with child again.

When will these scroungers stop pumping out sprogs they expect all the rest of us to pay for?

I can understand people being happy at babies of their own, babies of their friends and family but why fawn all over a baby of an over privileged fairy tale princess.

It's nauseating

If you're saying that he shouldn't have been allowed to inherit money from his mother then you're into a whole new argument about inheriting money only being allowed if it comes from a source that we approve of.

Most of these arguments are the same for anyone rich - most very rich people either inherit their money from dubious ancestors or make a profit off the backs of you and me buying something from them.

Good luck with trying to stop that

Russia and China tried to ban inheriting money or paying people more for one job over another or any kind of private enterprise. It wasn't terribly successful in the long run and still result in a super rich class of people that felt even less obligation to the society that enriched them than the inherited wealth people did before them.

How do you "fawn" in type?

Don't be childish, written. You know what I'm saying.

I know exactly what you're saying and I am pointing out that I think it's silly.

Sure, it would be worse if he didn't give the money away. But don't make it out to be some grand sacrifice or some selfless act. It's precisely his privilege and the fact that his family continues to get a huge amount of taxpayer money that allows him to do that. Easy come, easy go. Frankly, I think it obligates him to give his salary away.

written if you have received any State benefits, or will in the future, or have accessed any of the State funded institutions then you have already been 'sent' more than 1p.

I am well short of 1p. 1p/person would give me 600,000 quid. Since many of you think that is nothing, I assume you would be willing to send it to me annually (as you do with the royals). I clearly haven't used that amount.

I, like everyone else, use public services. We are all entitled to use them and we pay for them with our taxes. But don't you object that they (the royals) are entitled to those same services ON TOP of getting 40 million quid/year? That's what I object to. I am happy for them to use public services.

i bet he pays more tax than you .....what a ridiculous way of justifying massive unearned wealth.

Was it a justification - or just a fact.

There is no requirement to justify massive unearned wealth in this country and William would be quite a way down the list of those even if there was such a list.

Most of these arguments are the same for anyone rich - most very rich people either inherit their money from dubious ancestors or make a profit off the backs of you and me buying something from them.

no it doesn't. Inheritance is one thing. Most wealthy people don't get the money the royals get FROM US. In fact, none of them do. Also, if you object to make richer, you have some say in that. You don't have to buy their products, and those of us who do actually get something we want from that exchange.

writtenguarantee are you also miffed that Kate is suffering from severe morning sickness and is receiving medical treatment? Are you annoyed that her medical bill might be footed from the public purse? Do you think she should hot foot it down to the local NHS hospital for treatment instead of receiving costly private medical treatment (even though the security bill would be huge)?

He doesn't get £40 million a year

William's inheritance was from his mother. Did she, or her family, get payments from the taxpayer?

You're on spiteful form today, OP

I wouldn't describe her as poor Kate. I wish I was as freeeekin poor as her.
How are they scroungers. William works in the R.A.F.
Whoever made the comment about William paying more tax. Well yeah of course he does. He probably earns a lot more

the vast majority of Williams money is inherited from Diana.

I am not arguing for a monarchy - I really don't care about them. I think it would make almost no difference in cost having President Thatcher (or similar) or The Queen as head of state. I think it would also make little differnce to tourism income either.

But bithcing about one individual having a baby because you resent the system of monarchy when that particular individual doesn't take much of the Royal GRant isn;t well thought through and more than a little bitchy.

Most of Diana's estate came from shrewd investment decisions off the back of a not (by wealthy standards) particularly massive divorce settlement which as far as I'm aware came from Charles personal wealth.

weartherall, if she has a miscarriage I'll make sure you are the first to know so you can have a party hey?

written unless you are a very high rate taxpayer who doesn't access public services your tax contributions won't even come close to paying for what you use, so other taxpayers are already 'sending' you money.

I'm happy for wills and Kate however if we really want t get rid of the class system why the hell do we still have the royal family.
Its nothing personal...well, apart from the hunting but seriously I would rather the money went t the NHS.
In fact if everyone really wants the royal family we could perhaps privatise them...the conservatives are usually quite keen on such schemes!

The money wouldn't likely go to the NHS - more likely it would go to the office of the head of state who replaced the Queen. President Blair might come quite expensive. But you have the advantge of voting him out so I can see the appeal.

But I won't be nasty about a couple having a baby. Having just lost my son (late mc stillbirth) four weeks ago I firmly believe in sending positive vibes to anyone expecting.

sorry to hear.

I agree. If you notice, I didn't comment at all about their potential new child (in fact, none of my comments relate to that), and moved straight to the families general use of public funds. I can't speak for the OP, but my guess is that she/he too doesn't feel ill will to the child, but is unhappy with the general issue with the royals.

Being vicious and spiteful to another human being is really damaging to the republican movement. You can hate the institution (I do) but to bring it down to a personal attack on the royals is idiotic at best.

people vent in various ways. You are right that we are less likely to turn all the royal loyals here who happily pay for the extravagant of a wealthy family into republicans by going the route of the OP, but that's the news item of the day.

• family's

"I'm as republican as they come and really do believe the monarchy has no place in a truly democratic society. I will probably be avoiding fb, news, here etc. for the next few months. "

I agree with this. They should have no place in today's society.

I don't like any thread calling people scroungers, however.

It's good news that anybody is happily expecting a baby. I don't know Kate or William, and I doubt they're Mumsnet members, so am not going to offer congratulation.

I bet Kate and Wills are bloody gutted at your thoughts OP. Why on earth didn't they consider your feelings before adding to their family?*

Selfish, independently wealthy, happy, smiley bastards.

*It's because they don't give a shit and why should they?

I dislike the royal family intensely. (As an institution not as individuals IYSWIM)

OP YANBU

Oh when was this announced? How lovely!!
Hope it is a girl this time

Blimey - I thought it was only my very elderly Tory aunties that got all drippy over the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas and their spawn.

YANBU OP.

"Sure, it would be worse if he didn't give the money away. But don't make it out to be some grand sacrifice or some selfless act. "

I don't think I said it was a grand sacrifice. I said that he doesn't have to do it and I think that considering the circumstances he was born into (I wouldn't swap with him) he's making a good try of being a decent human being. I know I wouldn't be flying helicopters over the sea if I didn't have to because I was as rich as him.