Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

So now William and Catherine won't be working, will they be subject to the bedroom tax?

101 replies

ssd · 12/09/2013 18:26

well?

OP posts:
Original poster
ssd · 12/09/2013 19:48

sure they do Hmm

OP posts:
telsa · 12/09/2013 20:04

Pay their own way, my foot! Tney live off public subsidies. Off with their heads!

Lizzylou · 12/09/2013 20:08

SSD, your problem is with the Government. The democratically elected Government.
You stick your fingers in your ears and cry lalala all you want but you are raging at the wrong people.

Trigglesx · 12/09/2013 20:43

Oh FFS, if you want to have an intelligent discussion OP, then start it off with an intelligent question.

Biscuit
TheYoniWayIsUp · 12/09/2013 20:59

No offence OP, but you're coming across as really stupid.

queenofdrama · 12/09/2013 21:06

But the tax payer funds all the royal family's living expenses, do we not? So therefore we are also paying toward the upkeep of their estate? Confused

meditrina · 12/09/2013 21:11

A proportion of ier income comes from the public purse (variable, depending on his much they do).

Same as teachers, doctors, firefighters etc. is Gould imagine any of those who inherited the house they live in, and so do not claim HB, are similary not facing this benefit cap.

comingalongnicely · 13/09/2013 12:06

TheYoniWayIsUp - "No offence OP, but you're coming across as really stupid."

This, except remove the "no offence" and add "Ignorant"....

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 13:10

I loved the comment and was going to use it next time someone wants typical MN comments- it rivals 'I don't mean to be rude BUT..........'

BrokenSunglasses · 13/09/2013 13:10

What a ridiculous thread.

There isn't a problem with people being unemployed. The problem is with people claiming benefits.

culturemulcher · 13/09/2013 13:20

I think the OP is trying to draw the parallel between one newly unemployed couple who are about to benefit from a £1M tax-payer-funded refit of their home, while other unemployed couples are being asked to downsize.

hate to link to the Evening LowStandard but there you go

Vickibee · 13/09/2013 13:25

Let's become arepublic like France... unfortunately the Royals are very popular at the mo.
In no other walk of life do you get a job just because of who your parents are, not very modern is it. Get rid of the lot of them (Treason)

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 13:32

If OP wanted a serious debate she shouldn't have started it about a tax that isn't remotely relevant.
They are not going to fill in benefit forms, and if they did someone who got 6.5 million from their mother, and some more from their great grandmother, not to mention other income, is not going to be granted any benefit. Even if they were they could afford to find the rent for some extra rooms!!

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 13:35

And it isn't about unemployed couples - it is about those on benefits.
It is possible to be wealthy and unemployed.

Vickibee · 13/09/2013 13:35

It depends if you class all the state support the Royals get as benefits? They get millions every year, equates to 50p per Uk person or something. The Queen does a great job representing the UK but the job should not exist - maybe it won't be quite so popular when Charles is King

Vickibee · 13/09/2013 13:36

They are also building a granny flat for Kate's parents, who is paying for this?

Wallison · 13/09/2013 13:43

When these figures are trotted out about how much money they bring in, has anybody researched whether it is the royals themselves that are the draw? I mean, presumably tourists would like looking round the castles etc whether or not we had a royal family. I therefore think it's a bit of a red herring to talk like that.

Anyway, they don't work, they live off the taxpayer and so they should be subject to sanctions.

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 13:50

If someone opened bookings for dinner with William and Kate in a fairly ugly, nothing remarkable building and at a ridiculous price I bet they would be gone within minutes!

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 13:51

That meant ridiculously high price.

elQuintoConyo · 13/09/2013 13:53

Tally-ho
Radishes
Orangina
Lol
Leggings

You see, we can all talk shite, OP Grin

Wallison · 13/09/2013 14:07

Not sure of your point, exoticfruits. Do you mean that tourists don't go to visit the castles but to meet the royals? Despite the fact that they don't actually meet the royals when they go there?

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 14:11

You asked what the draw was. My suggestion would prove that they were a draw.

Wallison · 13/09/2013 14:12

Despite the fact that the tourists don't get to meet them? You might as well say that I am a tourist draw because lots of people come to the city I live in and don't get to meet me.

[registers self with the National Trust]

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 14:15

Personally I don't go to see royalty. I saw the Queen once in 1970s and Prince if Wales a few years later- once to do with my father and once to do with school. However they always get crowds. I remember on here before the wedding, you would think from MN that no one would have bothered but crowds turned out with the usual camping out etc.
These threads are never representative.

exoticfruits · 13/09/2013 14:17

So you really think that you could offer tickets for dinner with Kate and William and they would be ignored? Confused