[The Earl of Chesterfield]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45796485

I'm just wondering if, at the bit where they had to say 'For richer or poorer', they paused, turned to the assembled audience, then burst into guffaws of upper class laughter...


PS: why is one person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called an idle scrounger, yet another person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called a 'socialite'? Because one sups pints in their local flea pit whilst the other sups 'Champers' at posh-assed soirees?

Oh, and check out the 'Great Gatsby' quote. Proof absolute that all the money in the world can't buy an ounce of self awareness...

[frearsghost]

MDCCCLXVI, on 12 October 2018 - 08:56 PM, said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45796485

I'm just wondering if, at the bit where they had to say 'For richer or poorer', they paused, turned to the assembled audience, then burst into guffaws of upper class laughter...


PS: why is one person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called an idle scrounger, yet another person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called a 'socialite'? Because one sups pints in their local flea pit whilst the other sups 'Champers' at posh-assed soirees?

Oh, and check out the 'Great Gatsby' quote. Proof absolute that all the money in the world can't buy an ounce of self awareness...

Because richer or poorer has other connotations apart from money?

[valemadness]

MDCCCLXVI, on 12 October 2018 - 08:56 PM, said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45796485

I'm just wondering if, at the bit where they had to say 'For richer or poorer', they paused, turned to the assembled audience, then burst into guffaws of upper class laughter...


PS: why is one person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called an idle scrounger, yet another person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called a 'socialite'? Because one sups pints in their local flea pit whilst the other sups 'Champers' at posh-assed soirees?

Oh, and check out the 'Great Gatsby' quote. Proof absolute that all the money in the world can't buy an ounce of self awareness...

They both work and do lots of charity work.

[Heavy_Soul]

MDCCCLXVI, on 12 October 2018 - 08:56 PM, said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45796485

I'm just wondering if, at the bit where they had to say 'For richer or poorer', they paused, turned to the assembled audience, then burst into guffaws of upper class laughter...


PS: why is one person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called an idle scrounger, yet another person who never works a day in a life subsidised by the taxpayer called a 'socialite'? Because one sups pints in their local flea pit whilst the other sups 'Champers' at posh-assed soirees?

Oh, and check out the 'Great Gatsby' quote. Proof absolute that all the money in the world can't buy an ounce of self awareness...

https://twitter.com/...991507052929024

[kopblue]

valemadness, on 13 October 2018 - 09:10 AM, said:

They both work and do lots of charity work.

But they aren't socialists so people have to make stuff up about them you know how it works

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

kopblue, on 13 October 2018 - 11:40 AM, said:

But they aren't socialists so people have to make stuff up about them you know how it works

Please point out which bit is 'made up'.

Then perhaps you can tell me where either of these royals work, who for, how many hours they do and what they 'earn'.

[kopblue]

MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2018 - 01:54 PM, said:

Please point out which bit is 'made up'.

Then perhaps you can tell me where either of these royals work, who for, how many hours they do and what they 'earn'.

Why should I , you insinuated they don't work, valemadness points out they do I read that one works for a wine business the other an art gallery, I suggest if you feel the need to have a snipe at least try getting some facts right or point to fact the tax payer foots the security bill which would have more kudos.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

kopblue, on 13 October 2018 - 02:04 PM, said:

Why should I , you insinuated they don't work, valemadness points out they do I read that one works for a wine business the other an art gallery, I suggest if you feel the need to have a snipe at least try getting some facts right or point to fact the tax payer foots the security bill which would have more kudos.

Ah, so you can't.

You were just trying to be smart-assed.

Ah well, never mind, eh...

[valemadness]

MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2018 - 01:54 PM, said:

Please point out which bit is 'made up'.

Then perhaps you can tell me where either of these royals work, who for, how many hours they do and what they 'earn'.

Princess Eugenie works at London art gallery Hauser & Wirth as an associate director.
She graduated from Newcastle University in 2013 with degrees in art history and English literature.

Before she started at Hauser & Wirth, the Queen’s granddaughter worked for auction house Paddle8 in New York for two years.

She also has money in trust from her Great Grandmother, the Queen Mother.

Brooksbank has held a variety of service-related jobs, doing everything from bartending to serving food to managing the nightclub Mahiki. As he is a private citizen, his net worth is not known.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

valemadness, on 13 October 2018 - 03:38 PM, said:

Princess Eugenie works at London art gallery Hauser & Wirth as an associate director.
She graduated from Newcastle University in 2013 with degrees in art history and English literature.

Before she started at Hauser & Wirth, the Queen’s granddaughter worked for auction house Paddle8 in New York for two years.

She also has money in trust from her Great Grandmother, the Queen Mother.

Brooksbank has held a variety of service-related jobs, doing everything from bartending to serving food to managing the nightclub Mahiki. As he is a private citizen, his net worth is not known.

Thanks, Marcia.

But when all's said and done these are token positions with no one telling them they'll lose their Universal Benefit if they don't accept any job with any hours at any pay.

PS: I'm pretty sure Brooksbank holds some sort of position at Clooney's Tequila selling company. Hence the usually socially aware actor's appearance at this wedding.

[isleaiw1]

On the plus side, Royal weddings are good for tourism, and a few extra quid comes into the UK as a result. Regardless of whether you approve of the royals or not (I have time for some and not others..) that’s good for a fair few people (it doesn’t hurt if you have Hotels in London )

[kopblue]

MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2018 - 03:05 PM, said:

Ah, so you can't.

You were just trying to be smart-assed.

Ah well, never mind, eh...

The insinuation they don't work when you now know they do. Ah well never mind eh , you can admit when you get it wrong and not be so smart assed

[fishini]

kopblue, on 13 October 2018 - 05:39 PM, said:

The insinuation they don't work when you now know they do. Ah well never mind eh , you can admit when you get it wrong and not be so smart assed

She is privileged, she works as a hobby rather than a necessity. He is a glorified barman. Its just cost the taxpayers £2m+. Seems the money tree has sprouted another little branch that is ripe for picking

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

kopblue, on 13 October 2018 - 05:39 PM, said:

The insinuation they don't work when you now know they do. Ah well never mind eh , you can admit when you get it wrong and not be so smart assed

You've now had two opportunities to tell me which part of my post was 'made up' and offer details of the 'work' these entitled people do.

Yet you've failed to do so.

However our friend Marcia did exactly that, to which I and others pointed out that whatever roles they perform are token roles which wouldn't constitute 'work' by any normal person's parameters.

Infact they live lives of privilege at the taxpayer's expense whilst folk who've no choice but to live on benefits are vilified.

My initial and ongoing point.

I'll subsequently allow observers to decide who's wrong and trying to be smart-assed...

[kopblue]

MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2018 - 06:49 PM, said:

You've now had two opportunities to tell me which part of my post was 'made up' and offer details of the 'work' these entitled people do.

Yet you've failed to do so.

However our friend Marcia did exactly that, to which I and others pointed out that whatever roles they perform are token roles which wouldn't constitute 'work' by any normal person's parameters.

Infact they live lives of privilege at the taxpayer's expense whilst folk who've no choice but to live on benefits are vilified.

My initial and ongoing point.

I'll subsequently allow observers to decide who's wrong and trying to be smart-assed...

You said that they didn't work. That's the made up bit as you know full well as Marcia points out but hey let's cloudy the waters by throwing universal credit comments in, do they work or not if the answer is yes then you were wrong or made it up that they didn't work, it's really that simple . Have a pleasant night.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

kopblue, on 13 October 2018 - 07:12 PM, said:

You said that they didn't work. That's the made up bit as you know full well as Marcia points out but hey let's cloudy the waters by throwing universal credit comments in, do they work or not if the answer is yes then you were wrong or made it up that they didn't work, it's really that simple . Have a pleasant night.

Three opportunities. And counting...

[kopblue]

MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2018 - 07:33 PM, said:

Three opportunities. And counting...

I answered in the 1st post they work you said they didn't so what your counting I can't imagine

[fishini]

kopblue, on 13 October 2018 - 07:39 PM, said:

I answered in the 1st post they work you said they didn't so what your counting I can't imagine

Walking around an art gallery looking posh in £1000 dresses. While being susidised by the taxpayers and pouring drinks for posh people constitutes work in your world then? They are no more than privileged pampered leeches

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

kopblue, on 13 October 2018 - 07:39 PM, said:

I answered in the 1st post they work you said they didn't so what your counting I can't imagine

No, you hid behind our friend Marcia's post claiming it somehow justified your petty snipe.

A post subsequently addressed by myself and others in a fact based manner.

So I'll ask again, for the fourth time: please offer details of the 'work' this privileged couple are supposed to do and, if possible, how it compares to the demands placed upon others 'living off the state'.

[kopblue]

MDCCCLXVI, on 13 October 2018 - 08:15 PM, said:

No, you hid behind our friend Marcia's post claiming it somehow justified your petty snipe.

A post subsequently addressed by myself and others in a fact based manner.

So I'll ask again, for the fourth time: please offer details of the 'work' this privileged couple are supposed to do and, if possible, how it compares to the demands placed upon others 'living off the state'.

I originally replied to marcia about them working which you said they didn't that is all I didn't hide behind anything so save your snipes for your pal h again. I don't follow the privaliged like you do ,they work you've chosen to ignore that fact fine you don't like them I couldn't care less about them but their jobs however hard/cushy are paid work