Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Still Waters

The Queen should think about retiring

32 posts in this topic

The former Labour deputy Prime Minister said he wanted to pass on concerns from a friend that, at the age of 86, the Monarch was “overburdening” herself and was risking her health.

He added that the Queen herself seems unsure of her own health after her recent bout of illness which left her in hospital.

Lord Prescott, who is a member of the Privy Council which advises the Queen, said: “Even her doctors seem baffled by her illness, with the Queen reportedly telling Kamalesh Sharma, the Commonwealth Secretary General: ‘They’re not sure what’s the matter with me’.”

http://www.telegraph...t-suggests.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, a Pope retired...I guess a monarch could set a new precedent and retire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Not against her will, she shouldn't. (Especially when her replacement might be a multi-faith numpty who talks to plants!)

Edited by ealdwita
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally think they should.all just disapeer and live there lives away from tbe public. unelected.sponges sorry about spellings hard to type.on new fone

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord Prescott must have run out of acceptable topics to pen for his column.

His opinion, or that of his friend's, on this matter, would be better focused on considerations over their own retirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you like your job, you don't want to retire, and who could not like being Queen of England?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you like your job, you don't want to retire, and who could not like being Queen of England?

I'd make a great queen of england. ...wait

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Queen Elizabeth II is not going to abdicate.

On 21st April 1947 the then Princess Elizabeth made a 21st-birthday speech in which she vowed to serve her country for her whole life.

It was quite a lengthy speech but towards the end of it she said this:

I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.

But I shall not have strength to carry out this resolution alone unless you join in it with me, as I now invite you to do: I know that your support will be unfailingly given. God help me to make good my vow, and God bless all of you who are willing to share in it.

Elizabeth II vowed to serve her country until the day she dies. She will not break that promise.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you like your job, you don't want to retire, and who could not like being Queen of England?

There hasn't been a Queen of England since 1603.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea that occurred to me: I'm a bit slow on my protocol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I'm doing just fine thanks.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm kinda hoping she outlives Charles. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think she should retire and take the rest of the family with her.No need for a royal family,time for the UK to catch up with the modern world.Read somewhere last year that it took 65 mil of taxpayers dollars to keep this family up to their standards,about time they go out and get real jobs if they choose to live this way.....Pay for it out of their own pockets.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think she should retire and take the rest of the family with her.No need for a royal family,time for the UK to catch up with the modern world.Read somewhere last year that it took 65 mil of taxpayers dollars to keep this family up to their standards,about time they go out and get real jobs if they choose to live this way.....Pay for it out of their own pockets.

Yeah, after all it's not as if technically she owns the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, after all it's not as if technically she owns the country.

Modern world here,no one technically owns anything.Time for her to share the wealth,after all im told its the sophisticated thing to do ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sure why you UKers put up with the monarchy.

But, as an American, maybe it's a cultural thing.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sure why you UKers put up with the monarchy.

But, as an American, maybe it's a cultural thing.

Probably is since we don't believe in monarchy or bow down to a crown. [shrugs]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sure why you UKers put up with the monarchy.

But, as an American, maybe it's a cultural thing.

The Queen is fine, if we ever get Charles and he starts pushing homeopathy over conventional medicine and organic farming and talking to plants and whatever else, then I will be at the forefront of the revolution! *waves pitchfork heartily*

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care as long as one of them give me my Knighthood.. knight-smiley-face.gif

Although I like Harry, he is a lad is that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Queen should name her successor as William. Skip Charles all together.

Long Live the Queen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think she should retire and take the rest of the family with her.No need for a royal family,time for the UK to catch up with the modern world.Read somewhere last year that it took 65 mil of taxpayers dollars to keep this family up to their standards,about time they go out and get real jobs if they choose to live this way.....Pay for it out of their own pockets.

It costs just 65p, or thereabouts, per person per year for the monarchy. That's all.

Getting rid of the monarchy for a republic will not save you money. It'll be a lot more expensive. Obama's Air Force One jet alone costs more annually that the entire British monarchy does.

But the British monarchy is secure for a least another 100-150 years. The British people just don't want a republic. Although you can't blame them, because look what happened the last time Britain experimented with republicanism.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think she should retire and take the rest of the family with her.No need for a royal family,time for the UK to catch up with the modern world.Read somewhere last year that it took 65 mil of taxpayers dollars to keep this family up to their standards,about time they go out and get real jobs if they choose to live this way.....Pay for it out of their own pockets.

Now why would I have any reason to visit London if the Royals no longer existed?Personally I think every country should have at least two monarchs, a king and a queen. Adds class. I'm tired of this classless society business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yeah, after all it's not as if technically she owns the country.

The Queen is, by a considerable distance, the world's biggest landowner.

She owns about 6.6 BILLION acres of land. That's because, for all intents and purposes, she owns all of the land of the 16 countries of which she is Head of State, including the world's second-biggest country, Canada.

The world's next largest landowner is the Russian state, which owns just over 4.2 billion acres.

The value of the Queen's land holding is £17.6 TRILLION (US$33 trillion), which technically makes her the richest person on Earth.

Edited by TheLastLazyGun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

William is a little untested as yet. I think they should change the succession law and have Parliament select the next monarch from among the members of the royal family -- say from among a list of the fifty in line to the succession.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Queen Elizabeth II is not going to abdicate.

On 21st April 1947 the then Princess Elizabeth made a 21st-birthday speech in which she vowed to serve her country for her whole life.

It was quite a lengthy speech but towards the end of it she said this:

I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.

But I shall not have strength to carry out this resolution alone unless you join in it with me, as I now invite you to do: I know that your support will be unfailingly given. God help me to make good my vow, and God bless all of you who are willing to share in it.

Elizabeth II vowed to serve her country until the day she dies. She will not break that promise.

She vowed to serve her country her whole life, she did not vow to die on the throne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.