[snapdragon]

Property exists because things exist. I don't believe in Private property. The thing you will inherit because wealth is created by land exploitation. That is different from your shoes. How much do you know about Marx before we continue this on semantics?

Nothing. The only communist I know is a Leninist and filthy rich. They own loads of houses and have passed them to their children to avoid inheritance tax later on.

[Heisenberg]

My house is my personal property.

That's my understanding, yeah. A house you live in is personal property; a house you rent to others for profit is private property, because it generates capital. @Potemkin will know better than me if this is correct, though.

[B0ycey]

Nothing. The only communist I know is a Leninist and filthy rich. They own loads of houses and have passed them to their children to avoid inheritance tax later on.

The filthy rich? The hand that bites you comes to mind.

Besides, why would you need to give your house to your children if they were given a home beforehand due to their need? Just asking for curiosity.

[B0ycey]

That's my understanding, yeah. A house you live in is personal property; a house you rent to others for profit is private property, because it generates capital. @Potemkin will know better than me if this is correct, though.

Your house doesn't move so it is private property. Ask Pote and you'll be talking about the means of production.

[Heisenberg]

Things are also complicated by the fact that when you buy a house, it's actually the bank that owns it and charges you interest on the mortgage. Of course, a private housing market is based on the assumption of scarcity and private property, so in a society without private ownership of capital it wouldn't need to exist anyway.

[B0ycey]

... so in a society without private ownership of capital it wouldn't need to exist anyway.

BINGO!!

WE HAVE OURSELVES A WINNER!

Housing should be treated like the NHS. Nobody is talking about privatisation on that (excluding our American Cousins).

[Heisenberg]

BINGO!!

WE HAVE OURSELVES A WINNER!

Housing should be treated like the NHS. Nobody is talking about privatisation on that (excluding our American Cousins).

Agreed. If publicly funded housing is good enough for the royals, it's good enough for everyone else

[snapdragon]

The filthy rich? The hand that bites you comes to mind.

Besides, why would you need to give your house to your children if they were given a home beforehand due to their need? Just asking for curiosity.

What else would I do with it?

Leave it to the lazy bugger over the road who’s moaning because the council won’t give his daughter a bigger house? Sod that.

Though it sounds as if you believe his daughter should be given a bigger house.

She got pregnant at school and has been pregnant every four or five years since.

Never had a job.

How would you reward hard work?

Define need. Who decides what she needs?

[Beren]

So much for Global Britain.

With their growing provincialism Britain (sticking to their Windsors) won't be global, Harry and Meghan will.

However, all that appears to be an exploding time bomb which was put under a dysfunctional family and institution by Lady Diana. She created both the emotional and financial background for this.

They initially relied on what Princess Diana had left for Harry.

"I've got all my mum left me. And without that, we would not have been able to do this," he said. "She saw it coming and I certainly felt her presence throughout this whole process."

[B0ycey]

What else would I do with it?

Leave it to the lazy bugger over the road who’s moaning because the council won’t give his daughter a bigger house? Sod that.

Though it sounds as if you believe his daughter should be given a bigger house.

She got pregnant at school and has been pregnant every four or five years since.

How would you reward hard workers?

Let's try and not derail this thread too early as it is the biggest story today. My only remarks is housing would be provided by need and you wouldn't leave your home to anyone. And hard work can be rewarded by other means. Like getting better shoes.

[Beren]

Exactly, he's blowing them up, but not because of Meghan.

[snapdragon]

Let's try and not derail this thread too early as it is the biggest story today. My only remarks is housing would be provided by need and you wouldn't leave your home to anyone. And hard work can be rewarded by other means. Like getting better shoes.

That’s not much, is it?why would some people need a big house in Belsize Park and others a big house in a shithole estate?

Anyway, so far we’ve learned both Meghan and Harry have mental health issues.

I reckon that goes without saying.

They sound completely insane.

[ingliz]

the queen changed the rule

Then why say George V rules when you meant Elizabeth II's?

[B0ycey]

Anyway, so far we’ve learned both Meghan and Harry have mental health issues.

I reckon that goes without saying.

They sound completely insane.

I would say they are completely sane. I doubt anything that was said wasn't true and the reason for doing this interview was to promote their brand, which they have done. They have also clarified their position on Archie as that was the most contentious issue. But perhaps from a Royalist POV they went too far, but what has that got to Harry and Meghan who have already given up their role and money?

[snapdragon]

No. The rule came from George V , but it has been amended since.

Nice try, though.

It’s likely to be amended further by Charles when he becomes king, which is what Meghan Markle is kicking off about.

She’s a nasty piece of work

She was obviously thinking that the queen being as old as she is, it wouldn’t be long before Archie moved up one so could become a prince.

It’s not funny at all, actually.

I don’t want to play this game with you any more.

[Beren]

Charles will be a perfect king for collapse.

[ingliz]

Her being female is neither here nor there.

Princess Anne's children, Peter Phillips and Zara Tindall (formerly Phillips), did not receive princely titles at birth.

Archaic royal rules [George V] mean only the offspring of male royal heirs may pass on their honours, making them princes or princesses.

As such, the Princess Royal's children could not inherit titles, but the Queen did make her daughter an offer.

— Daily Express

Anne refused to take her up on it, but against the rules, the offer was made.

It appears the Queen makes up the rules as she goes along.

[Oxymoron]

What a loser bitch , and the guy is a piece of shit who is a traitor to his family.

[Beren]

^ If anyone still had any doubts which side to support here.

[late]

^ If anyone still had any doubts which side to support here.

I am an Anglophile. One of my deep regrets was that I never managed to go there. But because I am an Anglophiliac, I've noticed something.

This is a guess, but the reaction I am seeing reminds me of the resentment a lot of Brits still harbor against Americans. The last time an American married into the royal family, things did not go well, at all.

So my take has become that this is a complicated mix that hits Brits where they feel quite vulnerable, and for good reason. Royal controversy of major proportion has become a regular part of British life.