When will the cycle of dependence be broken?

The Damned's New Rose is playing on 6 Music right now. Beat the Sex Pistols by a month.

ridski said:

Not that I believe this particular tale of Soviet Punkitide, but the KGB and CIA rarely came up with the kinds of schemes attributed to them. Usually they would see something, see that it was working either for or against their interests, then either bank roll or put out counter-messaging in the media.

 Which could, of course, completely explain the Toy Dolls and Nellie the Elephant.

It might explain it, but it doesn't excuse it.

RealityForAll said:

 I believe that the Royals transferred most of their lands and rental properties (the "Crown Estate") to the parliament in exchange for a annuity (called the Civil List) for the royal family.  Making the annuity to the royals a contractual arrangement.   However, beginning in 2012, legislation provided that the Civil List was set as  a percentage of the Crown Estate's annual net revenue (currently set at fifteen percent ("15.0%")).  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

 Interesting. So they gave up their property? And now instead of getting 100% of the revenue (minus taxes) they get 15%? It's basically an 85% tax. Not much for their "subjects" to complain about, I guess. But boy, I find the word "subject" difficult to swallow. But hey, it's their country.

Tom_Reingold said:

RealityForAll said:

 I believe that the Royals transferred most of their lands and rental properties (the "Crown Estate") to the parliament in exchange for a annuity (called the Civil List) for the royal family.  Making the annuity to the royals a contractual arrangement.   However, beginning in 2012, legislation provided that the Civil List was set as  a percentage of the Crown Estate's annual net revenue (currently set at fifteen percent ("15.0%")).  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

 Interesting. So they gave up their property? And now instead of getting 100% of the revenue (minus taxes) they get 15%? It's basically an 85% tax. Not much for their "subjects" to complain about, I guess. But boy, I find the word "subject" difficult to swallow. But hey, it's their country.

 We're citizens. We haven't been subjects since 1983, and even then not all of us were subjects. that was a legal designation to do with the greater commonwealth.

ridski said:

Tom_Reingold said:

RealityForAll said:

 I believe that the Royals transferred most of their lands and rental properties (the "Crown Estate") to the parliament in exchange for a annuity (called the Civil List) for the royal family.  Making the annuity to the royals a contractual arrangement.   However, beginning in 2012, legislation provided that the Civil List was set as  a percentage of the Crown Estate's annual net revenue (currently set at fifteen percent ("15.0%")).  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

 Interesting. So they gave up their property? And now instead of getting 100% of the revenue (minus taxes) they get 15%? It's basically an 85% tax. Not much for their "subjects" to complain about, I guess. But boy, I find the word "subject" difficult to swallow. But hey, it's their country.

 We're citizens. We haven't been subjects since 1983, and even then not all of us were subjects. that was a legal designation to do with the greater commonwealth.

 If you're still having trouble with the 'quote' try signing in again.

Thanks for that information, ridski.

BCC said:

 If you're still having trouble with the 'quote' try signing in again.

 It's an issue with IE 8, which I have at work. Discussed with Jamie offline, thanks.