Communism. Good or bad. What do you really know about Communism?

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

Doing a little googling, It appears Edward VIII had to abdicate for marrying a divorced American socialite.

Does in American language "socialite" mean light socialist ?

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

Does in American language "socialite" mean light socialist ?

No a socialite is just like Cola Lite, or Lilt Lite, it's a socialist with any semblance of society sucked out of them, for example Tony Blair

alternatively there is another definition
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...lish/socialite

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I suspect there are some rich people here who wouldn't exactly mind being addressed as "My lord".

Ah ah! Are you slowly becoming an egalitarian?

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

Insofar as Miss Markle being an American, perhaps she will inject a certain American freshness into your tired old aristocratic circles. The shoe is now on the other foot.

She must be careful, we have seen what happened to Diana to bring some freshness in British aristocracy.

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I guess the plane crash scenario is out, regarding the possibility of future Britons having to tug their forelocks to a black King or Queen. Still, something else could happen, plague, nuclear war, etc.

That would be so fun.
The British Queen and her heirs having to pay US taxes on all her wealth and revenues.
But trust me, the British aristocracy will find an edict of the VIIIth century explaining why Megan can't become a British Queen.

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Sadly, it is not so very funny.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42679187

Let me add more raw informations to our American fellow member.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-messages.html

Originally Posted by Wendigo

No a socialite is just like Cola Lite, or Lilt Lite, it's a socialist with any semblance of society sucked out of them, for example Tony Blair

alternatively there is another definition
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...lish/socialite

Thank you. One more word in my English vocabulary.

[haroldeye]

Scounds please don't confuse Princess Michael of Kent (German/Austrian baroness type person) wife of Prince Michael of Kent with the Duchess of Kent (nee Katherine Worsley) who is married to the Duke of Kent, Prince Michaels elder brother. The Duchess is a good Yorkshire girl from Hovingham and having met her several times a bloody good lass.

xysde69 - Diana did not bring anything to the Royal family, she was part of the Royal Family's inner from being a child. Her father was an Aide de Camp to the Queen, she lived near the Royal family for much of her young life and the marriage was arranged by her great grandmother and his grandmother.

The Royal family do pay taxes on their private wealth. Remember Wills and Harry (or their trustees on their behalf) successfully sued Fayed for their IHT bill because their mother had died whilst in his care.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

Scounds please don't confuse Princess Michael of Kent (German/Austrian baroness type person) wife of Prince Michael of Kent with the Duchess of Kent (nee Katherine Worsley) who is married to the Duke of Kent, Prince Michaels elder brother. The Duchess is a good Yorkshire girl from Hovingham and having met her several times a bloody good lass.

Oops

Same deal though. Why they should not marry was beyond me ever since I heard of it; just stupid. But we are still graduating from being a real life Ruritania and becoming a more liberal and civilised society at least in some respects.

[haroldeye]

The Act of Settlement was drawn up when religion really mattered. The Civil War was partly fought over religion and the Glorious Revolution was all about religion. Speaking as the son of a Catholic father, Chapel mother and inclined towards CofE I don't give a stuff but when the law was made it was good sense.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

The Act of Settlement was drawn up when religion really mattered. The Civil War was partly fought over religion and the Glorious Revolution was all about religion. Speaking as the son of a Catholic father, Chapel mother and inclined towards CofE I don't give a stuff but when the law was made it was good sense.

I suppose it made sense in a senseless situation. The idea of sectarian conflict has always struck me as an insult to God, to make religious worship the basis of violence entirely contrary to what the religion claims to stand for. But British history is chock-full of these miserable and shameful conflicts and all the world over we can see examples of sectarian malice and hatred feeding into wars and conflicts today. It happens with most major world religions and must have something to do with an inherent flaw in the human spirit.

Religious observance is much less in the UK than it used to be and in many ways we are better for it. I am by no means convinced that religious belief has waned anything like as much as outward observance has waned; but I think more of us are free-thinkers and are far more accepting of others than used to be so. It is healthy this way. Sectarian laws such as the Act of Settlement are indeed relics of an old social tension which is almost completely gone. But we have not suddenly become wonderful human beings and I can imagine new tensions, especially between the majority communities [plural] and inimical minorities. This is something we need to keep an eye on. No latter day St Bartholomew's Day Massacre wanted here.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

xysde69 - Diana did not bring anything to the Royal family, she was part of the Royal Family's inner from being a child. Her father was an Aide de Camp to the Queen, she lived near the Royal family for much of her young life and the marriage was arranged by her great grandmother and his grandmother.

Here she had the reputation to be a Princess who was not conventional at the level of the standard Royal behaviour.
But maybe it was stories of European journalists.

Originally Posted by haroldeye

The Royal family do pay taxes on their private wealth. Remember Wills and Harry (or their trustees on their behalf) successfully sued Fayed for their IHT bill because their mother had died whilst in his care.

I never said that they didn't pay their taxes. (Even if they put some money in tax havens.)
But if you are an American citizen, you have to pay the American taxes even if you don't live in the USA or you don't get wealth in the USA or you don't earn any revenue from the USA.

So if Queen Megan will still keep her US citizenship, she will have to pay the British taxes + the American taxes.

I have an ex-American friend, who decided to reject the American nationality when asking and getting the French one, because he didn't want to pay twice the taxes.

[Mal Hombre]

I thought Megan was taking British citizenship and even converting to the Church of England ?

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by Mal Hombre

I thought Megan was taking British citizenship and even converting to the Church of England ?

It's not a question of taking the British one, it's a question of rejecting the American one. If you are bi-national you have to follow the rules of both nations.
As example, a Belgo-British has to vote during Belgian votations, because votations are obligatory in Belgium.
Does she reject her American citizenship ?
I didn't follow the British gossips. You surely are better informed that I.