The curious case of the shopping-cart in the night time

That's funny, once had a MG sports car, a hard top model.
Had some weirdo neighbors who didn't like the fact that my boyfriend gave me a Saint Bernard dog for a gift.
Way too large a beast for my studio flat.
These "dudes" took a garden hose and flooded our car with water.
Never had a issue myself with these guys,not sure why my dog was any of their business since he was picked up after.
I didn't keep the dog for long, it was just too much, he was bigger then my flat.
Too slobbery of a pet too.
Not sure why anyone would think giving a huge fully grown Saint Bernard to a young women for a gift was a good idea, what a space case he was.
He later bought me a really nice Triumph TR 4A sports car, nice care, a little  too late though.
Too many stings attacked, like taking him back.

SimonTrew wrote:

....

How are you getting on with those kitchen tops have they been fitted yet? I bet Mrs Fluffy is going to love them.

.... Tony Blackburn is DEFINITELY dead now.

Wassup with Tony B?  I like him, he's at national treasure status.  Been around forever.

Kitchen top was in today but we had trouble getting the oven installed. 

Worktop was about 2mm too low so we had to mess about levering it up to get it in.  I was not too happy and Mrs Fluffy was fuming.  But with a bit of a struggle, we got it in and it works fine and looks good.  There's only an issue with it if you look too hard.  It's slow going doing anything here. 

I had to put in the hob, the oven (two person job), do the sink tap and the waste pipes this arvo.  But it all works and looks pretty good and so it should as it cost a packet.

We're still missing some bits and bobs and I have to complete the under cupboard lighting and the mood lighting for the plinth and ceiling but other than that, mucho happio we're one step closer to a goal (even if that seems to be a moving target sometimes). 

I wired the hob on two phases (it's 7.5kw) and the oven on another (3.6kw).  Not an entirely happy situation but one has to work with what one has and I reckon it should be fine.  Deep sink came from Ikea (very very pricey for what it is) and made out of a plastic type compound.  We got the tap in  Bauhaus.   

This has been months in the making so glad to finally get that one over for the moment.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

Maybe you need to think about getting a dog..

Can;t really do that. The two animals would then be at each other like, er, cat and dog. Actually the cat is now old enough (about 8 to ten years we are not sure, because we just took him in off the street) he just lets the dogs play and doesn't really seem to care about them at all, the dogs in the garden where I used to rent, or the dogs that my family has at our country place. He occasionally gives them a claw on the nose if they start bothering him, it is quite funny.

But what with the missus travelling all the time etc it would not be fair on the dog. The cat, is a cat, and as cats do basically doesn't give a damn about us, but dogs need much more care and attention.

The street round the corner each house has a lovely dog in the garden, different breeds. Quite often on the street you then find a ball which presumably has been chucked over the garden fence with playing with the dog. I then chuck it back, but they probably all get other dogs' balls back. There was a nice big football there the other day. I know the breeds of dogs again but you can understand my being evasive and saying just "the street round the corner"etc for privacy.

I don't think Vigassz! Kutya is going to help (cave canem in latin, bewere of the dog).

I wonder if Vigassz! comes for latin for "vigilance". it seems extremely hard to get hold of a Hungarian dictionary with etymology. My best expensive dictionary sotar forgotten how to spell it, which is kinda $100 ish in two volumes from the Akadamia Kiado (the posh publishers) doesn't have etymology. Etymological dictionaries in England are just so easy to get hold of but never seen a Hungarian szotar with an etymology. And because of Hungarian being Finno-Ugric it means you hace to kind of guess the roots of words. Obviously Latin and Greek ones are easy to spot. With the spelling reforms etc sometimes they are in disguise. It is not really much a hard language to learn (Hungarians like to think it is) it is just DIFFERENT. You can't get away knowing Latin or Spanish or German or English of French. You just have to learn it.

klsallee wrote:

SimonTrew wrote:

Brits hate being called Brits! I ain't Brit I am English.  You try asking a Canadian what part of America are you from? Sheesh!

To each their own. But I will of course endeavor not to allude to you being Welsh, or Scottish in the future.

Call a Welshman an Englishman and he won't thank you for it.

But British people tend to dislike being called Brits. Maybe it is a generational thing, maybe young people don't mind. Middle-aged fartarses like me would prefer to be called British. "Britisher' is out because it has tones of being xenophobic, racist, Little-Englander, or used to have, anyway. But I am not Briitish, I am English. On any official form that it has nationality I put English, or cross out British and put English. I have nothing against the Scots apart from their parsimony, lack of bishops and love of drink, nor the Welsh except their annoying close-harmony singing and the need to change trains at Machynlleth, which the missus cannot pronounce HAHA I get one back on your strange Hungarian vowels) nor even can I find fault with the Northern Irish for their bright parade season to rival mardi gras and their inability to form their own government. But let's face it everyone knows the English are best and why should I not be proud to be one of them?

I'm not sure where a English person is actually from historically.
Do they have some Roman roots or Nordic?
Gaul, or German?
Honestly there was so much history and invasions there it makes me wonder.
I know the Royal family is related to Germany and Romania, blood relations to old Count Dracula himself.
I find it interesting to see connections between people.
On my dad's side we can trace the family back so far to 1775 as of being in the same area in SE Poland.
But not sure if they moved there ages back to escape a famine or war, the spot is up in the remote mountains and maybe they just ran for the hills generations ago for safety.
On my mom's side we are German, she was half German although no one would know by just looking at her.
She was part native American, Mohawk and a mystery "Brit" was told she was part English but could be Welsh.
Not sure, names like Jones, Jackson and Rice to name a few.
My eldest sister married a Welshman from London, he was nice enough but his mom was a real piece of work.
My mom had her over for a family dinner when the women was in the USA for a visit.
She was more fussy about spices and her food then a 2 year old.
My mom never wanted to see her and God forbid cook for her again.
I can tell allot about someone by how good a house guest they are.
Clean your plate and swallow whatever you take even if you get ill later on. Dang, my son's ex GF was really nice but cooking wasn't her forte.
Japanese red bean soup but done so sweet one almost lost it with every bite.
I ate the whole bowl not to hurt her feelings, can always take some pepto later on.
Off topic, once again.
Yes, I do wish the Tesco near us would purchase some new trollie's for their store.
lately everytime I put in my 100 forints for a cart the wheels are all shaky and rough rolling.
I mean their prices on good are going up all the time, why not buy some newer carts with some of their profit.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

I'm not sure where a English person is actually from historically.
Do they have some Roman roots or Nordic?
Gaul, or German?
Honestly there was so much history and invasions there it makes me wonder.
I know the Royal family is related to Germany and Romania, blood relations to old Count Dracula himself.

Interesting question...... We [English] are a bit of everything

Historically, the English population is descended from several peoples — the earlier Celtic Britons (or Brythons) and the Germanic tribes that settled in Britain following the withdrawal of the Romans, including Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Frisians. Collectively known as the Anglo-Saxons, they founded what was to become England (from the Old English Englaland) along with the later Danes, Anglo-Normans and other groups.

As for the Royal family, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (Queen's husband) was born Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark.

Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark was born in Mon Repos on the Greek island of Corfu on 10 June 1921, the only son and fifth and final child of Prince Andrew of Greece and Denmark and Princess Alice of Battenberg.

So as well as English, German there is Greek and Danish is there too

I am sure if there was DNA testing back in medieval times, I am sure you would find a different history of ancestors.

I really do find genetic history very interesting.
Why some people do things one way and others another, must come from somewhere.
I saw a several documentaries on Price Phillip and his story in Greece, his mum becoming a nun and the members of his family from Germany and their connections with the Nazi's.
What a story, his being sent to a rough and tough boarding school and being picked on by the other boys for being a "foreigner".
Very unlikely mate for a future queen but it seems to have worked for them, what married over 60 some years.
Several of my cousins did that 23 and me DNA test.
They wanted me to do it too for fun but I am not so sure I want that in the data base... Never know how that may effect any future family members, crazy world these days.
Not paranoid but perhaps I have seen too many sci-fi movies, never know for sure how it may come back and bite you.

I now wonder if the Queen has ever used a shopping trolly in her life?
Can't even imagine her walking through a grocery store and looking for deals.
I know she drove during the wars some trucks ,ambulances.
Just can't see her picking out the best tomatoes.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

Off topic once again

That's my fault really, I have a tendency to ramble off in odd directions. As indeed do the trolleys.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

I do wish the Tesco near us would purchase some new trollie's for their store.
lately everytime I put in my 100 forints for a cart the wheels are all shaky and rough rolling.
I mean their prices on good are going up all the time, why not buy some newer carts with some of their profit.

Tesco made a thumping loss in 2015 of £6.4bn, that is about $10bn USD. In 2016/2017 they did a bit better making about a billion and a half, and that looks set to continue for 2017/2018. But like most supermarkets they work on extremely tight margins. Shopping carts cost quite a lot of money, about €100 a pop, so it's not surprising they like to chain them up. More than anything, it stops them wandering around car parks in the wind, bashing against vehicles and so on; I assure you a shopping cart costs more than 100Ft, and although Tesco deny any responsibility etc. it is just a hassle for them if someone tries to sue them for negligence etc.) Personally I have a little keytag from Fotaxi that fits in the slot to release the cart. This is handy because I tend to dump my loose change into a piggy bank, well it is the Currency Cat actually, and then are forever finding myself short of the necessary 100Ft.

(Incidentally a British 10p piece will work as a Canadian quarter in parking meters in Toronto. Well, it did the last time I went and hadn't a quarter. At current exchange rates you are making a gain of about 8 cents, since 10p is worth about 17c, and that's about 33% profit, depending on whether you're buying or selling. But I wouldn't recommend it as a useful form of arbitrage.)

Historically, European shopping carts have all four castors rotate whereas North American ones tend only to have two castors rotate. This is because European supermarkets tended to have narrower aisles than North American ones, so the cart needed a smaller turning circle. Not so true now of course, with out-of-town retail parks and so on, but it seems that habits are hard to break. So European shopping carts are much more likely to wander than North American ones.

If you like a good picture book for your toilet/restroom may I recommend "The Stray Shopping Carts of Eastern North America: A Guide to Field Identification" , ISBN 9780810955202.

An interesting fact about the Queen.

The Queen is celebrating her 91st birthday but she can’t prove her age on her passport.

Queen Elizabeth II doesn’t have one, nor does she have a license. In fact, the British royal doesn’t ever have to prove her identity.

The monarch has visited more countries than any other royal in the UK, with the figure estimated to be over 116.

But she hasn’t needed to produce her travel document once.

Even though other royals including Prince Charles and the Duke of Edinburgh have to hold a passport, the Queen is the only one exempt from the rule.

This is because she’s the one who issues them.

The first page of all British passports read: “Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State requests and requires in the name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary."

While the Queen can travel freely between countries, she can also drive across her own country without ID either.

According to British law, the monarch doesn’t need a driver’s licence because she issues those too.

The Queen has nevertheless been driving for some 73 years after learning when she was just 19.

Funny,
I do think it is a good idea to charge for use of a cart because otherwise they would be rolling into parked cars or taking up parking spaces.
Happens all the time in the US, people are too lazy to walk 10 feet and put them away in the rack.
In places like Vegas where it gets really windy they hit cars all the time.
I noticed here at Tesco in Arena plaza that these past couple of weeks they have been raising costs slowly .
Some paper towels I was buying went up a good 40 forints a pack and same on most other items I usually buy.
Small change but adds up in the long run.
I am sure I will have a heart attack with prices my next US visit. Been a couple of years since we went there and prices are going up everywhere.
At least in Vegas if you don't want to spend a fortune on steaks or some special ethnic meal, buying spices and extras for one time dishes, you can always find just about anything in a casino buffet for a flat price.
Places like The Golden Nugget, The M, The Palms have really decent quality items cooked nicely and not warmed over all day long for a good price.
Buffets a bit off the stip such as The Santa Fe Station have fresh seafood, sushi 
The M has all you can drink wine and beer and liquor in your espresso over 250 items from simple foods to Thai and Hawaiian dishes.
About $25. a person and it's located in a nice setting, not crowded and noisy.
They sometimes film a food show inside that buffet and have master chiefs doing the shows.
I took my little great-niece to The Bellagio buffet when I sat her. Really great buffet for $50 for 2, only issue was wine was a extra $10 a head , was just wanting one small glass since I was child sitting, not going to even drink $10. worth so didn't try it out.
I was very surprised how good it was, sushi, smoked fish items, bagels with lox, fresh berries out of season  etc.
We spent hours swimming afterwards since we had over eaten lunch .
Silly little kid though, just went for the sushi and pizza, what a combo.
In the evening my niece took us out to some 5 star Japanese place inside the Bellagio, spent nearly $400 and I swear it wasn't as tasty as the buffet sushi had been.

SimonTrew wrote:

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

Off topic once again

That's my fault really, I have a tendency to ramble off in odd directions. As indeed do the trolleys.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

I do wish the Tesco near us would purchase some new trollie's for their store.
lately everytime I put in my 100 forints for a cart the wheels are all shaky and rough rolling.
I mean their prices on good are going up all the time, why not buy some newer carts with some of their profit.

Tesco made a thumping loss in 2015 of £6.4bn, that is about $10bn USD. In 2016/2017 they did a bit better making about a billion and a half, and that looks set to continue for 2017/2018. But like most supermarkets they work on extremely tight margins. Shopping carts cost quite a lot of money, so it's not surprising they like to chain them up. (Also of course, it stops them wandering around car parks in the wind, bashing against vehicles and so on; I assure you a shopping cart costs more than 100Ft, and although Tesco deny any responsibility etc. it is just a hassle for them if someone tries to sue them for negligence etc.).

I do know in the UK they made that trolleys would only work in the shop and carpark, if you travelled further they would cease up. It was the worst thing they ever did because even in the shop they wouldn't work a lot of the times.

But Tescos did go through bad patch, trying to expand in America which failed, then false accounting and buying a few aeroplanes for management. So after a restructure and shedding some management they are on track. They have also bought Bookers a Cash N Carry company which supplies their rival smaller shops.

As Sainsbury's and Asda (owned by Walmart) 2nd & 3rd largest supermarkets in the UK are to merge it will be interesting to see what Tescos reaction will be.

SimCityAT wrote:

The first page of all British passports read: “Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State requests and requires in the name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary."

I know. I started a topic on "The let and hindrance" a few weeks ago. Passports cause more lets and hindrances than almost any other document in existence, so it is pure pomp to put it on there.

It is sheer nonsense to say that the Queen doesn't need a passport as if that were some kind of divine right. She just doesn't in practice need one, if asked for identification she can always turn sideways and hold up a postage stamp. It is of course the foreign country's right to require whatever documentation from whoever they please when someone crosses its border, the Queen included. And she won't get into trouble on the way home, because as far as I can gather, no British  subject is required to show a passport to a British official while on British soil. (I haven't tried that one yet, as I said in the other thread). It would be odd were they required to, because many British subjects don't have one. (Although since the Queen is not a British subject, she might in fact be the only British citizen who could lawfully be required to provide identification. Monarchs have not been above the law since about, oooh, 1215.)

Also I notice that the Government has resumed the habit of saying that the passport remains the property of Her Majesty, natch. Which is very odd, because I could swear I paid for it, not her. Banks have a habit of doing this too, of putting on the card "this card remains the property of XYZ bank". If you phone up and tell them "I lost your card" they puzzle for a bit. "You mean your card, sir?". "No, your card. It said quite clearly on it, it was your card. I think you were damned foolish to lend it to me, but anyway, I lost it."

Well, the queen does own Canada, Australia,the UK and God knows what else.
Since it's all hers guess she doesn't have to answer to anyone about anything.
Personally I would like to know the where about's of those 10 Native children in Canada who never came back after having a "picnic" with her and Phillip.
Just makes me wonder who or what was for lunch that day.
My husband renewed his US passport recently here at the US embassy.
Was really quick it was ready within 2 weeks, much faster then renewing it in the US.

SimCityAT wrote:

I do know in the UK they made that trolleys would only work in the shop and carpark, if you travelled further they would cease up. It was the worst thing they ever did because even in the shop they wouldn't work a lot of the times.

I never bothered to find out how those work. I assume it's done with a brake on the castor on which a fixed magnet is attached and held off by a spring, then an electromagnet buried at the parkolo boundary which has more pull than the spring has. Fixed magnet gets attracted to electromagnet, brake is applied to wheel. But deliberately spewing out a wide spectrum of electromagnetic radiation is not a very good idea, and it's not as if these things are going to be tuned. I suppose an easy test would be to hold your mobile phone near it and see if it gets confused, although doing some research would also work, but then idle speculation is much more fun.

SimCityAT wrote:

As Sainsbury's and Asda (owned by Walmart) 2nd & 3rd largest supermarkets in the UK are to merge it will be interesting to see what Tescos reaction will be.

I've always thought a merger with e.g. Carrefour or Auchan or another biggie like that seemed more likely than their American exploits, where they have tried and failed many times. Yet supermarkets seem quite national things; Tesco have actually done very well to become the largest retailer in Hungary.

If you put the boot on the other foot, you can think of Wal*Mart's getting into, and pulling out of, ASDA as an admission that Wal*Mart, as Wal*Mart, had no chance of penetrating the British market; there just wasn't the brand recognition.

They seem to be all having a moan about it all in the news.... But didn't Morrisons buy Safeways in the 90's?

SimCityAT wrote:

They seem to be all having a moan about it all in the news.... But didn't Morrisons buy Safeways in the 90's?

In 2004. But Safeway was a fairly minor player.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

Well, the queen does own Canada, Australia,the UK and God knows what else.

I would not go as far as saying she owned them, but she is head of 16 states: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, and the United Kingdom. She is also monarch of three Crown dependencies—Guernsey, Jersey, and Isle Man and two associated states—the Cook Islands and Niue—since they acquired this status in 1965 and 1974, respectively.

SimonTrew wrote:

SimCityAT wrote:

They seem to be all having a moan about it all in the news.... But didn't Morrisons buy Safeways in the 90's?

In 2004. But Safeway was a fairly minor player.

I was close, just seems much longer lol

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

My husband renewed his US passport recently here at the US embassy.
Was really quick it was ready within 2 weeks, much faster then renewing it in the US.

That is my experience too, well not mine personally. My Canadian ex renewed hers in London (at Canada House) and it was much quicker than had she done so in Canada; my Hungarian missus renewed hers in London (at Eaton Square) and it was much quicker than doing it in Hungary. There was no great hurry on either occasion, it is not as if they asked/paid for it to be expedited or anything.

When I went to the US Embassy in London on Grosvenor Square (to get my H1 and L1 visas, when I lived in Houston), not part of London I am much familiar with, I couldn't find it. (I'd walked down from Bond Street so was at the other end of the rather large square/gardens.) So I asked a policeman who was standing in front of one of the other embassies there. He pointed and said see that ruddy great building over there with the eagle on the top and the Stars and Stripes? Yes, thank you officer. (It was rather a welcome home, really. Everyday British sarcasm is something I really miss.)

It was all a bit of a rush after that, cos the embassy only opens for a couple of hours a day (why?) and you need a special London version of the form which has a paying-in slip. I would get off the redeye flight, pick up sterling from an ATM, head on the Tube to Bond Street and walk down to the embassy to  wait for it to open (no hurry until it does). Then grab a form (the London embassy had a special version with a paying-in slip), run with my baggage to Bond Street post office before you get behind a woman paying in all the farthings she has collected since 1958, fill out the form, attach the photos, pay the cash fee, get the counterslip stamped, run back to the embassy with form, counterslip, more photos, passport, prepaid return envelope all hand delivered before they closed. Three days later passport with visas delivered to my door in the UK, back to Houston we go.

Us Brits now have to do ours online and the renewed passport is sent over from Liverpool. They closed the foreign offices a few years back, then our nearest one was in Germany. We are still able to get an ETD (emergency passport) that enables us to travel to the UK or if need be to travel back A maximum of 2 destinations. That cost 100 GBP.

SimCityAT wrote:

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

Well, the queen does own Canada, Australia,the UK and God knows what else.

I would not go as far as saying she owned them, but she is head of 16 states: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, and the United Kingdom. She is also monarch of three Crown dependencies—Guernsey, Jersey, and Isle Man and two associated states—the Cook Islands and Niue—since they acquired this status in 1965 and 1974, respectively.

Read she also owns  allot of NYC.

SimCityAT wrote:

The first page of all British passports read: “Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State requests and requires in the name of Her Majesty..."

Since Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State is, presumably, the Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson, I am not going to become overconfident that any requests or requirements he may make will be taken very seriously.

Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State for Home Affairs managed, on her watch, to cause God knows how many lets and hindrances to Commonwealth citizens i.e. the Windrush saga, denying Commonwealth citizens, Her Majesty's subjects,  British residents their basic rights they have paid for all their lives. An absolute scandal. That has been going on for years, but has only just recently caught national attention. An absolute, disgusting scandal that should have been sorted out years ago. People didn't bother to register to be British because they thought they already were. Oh, and who was Home Secretary when they didn't have these targets? Who wasn't there when it didn't happen? Stand up, Prime Minister.

Perhaps, since most of them have British passports, they can enter the country with them and expect any official, in the name of Her Majesty, to  allow them to pass without let or hindrance and offer them every assistance as may be necessary. There are people who have gone to visit family in the Caribbean, come back to Blighty and been denied admission on a British passport, then had pensions cut, denied access to the NHS, threatened with eviction and deportation, when every bit of paperwork shows they are as British and I am, often more British if you simply count the number of years they have lived, worked and paid their taxes, brought up children and grandchildren, all for the good of the Land of Hope and Glory, Mother of the Free. An absolute, complete bloody scandal.

The let and hindrance, indeed.

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

SimCityAT wrote:

Marilyn Tassy wrote:

Well, the queen does own Canada, Australia,the UK and God knows what else.

I would not go as far as saying she owned them, but she is head of 16 states: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, and the United Kingdom. She is also monarch of three Crown dependencies—Guernsey, Jersey, and Isle Man and two associated states—the Cook Islands and Niue—since they acquired this status in 1965 and 1974, respectively.

Read she also owns  allot of NYC.

owns land privately in the United States and Canada, though not in her capacity as Sovereign of the United Kingdom. She owns a horse farm in Kentucky, and is believed to own prime Park Avenue estate in New York City. Its said the family is the legal owner of about 6.6 billion acres of land, one-sixth of the earth's land surface. If you included Antarctic territories then it could be more.

SimCityAT wrote:

If you included Antarctic territories then it could be more.

I don't think you can do that. There are plenty of disputes about who "owns" Antarctica, wait forty years until we run out of oil and we will probably find out the country with the biggest guns owns it. British Antarctic Territory is relatively small, but in any case the Queen doesn't own it.

I don't know where you are dragging those figures from, but you have to separate the Crown Estate from land owned by government and only nominally in the monarch's possession. You have to separate the Crown from the Queen as a person. As the Monarch, she owns all the post offices too, police stations, prisons, courts of justice, lunatic asylums, all Government buildings, and beaches above the high-tide mark, the Cinque Ports, and I suppose as head of the Church of England she owns all C of E churches, churchyards and other C of E land, which is in itself considerable.

You drive your car on the Queen's Highway so except for private roads she owns all of them, which is about 2% of land in England. Postman Pat, being a servant of the Queen, can park his van anywhere, but the rest of us when we park on the street are committing criminal offences by obstructing the passage and repassage of traffic along the Queen's highway.

She owns all of the rivers and waterways that nobody else specifically owns, and owns every drop of rain once it hits the ground (you can legally collect it in a water barrel, it's yours until it hits the ground, then it's hers, but she lets the water companies deal with it for her cos she's a bit busy).

She owns the BBC.

She owns all military land, seaports and airbases. She owns all military equipment and uniforms. She owns the Royal Parks in London. She owns my passport. She owns my birth certificate and marriage certificate, of which I only ever get a certified copy, and one day she or her successors will own my death certificate. My next of kin willl, however, own the ground under which I am buried, so they can legally dance on my grave without committing trespass.

She owns every wildfowl except a few swans that are upped. She owns Fish Royal, flotsam and jetsam, and treasure trove (though she will pay a fair price to say thankyou for finding it).

It's a good job we've got a good Queen. She has served our country loyally for so many years. My Mum got given in 53, I think every child did, a souvenir album of her coronation. My Mum would have been 14 at the time and in her last year at school. I ain't got nothing against the Queen. But the Crown Prerogative makes a nonsense of a government being answerable to its people. "I asked the Queen, and she says it is all right, go ahead". She hasn't much option, were the Queen to refuse to assent then there would be a constitutional crisis and bang goes the monarchy. That ministers can write laws without scrutiny, under the Crown Prerogative. We have to get rid of that.

The figures are from research, but it is a very complicated subject. Because when her personal wealth is said does she really own it or does the country itself own the land.

Because you do have the crown estate and that is given to the treasury and in return, a proportion is given back to the royals and that is used to pay for her travel and the upkeep of the property and to pay staff.

Historically, Crown Estate properties were administered by the reigning monarch to help fund the business of governing the country. However, in 1760, George III surrendered control over the Estate's revenues to the treasury, thus relieving him of the responsibility of personally paying for the costs of the civil service, defence costs, the national debt, and his own personal debts. In return, he received an annual grant known as the Civil list.

By tradition, each subsequent monarch agreed to this arrangement upon his or her accession. However, from 1 April 2012, under the terms of the Sovereign Grant Act 2011 (SSG), the Civil List was abolished and the monarch was thenceforth provided with a stable source of revenue indexed to a percentage of the Crown Estate's annual net revenue (currently set at 15%).

The Crown Estate in 2015 made record profits of £285.1 million.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/busi … 40876.html

SimCityAT wrote:

If you included Antarctic territories then it could be more.

If you're ever in Cambridge, UK, take an hour to go to the British Antarctic Survey museum (the BAS are based in Cambridge)  on I think Bene't street (it might be another street at that point, Cambridge street names change every couple of hundred yards or so even though it is patently the same street). Opposite where they split the atom etc. It doesn't take long to go round and is quite interesting. Like most museums in England, it is free admission.

One thing that struck me, is this is the stuff the Scott expedition brought back. Most of it is mildly interesting in a kinda oh look tins of bully beef kinda way,tattered clothes and battered skis etc, but the best is they took a player piano with them. Now that's understandable, not much in the way of entertainment in the frozen wastes, but the thought of four men and some huskies dragging this player piano behind them to get to base camp does somewhat amuse me. What is just even more perplexing to me is that they brought it back. I mean, you have taken a player piano half way around the world, being more essential than, say, some nice woolly socks, then having been beaten to it by Amundsen, you go heigh-ho let's set for home, better get that player piano back, long journey home and someone lost the ace of spades so it's not as if we can play cribbage. What were they thinking?