Memo to BL: This is what a cargo ship looks like. The only export the UK has ever had is pain and death and endless wars, that is coming to an abrupt end for a variety of reasons.
Britannia to rule the waves after Brexit
- Thread starter Blackleaf
- Start date
When do you have a full stop my little delusional spammer for once powerful (and corrupt) English throne?
No, I'm not wrong.
The United States operates eight Algol-class vehicle cargo ships. These are steamships - and they are currently the fastest cargo ships in the world.
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries' shipbuilding division builds steam propulsion and has received eight orders for steam powered "Sayaendo"-series LNG carriers, including two in October 2011 from Osaka Gas International Transport and MOL and one in 2014 from NYK.
After sitting aroud idle for twenty years, the high pressure steam lines on Brittania will be like unexploded bombs when pressurized, again.
Memo to BL: This is what a cargo ship looks like. The only export the UK has ever had is pain and death and endless wars, that is coming to an abrupt end for a variety of reasons.
lol
that line just went into receivership, and the whole shipping industry is going for a poop over it
Hanjin Shipping bankruptcy causes turmoil in global sea freight
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...nkruptcy-causes-turmoil-in-global-sea-freight
just sayin
Im betting they have been looking after the old girl like she was the queen herself
Maintaining UK's No.1 Attraction - The Royal Yacht Britannia
Oh dear. That would be a bit of rotten luck.
I reckon the British Museum is the UK's No1 attraction.
Paying $30B/year in usury fees when that money could be saved or spent internally on improving the lives of the poor. Your Nation is in even deeper to the Rothschild Cartel. You get the commas right but don't know how to spell 'your'. I feel vindicated even if it is a typing error rather than a sign of your low intelligence.
That is $100B Canadian smackers BTW
The ship actually has the prefix HMY.
HMY Britannia, or Royal Yacht Britannia. Either is acceptable.
A look around HMY Britannia in Edinburgh: on deck, the royal apartments, wardrooms, and messes -
People often make the mistake of thinking they have to salvage an old pile of junk when it is less expensive to build new. A 60+ year old steel ship is just going to be no end of problems.
I wasn't saying they should donate anymore than what they pay in taxes. The usury money doesn't come out of the pockets of the rich, it comes out of the taxes that all people pay and I'll bet the poor and middle class pay more taxes than your precious rich tards do.
Nice attempt at deflection. I have also gotten over your comma comment so take it from there, okay.
They should apply that concept to people also, concentrate on keeping the younger generation healthy rather than spending the money on old f*ckers like Soros. I'm also over 60 if that makes a difference.
No. The rich pay more in taxes.
Someone on £11,001 to £43,000 per year hands over 20% of it to the state in income tax.
Someone on over £150,000 per year hands over a whopping 45% of it to the state in income tax.
Income tax is scandalous.
The Royal Navy has a 251 year old mainly wooden warship - HMS Victory - still in commission that can still be sent into battle whenever necessary.
I think running a ship that was launched only in 1953 would be a doddle.
That is the rate before the deductions are applied. An accountant who can't get that reduced wouldn't have much of a customer base if they couldn't reduce that amount by a large margin.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ome-super-rich-they-pay-lower-taxes-for-real/
Strategies rich people use to pay less in taxes - Business Insider
Royal fortune stays secret: 'The Queen has been forced into paying taxes and the last thing she wants to do is to give the impression to the people that there is a tax regime for her and another one for the ordinary punter' | The Independent
THE voluntary arrangements by which the Queen and the Prince of Wales will pay income tax were unveiled yesterday with some pomp and little precision.The exact amount that the Queen will pay, and the size of the private fortune from which the income will be taxable will remain secret. Bequests to the next sovereign will remain free of inheritance tax; gifts to her other children will be taxed.
The Prince of Wales will replace his present arrangement - paying 25 per cent of the profits of the Duchy of Cornwall to the Treasury - with an agreement to pay tax at 40 per cent and deduct legitimate expenses. This would leave him no worse off, according to a Buckingham Palace spokesman, but it does make him vulnerable to any rise in the rate of income tax.
John Major assured MPs yesterday that Britain would not be getting a cut-price, bargain basement monarchy as a result of the voluntary agreement by the Queen to pay tax and restrict the size of the Civil List. She will return to the Treasury the money voted to all members of the Royal Family except herself, the Duke of Edinburgh, and the Queen Mother.
The Prime Minister told the Commons: 'The Conservative Party, and I believe every member of it and many beyond it as well, are very strong monarchists and would not wish to see changes in the constitutional hereditary monarchy that we have in this country.'
By far the greater part of the money spent on the Queen's behalf will remain exempt from tax because it is paid by the Government for her work as head of state.
In 1990-91, the Royal Family received a total of pounds 45,357,807 on the budgets of government departments. In this category came the pounds 16.8m spent by the Ministry of Defence on royal transport and the pounds 25.6 m spent by the Department of the Environment on the royal palaces.
The Lord Chamberlain, Lord Airlie, the official in charge of the Queen's finances, said yesterday that such moneys could not be counted as part of the Queen's income and that if tax were levied on them, they would have to be increased to compensate.
Why don't the 'commoners' get to use the money 'they' get as a deduction on their tax forms??
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ome-super-rich-they-pay-lower-taxes-for-real/
Strategies rich people use to pay less in taxes - Business Insider
Royal fortune stays secret: 'The Queen has been forced into paying taxes and the last thing she wants to do is to give the impression to the people that there is a tax regime for her and another one for the ordinary punter' | The Independent
THE voluntary arrangements by which the Queen and the Prince of Wales will pay income tax were unveiled yesterday with some pomp and little precision.The exact amount that the Queen will pay, and the size of the private fortune from which the income will be taxable will remain secret. Bequests to the next sovereign will remain free of inheritance tax; gifts to her other children will be taxed.
The Prince of Wales will replace his present arrangement - paying 25 per cent of the profits of the Duchy of Cornwall to the Treasury - with an agreement to pay tax at 40 per cent and deduct legitimate expenses. This would leave him no worse off, according to a Buckingham Palace spokesman, but it does make him vulnerable to any rise in the rate of income tax.
John Major assured MPs yesterday that Britain would not be getting a cut-price, bargain basement monarchy as a result of the voluntary agreement by the Queen to pay tax and restrict the size of the Civil List. She will return to the Treasury the money voted to all members of the Royal Family except herself, the Duke of Edinburgh, and the Queen Mother.
The Prime Minister told the Commons: 'The Conservative Party, and I believe every member of it and many beyond it as well, are very strong monarchists and would not wish to see changes in the constitutional hereditary monarchy that we have in this country.'
By far the greater part of the money spent on the Queen's behalf will remain exempt from tax because it is paid by the Government for her work as head of state.
In 1990-91, the Royal Family received a total of pounds 45,357,807 on the budgets of government departments. In this category came the pounds 16.8m spent by the Ministry of Defence on royal transport and the pounds 25.6 m spent by the Department of the Environment on the royal palaces.
The Lord Chamberlain, Lord Airlie, the official in charge of the Queen's finances, said yesterday that such moneys could not be counted as part of the Queen's income and that if tax were levied on them, they would have to be increased to compensate.
Why don't the 'commoners' get to use the money 'they' get as a deduction on their tax forms??
I tend to agree. I am over 60 too and in good health. But when I see people in their late 70's or older getting expensive taxpayer paid for treatments while working age people are waiting in line for operations so they can go back to work I think there is something wrong with our system. Probably deserves a thread of it's own.
I doubt it. But I am thinking along the lines of a modern propulsion system, Electronics, Sanitation systems as well as the condition of the hull. The largest boat I worked on was 120 ft and that was an expensive refit on a much younger hull. And that was just power.
I doubt it. But I am thinking along the lines of a modern propulsion system, Electronics, Sanitation systems as well as the condition of the hull. The largest boat I worked on was 120 ft and that was an expensive refit on a much younger hull. And that was just power.
The Queen (God Save the Queen!) voluntary started paying income tax in 1993, the year of that Indy article. What she pays is secret, but I'm assuming it's 40%.
Before 1993, Prince Charles paid 25 per cent of the profits of the Duchy of Cornwall to the Treasury. In 1993 he replaced that with an agreement to pay tax at 40 per cent and deduct legitimate expenses.
The Brexit vote (to be distinguished from the actual Brexit of course since that has not even begun yet) might actually have been good for the UK economy.
It weakened the pound and so benetited export and the tourism industries while still giving the UK full access to the EU market due to its still being a full EU member-state.
If the income comes from general revenue then she pays nothing, that was explained in the article as her income would have to be increased by that same amount. Why do the taxpayer not get to claim a deduction for how much they contribute to the income the Royals get. (rather than just the Queen)
With all due respect you guessing what she pays doesn't cut it in the real world as it is based on a fantasy rather than any actual documented evidence.
With all due respect you guessing what she pays doesn't cut it in the real world as it is based on a fantasy rather than any actual documented evidence.
No, it is a really big reason why they retire steam turbine powered ships that were built in the 1950's that have steamed a million miles. Luck is not the issue. It is a near certainty that something will fail right away.
The high pressure steam that steam turbine engines use in their first stage is 900°F. It is a colourless gas, at that temperature and it doles out instant death. It requires that boilers and steam lines in tip-top condition.
Last edited: