The Very-Many-Questions-Not-Worth-Their-Own-Thread Thread ΛΕ

[cardgame]

Carbon taxes can change people's choices.

You mean take them away?

 

[Arakhor]

EDIT: Ah...so Charles, who is the next king, "just happens" to be the designated successor as head of the commonwealth also. So, it isn't hereditary or anything, it just worked out. Got it.

Well, I did say it wasn't automatically inherited with the throne, but there is a clearly an obvious choice for the new incumbent. Given that the various Commonwealth nations (about half a dozen of which have never belonged to the British Empire) choose the next head, I suppose that someone else could be picked (theoretically).

 

[Cutlass]

You mean take them away?

No. Make people pay the cost of the damage they are inflicting on others.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, I did say it wasn't automatically inherited with the throne, but there is a clearly an obvious choice for the new incumbent. Given that the various Commonwealth nations (about half a dozen of which have never belonged to the British Empire) choose the next head, I suppose that someone else could be picked (theoretically).

From what I read, which was admittedly not necessarily of any great authority, Charles has already been picked as "designated successor." Apparently people think that this head of commonwealth position, much like the throne, needs to be handed on decisively so the choosing is done ahead of time. It should be noted that this "succession of the head of the commonwealth" has never actually happened yet, so on some level everything about it has a bit of an air of speculation. I'm fascinated with the entire thing, as I am set on becoming a citizen of a commonwealth realm at some near future point. God save the Queen!

 

[Takhisis]

You'll be a subject rather than a citizen, Tim.

 

[Arakhor]

"Head of the Commonwealth" is an even more meaningless title than "Queen of the United Kingdom &c", because the Queen does still have a few privilege powers.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

With no threat "ask a Brit, Canadian, etc"

I am looking at a TV documentary on the life of Queen Elisabeth.
A long life as person and as Queen, but everything comes to an end.

Q
How will countries in the Commonwealth, that have her as Queen, as head of state, react when she resigns or dies ?
For almost everybody living in the Commonwealth the Crown and the person Elisabeth are one.
Will her successor still be the King of all these Commonwealth countries ?

When she dies, I will grieve. No, I never met her. She's been here on a visit, to open the new children's wing of the hospital. But while there were some things she did that didn't sit well with a lot of people, overall I respect her.

There is a vocal anti-monarchy faction in Canada that keeps ranting that we need to be a republic after the Queen dies, but a lot of these are also the ones who praise Trump and insist that "we need to make Canada great again."

As far as I'm concerned, Canada never stopped being "great" - it just varies from Prime Minister to Prime Minister as to how "great" it is.

Barring something unthinkably awful, the Queen will not abdicate. Over 60 years ago she pledged to serve "(my) whole life", and she's still on the job in her mid-'90s. She's not obliged in any way to step aside for Charles, and once she dies, it will be his decision whether to abdicate in favor of William or serve as King. There's the fact that he was trained his entire life for this position, and he's indicated that he has no intention of abdicating. Another factor is that William's children are still really young, and Charles knows from experience what it's like to be a small child who doesn't get as much parental attention as he'd have liked because they're always off on some royal duty or other.

Whichever way it happens, it is going to feel downright bizarre not to have the Queen. So many Canadians have grown up during the reign of Elizabeth II, and the older people don't talk much about when her father was King.

Unless the 16 various countries with the Queen as head of state each take the opportunity to institute a republic instead, then yes, either Charles or William will be the next monarch of those 16 countries. They will not automatically be the next Head of the Commonwealth, though that is expected.

I expect there will be a bunch of anti-monarchy grumbling here, but most people would prefer to keep it if only to avoid even more headaches from having to dissect the Constitution and put it back together again.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You'll be a subject rather than a citizen, Tim.

Man, there is a lot to learn in this royal subject business...

On to a different question...

I was thinking of posting something about an event that happened in my hometown, ie the town I was born and raised in. But then I got sidetracked thinking about Palmdale being my hometown, ie the city I live in. Is hometown taken to mean one or the other of those, generally? Is there some term I am missing for one of them that makes "hometown" not ambiguous? How do you differentiate which one you mean?

 

[cardgame]

I have been wondering similarly myself. Here's my theory: Palmdale is your home, where you grow up is your home town. Unless you moved around a lot.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I have been wondering similarly myself. Here's my theory: Palmdale is your home, where you grow up is your home town. Unless you moved around a lot.

That seems a very reasonable position, but is it held widely enough that using it will be clear to people? Like, if I go to another forum and say "this happened in my home town" are people generally going to say "you mean Palmdale?" or will they mostly get it?

 

[tjs282]

I started answering your post, and then saw that everyone else had said the same things, but I'm posting anyway...

Jeremy Clarkson?

Yes, JC definitely ought to reconsider his life choices, not to mention most of his BS pronouncements on subjects he knows nothing about (like AGW) — which your notfriends appear to have swallowed without even chewing.

They're smarter than I am.

Nope, doesn't sound like it.

I'm the loser. I don't deserve to have friends.

Nope, don't believe that either, and neither should you. And if that is the kind of thing these people are telling you, then yes, they are seriously toxic, and emphatically notfriends, because real friends don't say that kind of **** to each other.

And everyone (who's not a complete arse) deserves to have friends.

 

[Snerk]

Carbon taxes can change people's choices.

Sure but proposing progressive carbon taxes that makes a real difference doesn't get people elected so we're back to square one.

 

[Arakhor]

It's probably different for people who've moved around a lot, but I have only three places in my life - where I was born, where I spent my formative years and the district in which I've spent the last 30 years (even though I've lived in two different parts of that district). As such, I definitely have a home district, but not really a home town.

 

[Cutlass]

Sure but proposing progressive carbon taxes that makes a real difference doesn't get people elected so we're back to square one.

Then stop electing politicians whose goal is to kick your children's teeth in.

 

[Snerk]

Then stop electing politicians whose goal is to kick your children's teeth in.

Ah, but there's a snag. You see, in a fit of outrageous tyranny, democracy has decided that other people than me should be allowed to vote too. And other people are mostly morons.

 

[Synobun]

That seems a very reasonable position, but is it held widely enough that using it will be clear to people? Like, if I go to another forum and say "this happened in my home town" are people generally going to say "you mean Palmdale?" or will they mostly get it?

I think they'll get it. I say that my hometown is in Ontario even though I was not born there and did not live there for the first couple years of my life. It is, however, where I primarily grew up.

 

[Silurian]

You mean take them away?

As other people have noted why should other people pay for your mess.

I would imagine that rural areas will be one of the last places to use ICE.
It would be a good idea too encourage, with tax breaks etc, clustering of property in rural areas so the need for personal transport is reduced.
Then if you decide to live in a house that is miles from another you have to pay the cost.

It's probably different for people who've moved around a lot, but I have only three places in my life - where I was born, where I spent my formative years and the district in which I've spent the last 30 years (even though I've lived in two different parts of that district). As such, I definitely have a home district, but not really a home town.

I live in my hometown, where I was born and went too school.
I have lived in three different properties here.
My job has involved working away from home, coming home at weekends or once a month or so.
Excluding hotels and B&Bs whilst looking for a place to stay I have lived in 24 places plus the 3 in my home town.

 

[Arakhor]

You've been in the same place for 50+ years? You must have seen a lot of changes!

 

[The_J]

I guess you should make it explicit when you say it. I'd not see a good way to differentiate it.
I can at least say "my parent's home", because that is also the place where I was mostly raised, but I guess that doesn't apply to everyone either.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I was thinking of posting something about an event that happened in my hometown, ie the town I was born and raised in. But then I got sidetracked thinking about Palmdale being my hometown, ie the city I live in. Is hometown taken to mean one or the other of those, generally? Is there some term I am missing for one of them that makes "hometown" not ambiguous? How do you differentiate which one you mean?

You can say "birthplace" for the one.