its a rubbish term dreamt up by the right during the eighties when the top rate of tax came down to 40%, the city was derregulated , state owned companies were privitised and all of a sudden bankers bonuses and executive remuneration started going through the roof.At the same time people at the other were facing job losses, negative equity , the threat of home repossession and the iniquitous poll tax.Its when Britain started to become more and more polarised and those who complained were accused of envy.Complete nonsense of course
That made me chuckle. 
Henry the 8th got through a couple of Katherine's if memory serves... 
If this is funded by private donations and not the tax payer I don't have a problem with this.
If the proposals for it to be used for disadvantaged youngsters, scientific research, to help trade amongst other things then why not.

No, you're not bitter and twisted at all 
But that's the private funded scheme - not one purchased at public expense.Even the bitter masses, to which all politicians have to bow, cannot have a problem with that.Unfortunately I am not sure a privately funded venture would quite carry the same status on the world stage (although much would depend upon implementation).Maybe next we can start privatising British embassies around the world?
you're right there, I'm not
If it's privately funded, will it be named like a football stadium? I can see it now...the JJB Royal Yacht or maybe the Argos Floating Palace 
But the public can't use it
Lets spend public money on things the public can actually use
I'd like to know how the yacht would be used - in fact a history of how Britannia was used.
In principle, it's not the amount of money that I have a problem with, but that it is used to buy a yacht that won't be used much.
When would it be used - Cowes Week, Navy Reviews (do we have them anymore), the odd other occasion.
So maybe a week or two a year.And what will happen to it for the remaining 50 weeks each year?
As for private money - that's all very well for the purchase, but who is going to pay for the crew, security, maintenance, refit, running costs - bet that comes out of the public coffers.
And I bet those costs are disproportionate to the use - because you can bet that it won't be simply wrapped up in celephane for the 50 weeks each year it isn't being used.It will need to be manned, maintained and run so that it is always ready if needed.
This arguments are often countered by promises of secondary use - school education has been mentioned for the proposed new ship.But realistically, will that happen and to what degree - it would be a security nightmare.Besides, the cost of Britannia was justified by it being a Hospital Ship - but was it despatched to the Falklands when needed - no it wasn't.
One positive I can think is that the building of the ship would generate jobs - mind you I don't have faith in the government that it wouldn't award the job to some company in Italy.
And finally, the motives of the private money.Most investors want to see some form of return - where will that come from - will they retain ownership hire it out to the UK government as required, or will this be a 'cash for honours' scheme.
Cheers,
Nigel