I think they should name the new baby Shamu since its just a tourist attraction. The reason the royal family exists is because they bring in more in tourism than Britain spends giving them perks. Once the tourism slows down they can be kicked from Buckingham palace and forced to be normal.
Poll: Do you like the British Royal Family?
- Thread starter Terramax
- Start date
Kind of "meh", really. They're not particularly important in the grand scheme of things, but I'm opposed to getting rid of them because we can't very well be a United Kingdom with no monarchy, and "United Republic" sounds stupid.
Also, this. Getting really sick and tired of the media hype machine, the only reason people cared about the wedding was because we got a day off.Hazy992 said:
How about the I don't care option? why do people always leave that out when there are plenty of people who don't devote any time to these pseudo-celebrity tabloid idiots?
Ah well... not like theres other important stuff to worry about in this world, right?
Ah well... not like theres other important stuff to worry about in this world, right?
Johnny Novgorod said:
They actually bring in 100s of millions more in revenue for the country than they use, they also privately own a large amount of land which is their own income. This by and large creates huge sums of living money for them, however they are extremely good landlords to the tenants charging very fair rates and supporting said tenants regularly. There are some taxes that certain royal avoid, such as Prince Charles with corporation tax, although with the recent scandal with large companies saying they are Irish so pay no tax here the royals actually pay more than they could do.
Sadly the royals are an example of wealth since birth breeding generosity, we currently are considering paying our MPs more just to stop them becoming MORE corrupt. The royal family who are constantly filmed cannot have the luxury of being overtly corrupt and must remain generally good all the time to avoid public outbursts of hatred.
Having seen another post briefly concerning how the British Royals are the only royals and no one internationally bothering with say Spain's royals, this is partly due to the Queen being so popular on a world basis, having been there during WWII she helped many Brits and often says quite sensible and supportive things to do with the commonwealth. Sadly many royals in other countries are simply not nice at times, as pointed out about the Spanish king if that is true. Also the richest woman in Spain in a very strange member of their royalty who hordes her money with dodgy plasic surgery....The British royal fit the part best and act the part of fairly tale royals. This will diminish with the queens death sadly.
Not British, and I don't dislike the Royal Family.
I more just am sick of people pretending like they're interesting to talk about.
I more just am sick of people pretending like they're interesting to talk about.
I'm American and honestly it kinda angers me with how much the media has been concentrating on them. There are better things in this world for the media to cover and instead they are giving media time to family that just had a baby. It is a baby. It is in no way special or unique. There should be no media coverage of a baby unless said baby is the herald of the apocalypse.
I feel the same way when a politician gets the same treatment, especially at funerals. Oh, this person died yet because he was in a seat of power that somehow makes it newsworthy. The world and society are not going to halt because of a baby being born or someone in a position of power dying.
I feel the same way when a politician gets the same treatment, especially at funerals. Oh, this person died yet because he was in a seat of power that somehow makes it newsworthy. The world and society are not going to halt because of a baby being born or someone in a position of power dying.
Sure. I don't necessarily care about them but there's just something about the throwback they represent that I do like, especially in the current generation.
"The United Republic of the Kingdoms of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland."BlackStar42 said:
At the same time "because it's our name" is a pretty stupid reason to support anything. It would probably change to RGB&NI - "The Republic of Great Britain & Northern Ireland".
I'm Canadian and I like them. I like the tradition that goes along with them. The Queen is like our nice grandma (not quite as keen on Charles). I would certainly much rather have them as non-partisan heads of state than some wanker republican president. (Side note: Republics always seem to be born in blood and killing. Canada went the constitutional monarchy way and everything worked out just fine.) When they visit our armed forces it is a huge morale boost for them. Heck the current government likes them enough that they're putting the name Royal back into things.
Not 100% sure but I think they generate a butload of revenue from their estates and tourism. Pretty sure the taxpayers aren't footing the royal?s bill. MP's on the other hand...
Not 100% sure but I think they generate a butload of revenue from their estates and tourism. Pretty sure the taxpayers aren't footing the royal?s bill. MP's on the other hand...
I am British, and really I am indifferent. I could care less about what happens involving the royal family.
If it's a choice between privileged aristocrats or President Cameron, then polish my crown and call me a Royalist. Why not compromise and have an elective monarchy?Abomination said:
