By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - The Royal Family are irrelevant in the modern era

sapphi_snake on 15 April 2011

How long 'till those people will be thrown out and exiled?



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

Around the Network
numonex on 15 April 2011
sapphi_snake said:
The Fury said:

I'd prefer there to be an official head of state then letting someone like David Cameron being the all out leader of our nation. The event is also not being paid for only by British Tax payers. The Royal Family themselves are paying for everything except security and road closures (stuff like that). Wedding and Reception is being paid for by the Royals. Yes you may argue that we pay them but they get neglegible amount compared to what we just put into our banking system, infact they took less last year and probably bring in more in Tourism and the Royals help and give huge amounts to charity every year as well as employ hundreds of people.

Question: Where do they get their money in the first place?

The Royal Family are fully funded and paid for by the UK Government on behalf of the British tax payers. Half a billion pounds annually is the cost of security and police/military to protect and safe guard the Royal Family. 



trashleg on 15 April 2011
The Fury said:
trashleg said:

Bleh. Bloody English.

 

The 'British' Monarchy. Scots are British too, even the angry ones who deny it.

But you must concede, that the monarcy is by-and-large a very English thing.

One reckons that the Royal Family has no effect on one's life whatsoever, and would rather the money be spent on better-deserved projects.

Besides, Burns' Scots > Queen's English.



Highwaystar101 said: trashleg said that if I didn't pay back the money she leant me, she would come round and break my legs... That's why people call her trashleg, because she trashes the legs of the people she loan sharks money to.
sapphi_snake on 15 April 2011
numonex said:
sapphi_snake said:
The Fury said:

I'd prefer there to be an official head of state then letting someone like David Cameron being the all out leader of our nation. The event is also not being paid for only by British Tax payers. The Royal Family themselves are paying for everything except security and road closures (stuff like that). Wedding and Reception is being paid for by the Royals. Yes you may argue that we pay them but they get neglegible amount compared to what we just put into our banking system, infact they took less last year and probably bring in more in Tourism and the Royals help and give huge amounts to charity every year as well as employ hundreds of people.

Question: Where do they get their money in the first place?

The Royal Family are fully funded and paid for by the UK Government on behalf of the British tax payers. Half a billion pounds annually is the cost of security and police/military to protect and safe guard the Royal Family. 

Well, if they ever want to cut spending, they could cut them off and make them work for a change.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)

The Fury on 15 April 2011
sapphi_snake said:
The Fury said:

I'd prefer there to be an official head of state then letting someone like David Cameron being the all out leader of our nation. The event is also not being paid for only by British Tax payers. The Royal Family themselves are paying for everything except security and road closures (stuff like that). Wedding and Reception is being paid for by the Royals. Yes you may argue that we pay them but they get neglegible amount compared to what we just put into our banking system, infact they took less last year and probably bring in more in Tourism and the Royals help and give huge amounts to charity every year as well as employ hundreds of people.

Question: Where do they get their money in the first place?

I did mention the fact we pay them in my original post ("Yes you may argue that we pay them but"). Okay so maybe didn't stand out as much as I wanted but I'll still happily give my few pence a year to keep hundreds of people in employment and lets them give millions to charity every year.



Hmm, pie.

Around the Network
The Fury on 15 April 2011
trashleg said:
The Fury said:
trashleg said:

Bleh. Bloody English.

 

The 'British' Monarchy. Scots are British too, even the angry ones who deny it.

 

But you must concede, that the monarcy is by-and-large a very English thing.

One reckons that the Royal Family has no effect on one's life whatsoever, and would rather the money be spent on better-deserved projects.

Besides, Burns' Scots > Queen's English.

It's a British thing, Scotland has had it's share of Kings and Queens as well and we wouldn't have a British Monarchy if it wasn't for King James VI (James I) of Scotland.

Like banks you mean? One's money didn't goto deserved projects, it went to the Banks... oddly enough, 2 Scottish Banks at that (HBOS and Royal Bank of Scotland). Maybe it could be argued the money could be better spent but you could argue that about nearly anything. We only give 67pence each to the Royal Family. I give more to lesser deserved projects via taxation then that.

It may be, the British Isles has many great dialegs... except those in Chatham. No one should speak like them. Bloody Chavs.



Hmm, pie.

dsister on 15 April 2011
SamuelRSmith said:

I just don't buy the tourism argument. The Palace of Versailles gets more visitors per year than Buckingham Palace... and France haven't had a Monarch for centuries.


Look at the royal wedding... People care about your monarchy... >_>



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

highwaystar101 on 15 April 2011
trashleg said:

Bleh. Bloody English.


Bloody Scots!



SamuelRSmith on 15 April 2011
dsister said:
SamuelRSmith said:

I just don't buy the tourism argument. The Palace of Versailles gets more visitors per year than Buckingham Palace... and France haven't had a Monarch for centuries.


Look at the royal wedding... People care about your monarchy... >_>


Just not our people. Airlines have reported that the weekend of the wedding is one of their busiest weekends that they've ever seen. Literally fully booked. These people aren't using their extended long weekend to celebrate the marriage, they're using it to get away from the country for a bit.



sapphi_snake on 15 April 2011
The Fury said:
sapphi_snake said:
The Fury said:

I'd prefer there to be an official head of state then letting someone like David Cameron being the all out leader of our nation. The event is also not being paid for only by British Tax payers. The Royal Family themselves are paying for everything except security and road closures (stuff like that). Wedding and Reception is being paid for by the Royals. Yes you may argue that we pay them but they get neglegible amount compared to what we just put into our banking system, infact they took less last year and probably bring in more in Tourism and the Royals help and give huge amounts to charity every year as well as employ hundreds of people.

Question: Where do they get their money in the first place?

I did mention the fact we pay them in my original post ("Yes you may argue that we pay them but"). Okay so maybe didn't stand out as much as I wanted but I'll still happily give my few pence a year to keep hundreds of people in employment and lets them give millions to charity every year.

I think such individuals have no place in a modern democratic society, and if they want money they should work for it, just like everyone else.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)