comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! π
We only have like 5 years or so left of the queen anyway. Can the left wing not just let her have her time and let people on the right appreciate her for that time? Same goes for people on the right, can you not just let the left enjoy Attenborough for the next 5 years or so? Let's have some peace.
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
Not a fan of either of them for different reasons, the royal family are a bunch of toffs who only care about clinging onto their wealth and power in a society where more and more people don't really care about them. Meghan Markle comes across very fake to me like most actors do, seems to very ambitious and hungry (nothing wrong with that) but acts helpless for image reasons. Harry hates the media and a lot of aspects of the royal family because of how his mother died which is understandable. They've decided to become liberal preachy celebrity types so they'll become more annoying but I don't think either of them are bad people.
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 3 minutes ago
I'd have a go on Liz.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She would eat you alive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Easier to tug to Liz than Elgar, that's for sure
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, on Oprah and James Corden and social media and papers and magazines....they were very specific.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, on Oprah and James Corden and social media and papers and magazines....they were very specific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've seen Harry say he wanted to get her/them away from the UK tabloids/press. But that is very different from doing an interview with Oprah, or a Netflix show or whatever where you control the narrative.
I've seen Harry say he wanted to get her/them away from the UK tabloids/press. But that is very different from doing an interview with Oprah, or a Netflix show or whatever where you control the narrative.
_________________
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, on Oprah and James Corden and social media and papers and magazines....they were very specific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've seen Harry say he wanted to get her/them away from the UK tabloids/press. But that is very different from doing an interview with Oprah, or a Netflix show or whatever where you control the narrative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And he has as much of a right as anyone to be against the UK press but it is still a little contradictory. Many famous people manage to shut themselves out of the public eye successfully and they don’t do it by talking to Oprah π this is just to point their point across about their feud with the royal family and they know this will pss them off no end.
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
It was funny that left wing republicans fell in love with the Royal Meghan, once certain political boxes started being ticked.....
How predictable was that?
The fact Meghan bullied two female members of her staff, wears jewels from the Saudi Royal hit man and Harry signs an 18m dollar contract with Spotify places both in a strong moral and progressive place, imo.
How do they cope?
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 59 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it was blind and uncritical you would be right.
Putting tradition and patriotism in inverted commas doesn't make them bad things and they are not the same thing. I quite like tradition, but patriotism less so.
Of course all history isn't good, it is what has happened in the past. The remarks about a rock floating in space have absolutely nothing to do with whether being a monarchiste or republican brings more enjoyment to the country at large. I believe it does in a generally innocent fashion.
I've never found any difference in intelligence on either side. Just a different viewpoint
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said. I'm sure we're all capable of being 'intelligent' and discussing our 'viewpoints'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do sections of the English left loath themselves, their country, history and their neighbours?
Is it intellectual virtue signalling, guilt ridden self-hate or just a teenage phase that some get marooned in?
Other nations have left wing movements that do not turn in on themselves and it is so ironically "English" to hate yourselves and apologize for being English.
Just an observation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The trouble is both our government and the opposition are so left wing they are trying to outdo each other
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! π
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I'm just curious of what you thought, because I don't see there being a huge upside, personally.
The land and assets would go to the State I guess, who’d likely share it amongst the powerful elite and their shell companies. Nothing would change for the average person.
I think 99% of the arguments are because of the bad press they get (completely valid), some sort of moral objection (I don't agree but ok), and the assumption that the alternative is better (completely misplaced IMO).
The actual monetary thing, I don't think there's a solid argument for. Not one I've seen anyway.
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by Shaun M - Rapinha de vi la loca (U9955)
posted 1 minute ago
Absolute waste of air time. Harry and William are decent blokes but I couldn't give a rats **** about Megan and the rest of them. Need to stop living in the tudor age and get rid of the expensive tourist attraction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why get rid of something that brings in more than it costs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the slave trade or the arms industry? If we defended the existence of industry or institutions purely on financial grounds, well... I think my two examples more than make the point.
As for tourism... People don’t actually get to see & meet the Royals when they come and take a photo of Buckingham Palace. They can still come and take their photos from behind the gates. Imagine how much more tourism would be generated if Buckingham Palace was open to the public to view as a museum type of attraction, like the many Palaces, gardens & castles in say, St Petersburg for example? We don’t need an actual Royal Family to generate tourism or money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparing tourism to slavery is utterly bizarre.
But I take your second point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elvis, you’re a far, far better poster than to completely fail to understand my first point. I wasn’t comparing *the nature* of tourism vs slavery. Tourism is by and large a positive thing (obviously not always!), and slavery’s exclusively negative.
I was simply pointing out the flawed *reasoning* that because something “brings in more than it costs”, that it should remain. You can use the very same *reasoning* to defend lots of things, including terrible things. Point being, we need a much better set of reasons for defending the continued existence of an institution or industry than the bottom line. That’s the point. It’s not to equate (or even compare) tourism & slavery/arms on ethical grounds! That’s absolutely not what I was doing.
Don’t go full-stretty on me!
The only solution is to use James Corden as fuel to power the UK for a year. Could burn his fat for a year seeing as he's not willing to burn any himself. The carbon emissions would be offset by the lack of hot air and shiite he wouldn't be able to produce of the year due to being dead.
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whinging P0M's is a reference to P0M's whinging about :" Oh its not like home." "Why can't they all just speak English" "We don't do it like that in Britain."
More a British Chauvinist than one who runs Britain down.
I am not Royalist, but respect the Queen.
I am not English, but respect and admire England.
You do not know how lucky you are living in the UK.
Not perfect by any means, but few places are as good to live in and bring up a family, even if govts and parts of the UK are a bit "moody".
Don't know your born.
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! π
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I'm just curious of what you thought, because I don't see there being a huge upside, personally.
The land and assets would go to the State I guess, who’d likely share it amongst the powerful elite and their shell companies. Nothing would change for the average person.
I think 99% of the arguments are because of the bad press they get (completely valid), some sort of moral objection (I don't agree but ok), and the assumption that the alternative is better (completely misplaced IMO).
The actual monetary thing, I don't think there's a solid argument for. Not one I've seen anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The crown estate is not their private property, they can’t sell it nor are the revenues theirs.
I agree I don’t see the upside plus there isn’t a downside to having them, only to miserable, ideologically possessed malcontents who just like to be trendy by hating on the monarchy for no sound reason.
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell us how they’re funded please
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 19 minutes ago
Any argument against taking back all land and property bar Buckingham Palace then?
The palace has 775 rooms apparently so not a bad deal at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are not taking it back. Buckingham Palace was given. I believe the other two were bought by them.
Sign in if you want to comment
Meghan Markle and Royal Family
Page 8 of 82
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! π
posted on 5/3/21
We only have like 5 years or so left of the queen anyway. Can the left wing not just let her have her time and let people on the right appreciate her for that time? Same goes for people on the right, can you not just let the left enjoy Attenborough for the next 5 years or so? Let's have some peace.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
posted on 5/3/21
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
posted on 5/3/21
Not a fan of either of them for different reasons, the royal family are a bunch of toffs who only care about clinging onto their wealth and power in a society where more and more people don't really care about them. Meghan Markle comes across very fake to me like most actors do, seems to very ambitious and hungry (nothing wrong with that) but acts helpless for image reasons. Harry hates the media and a lot of aspects of the royal family because of how his mother died which is understandable. They've decided to become liberal preachy celebrity types so they'll become more annoying but I don't think either of them are bad people.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 3 minutes ago
I'd have a go on Liz.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She would eat you alive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Easier to tug to Liz than Elgar, that's for sure
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, on Oprah and James Corden and social media and papers and magazines....they were very specific.
posted on 5/3/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 5/3/21
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, on Oprah and James Corden and social media and papers and magazines....they were very specific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've seen Harry say he wanted to get her/them away from the UK tabloids/press. But that is very different from doing an interview with Oprah, or a Netflix show or whatever where you control the narrative.
posted on 5/3/21
I've seen Harry say he wanted to get her/them away from the UK tabloids/press. But that is very different from doing an interview with Oprah, or a Netflix show or whatever where you control the narrative.
_________________
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The UK is a better place to live in than most parts of the world and the Queen brings in cash too.
God Bless her.....people like her and I respect that.
Not fussed on the test of them, tbf
Meghan and Harry are hypocrites, imo.
Not wanting media attention LMAO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have they actually said that they don't want media attention?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, on Oprah and James Corden and social media and papers and magazines....they were very specific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've seen Harry say he wanted to get her/them away from the UK tabloids/press. But that is very different from doing an interview with Oprah, or a Netflix show or whatever where you control the narrative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And he has as much of a right as anyone to be against the UK press but it is still a little contradictory. Many famous people manage to shut themselves out of the public eye successfully and they don’t do it by talking to Oprah π this is just to point their point across about their feud with the royal family and they know this will pss them off no end.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
posted on 5/3/21
It was funny that left wing republicans fell in love with the Royal Meghan, once certain political boxes started being ticked.....
How predictable was that?
The fact Meghan bullied two female members of her staff, wears jewels from the Saudi Royal hit man and Harry signs an 18m dollar contract with Spotify places both in a strong moral and progressive place, imo.
How do they cope?
posted on 5/3/21
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 59 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
Hating on the monarchy is such an easy thing to do. We all know the reasons against having a monarchy.
But the Queen contributes an awful lot to charities and the tradition factor is important to a lot of people. I for one, don’t want our country to end up like some bland, indistinguishable, unidentifiable mess.
Many other countries have monarchies and I doubt any of them moan about their monarchies as much as we do. A large minority of us are so unpatriotic and hateful of our country, its history and its traditions.
It’s very strange when you think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blind, uncritical conformity to “traditions” and “patriotism” (a made-up, nonsensical idea used propagandistically that only the brain-dead buy into) is what’s strange.
As for being “hateful” of history & traditions... Surely there are aspects of our history - including ongoing aspects - that you hate, too? You wouldn’t be so blind as to defend terrible things simply because they have been done by the state on the piece of rock in the ocean on a planet floating around the sun in outer space that you - by pure happenstance beyond your control - were born onto? Because that would be REALLY weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it was blind and uncritical you would be right.
Putting tradition and patriotism in inverted commas doesn't make them bad things and they are not the same thing. I quite like tradition, but patriotism less so.
Of course all history isn't good, it is what has happened in the past. The remarks about a rock floating in space have absolutely nothing to do with whether being a monarchiste or republican brings more enjoyment to the country at large. I believe it does in a generally innocent fashion.
I've never found any difference in intelligence on either side. Just a different viewpoint
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said. I'm sure we're all capable of being 'intelligent' and discussing our 'viewpoints'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do sections of the English left loath themselves, their country, history and their neighbours?
Is it intellectual virtue signalling, guilt ridden self-hate or just a teenage phase that some get marooned in?
Other nations have left wing movements that do not turn in on themselves and it is so ironically "English" to hate yourselves and apologize for being English.
Just an observation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The trouble is both our government and the opposition are so left wing they are trying to outdo each other
posted on 5/3/21
*put their point across
posted on 5/3/21
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! π
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I'm just curious of what you thought, because I don't see there being a huge upside, personally.
The land and assets would go to the State I guess, who’d likely share it amongst the powerful elite and their shell companies. Nothing would change for the average person.
I think 99% of the arguments are because of the bad press they get (completely valid), some sort of moral objection (I don't agree but ok), and the assumption that the alternative is better (completely misplaced IMO).
The actual monetary thing, I don't think there's a solid argument for. Not one I've seen anyway.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Elvis: King of Cult (U7425)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by Shaun M - Rapinha de vi la loca (U9955)
posted 1 minute ago
Absolute waste of air time. Harry and William are decent blokes but I couldn't give a rats **** about Megan and the rest of them. Need to stop living in the tudor age and get rid of the expensive tourist attraction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why get rid of something that brings in more than it costs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like the slave trade or the arms industry? If we defended the existence of industry or institutions purely on financial grounds, well... I think my two examples more than make the point.
As for tourism... People don’t actually get to see & meet the Royals when they come and take a photo of Buckingham Palace. They can still come and take their photos from behind the gates. Imagine how much more tourism would be generated if Buckingham Palace was open to the public to view as a museum type of attraction, like the many Palaces, gardens & castles in say, St Petersburg for example? We don’t need an actual Royal Family to generate tourism or money.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparing tourism to slavery is utterly bizarre.
But I take your second point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elvis, you’re a far, far better poster than to completely fail to understand my first point. I wasn’t comparing *the nature* of tourism vs slavery. Tourism is by and large a positive thing (obviously not always!), and slavery’s exclusively negative.
I was simply pointing out the flawed *reasoning* that because something “brings in more than it costs”, that it should remain. You can use the very same *reasoning* to defend lots of things, including terrible things. Point being, we need a much better set of reasons for defending the continued existence of an institution or industry than the bottom line. That’s the point. It’s not to equate (or even compare) tourism & slavery/arms on ethical grounds! That’s absolutely not what I was doing.
Don’t go full-stretty on me!
posted on 5/3/21
The only solution is to use James Corden as fuel to power the UK for a year. Could burn his fat for a year seeing as he's not willing to burn any himself. The carbon emissions would be offset by the lack of hot air and shiite he wouldn't be able to produce of the year due to being dead.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
We're Schit and we will tell everyone about how Schit the UK is.....how very droll.
It's been done to death, comrades and republicans.
Whinging p0ms ring any bells.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whinging P0M's is a reference to P0M's whinging about :" Oh its not like home." "Why can't they all just speak English" "We don't do it like that in Britain."
More a British Chauvinist than one who runs Britain down.
posted on 5/3/21
I am not Royalist, but respect the Queen.
I am not English, but respect and admire England.
You do not know how lucky you are living in the UK.
Not perfect by any means, but few places are as good to live in and bring up a family, even if govts and parts of the UK are a bit "moody".
Don't know your born.
posted on 5/3/21
You can't bemoan the reasoning to not get rid of something that's turning a profit unless you're willing to provide solid reasoning for the opposite.
BerbaKing11, it comes across like you don't care whether it's a good thing for the country or not.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Bãles left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
You can have a look around the palace if you like.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve actually no idea whether you can or can’t in that instance, but you get my point, right? The Royals *themselves* are not the tourist attraction - nobody gets to see them, just as nobody gets to meet a King or Ruler at Peterhof’s Palace.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're being silly now. No one would care if it wasn't a royal residence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just as nobody cares at the example I gave? Looks like I’m not the one being silly! If you’re arguing nobody would turn up to ex-Royal buildings, may I suggest you visit some abroad and discover for yourself how wrong you are?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex royal buildings. Right. Which in itself makes my point. The fact they're royals is the draw. We're agreed on that.
So what's the benefit of making them ex royals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sorry but if you don’t already know the main arguments against the existence of a Royal Family, you’ll have to go and research it yourself. It’s way, way too long of an essay for me to do on my phone at 10pm on a Friday! π
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I'm just curious of what you thought, because I don't see there being a huge upside, personally.
The land and assets would go to the State I guess, who’d likely share it amongst the powerful elite and their shell companies. Nothing would change for the average person.
I think 99% of the arguments are because of the bad press they get (completely valid), some sort of moral objection (I don't agree but ok), and the assumption that the alternative is better (completely misplaced IMO).
The actual monetary thing, I don't think there's a solid argument for. Not one I've seen anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The crown estate is not their private property, they can’t sell it nor are the revenues theirs.
I agree I don’t see the upside plus there isn’t a downside to having them, only to miserable, ideologically possessed malcontents who just like to be trendy by hating on the monarchy for no sound reason.
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
We would be a sadder, drabber more boring country without them. A loss of pleasure to millions.
A loss of tourist income.
We would gain nothing as a country.
Every American president can't wait to come to meet her, even Trump.
Why, because they don't have anything like it, they come to bow and scrape, every one since Trueman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You sound like a religious fanatic, sadly I know you're not remotely alone in that sense when it comes to them and it's not something that can be reasoned with
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I don't, but you most certainly do. I'm on the side of fun, you're on the side of getting rid of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I already said that once evicted they can sign multi million pound deals with the likes of Netflix so people like yourself can still get their fill. If, as has been pointed out they're still very popular among certain people then they'll be enough demand for it without the need for them to own much of the country
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And they are unpopular among certain people, but less of them. Your idea of Netflix is of course daft. You are perfectly in order to ignore them, and just think what they bring to the country in gaiety and income.
For some reason republicans are nearly always sad or angry people in my experience
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They bring revenue at the expense of owning huge amounts of land/property to the detriment of the rest of the UKs citizens
Having their own tv show or even channel makes more sense than the current situation. Their followers can fund them and can get all their creepy pleasure out of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fun they bring isn't creepy. Wishing to make us lose something that the majority like, for what gain, is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you losing if you still get to fund them and watch them as a celebrity family?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's a daft idea. I've never seen the Queen, I guess most people haven't. I'm not bothered by that fact, I wouldn't be watching them as a celebrity family any more than any other celebrity family
But I enjoy knowing we are keeping a centuries old tradition, I like the fact we are different from most countries and don't feel obliged to follow the herd.
I like the fact it gives us a certain status in the world.
It gives pleasure to lots and is harmless.
And a royal family is only royal if it has a palace rather than a three bed semi in Woking
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems that you're uninformed/deluded about how the royal family is funded at your expense. Guess it would seem like just a bit of fun if that's where your knowledge ends
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell us how they’re funded please
posted on 5/3/21
comment by Scruttocks (U19684)
posted 19 minutes ago
Any argument against taking back all land and property bar Buckingham Palace then?
The palace has 775 rooms apparently so not a bad deal at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are not taking it back. Buckingham Palace was given. I believe the other two were bought by them.
Page 8 of 82
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13