Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

For queen and country?



RowleyBirkinQ.C(deceased)

RowleyBirkinQ.C(deceased)

New member
Dec 16, 2010
3,613
Over there
This has probably been asked in one form or another, but I'll give it another airing. Are you pro or anti monarchy?
Had a very lively debate at work today, mainly with the welsh contingent, who was of the opinion that the whole royal family should disappear and hand back all the money that is given to them by the British tax payer. I'm not particularly a royalist but wouldn't want to see them gone, their history is British history.
 










Lord Bracknell

Lord Bracknell

On fire
Jul 5, 2003
39,499
104 Upper Grosvenor Street, Mayfair
Most of our royal families have disappeared from sight - either because they fall out among themselves or the people get fed up with them. I don't expect this lot to be any different.
 








User removed 4

User removed 4

New member
May 9, 2008
13,331
Haywards Heath
RowleyBirkinQ.C(deceased) said:
This has probably been asked in one form or another, but I'll give it another airing. Are you pro or anti monarchy?
Had a very lively debate at work today, mainly with the welsh contingent, who was of the opinion that the whole royal family should disappear and hand back all the money that is given to them by the British tax payer. I'm not particularly a royalist but wouldn't want to see them gone, their history is British history.
Click to expand...

I wish the fvcking welsh would disappear and hand back all the money given to them by the British taxpayer.
 




S

Seagull over Canaryland

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2011
3,549
Norfolk
Pro monarchy but its the hangers on that give the Royal family a bad reputation. IMHO should restrict public funding to the official duties of the current monarch plus next two in line. The rest shouldn't be dependent on the state or maybe get a much smaller allowance.

I'm not an academic but agree that the history of this country is entwined with a monarchy so should not be abandoned, although it isn't exactly a pure English lineage going back 2000years. Ahem.

The power of the monarch is largely as a figurehead having been gradually curtailed at various times in our history when they pushed their luck eg 1215, 1264, 1649 and a lot more accountable to the people.
 


16bha

16bha

New member
Sep 6, 2010
2,806
East Stand Upper & Worthing
The royals bring in more to the country financially than they cost in terms of tourism and commerce. Although it hurts for some to see that level of wealth given to them, they (mostly) pay for themselves,and to be fair, sacrifice any sort of normal life in doing so.

would keep the civil list limited though, or ensure that they are financed by the public purse in strict correlation to what they do for the country.

GSTQ!
 






T

turienzo's lovechild

New member
Oct 25, 2003
23,964
16bha said:
The royals bring in more to the country financially than they cost in terms of tourism and commerce. Although it hurts for some to see that level of wealth given to them, they (mostly) pay for themselves,and to be fair, sacrifice any sort of normal life in doing so.

would keep the civil list limited though, or ensure that they are financed by the public purse in strict correlation to what they do for the country.

GSTQ!
Click to expand...

something that often gets overlooked...and i'm not sure i fully understand it so would be interested to know why it is often overlooked is that the crown gives the profits of its property portfolio (crown estate) to the treasury...the vastly exceeds the amount that we give them (for example 2007-8 they gave 200m and took 40m). "Republic" an anti-royalist pressure group estimate the total expenditure (after security costs etc.) is at most 184m....so even then we're in profit surely?

unless i'm greatly confused
 


Doc Lynam

Doc Lynam

I hate the Daily Mail
Jun 19, 2011
7,200
Edward III sent campaign after campaign to defeat the Welsh, in the end he sent a huge army to invade Wales they took alot of it but the Welsh led by LLewellyn fought back the English. So the Archbishop of Canterbury tried to bride LLewellyn with a large part of English land and a title if he stopped protecting his homeland, he said he would 'rather die then live under English rule and would not do homage to a man who's language, customs and laws they where entirely ignorant.' So guerrilla tactics were used by the Welsh, this war going on for a year or so until LLewellyn was killed. Edward then said Wales was "pacified" but to break the Welsh they needed to stripped of their cultural identity. So the Welsh like to call themselves the Princes of Wales! The name of the most English of English, the Kings first son, air to the throne will be called Prince of Wales.
This stuff runs deeper then most think.
 








Silverhatch

Silverhatch

Well-known member
Feb 23, 2009
4,312
Preston Park
The royal family are at the pinnacle of a class system that rewards hereditary power and privilege and underpins the class system in this country. Good thing or bad?
 


S

Soulman

New member
Oct 22, 2012
10,966
Sompting
With a population of about 60m, it costs every one of us just over a pound a year, which goes to the Queen. Apparently if she was a business she would be very solvent and successful, as she brings in over 2 billion in tourism etc. This goes to the treasury to help fund many who have never put in the coffers but take plenty out. I don't begrudge my £1 odd a year.
 


User removed 4

User removed 4

New member
May 9, 2008
13,331
Haywards Heath
MYOB said:
Do you feel the same about the other two parts of the UK that receive transfers, namely Scotland and Northern Ireland?
Click to expand...

Scotland yes , northern Ireland no, though perhaps you should take heed of your own username ,you`re Irish, in Dublin, we're talking about British affairs, ie mind your own fvcking business.
 




User removed 4

User removed 4

New member
May 9, 2008
13,331
Haywards Heath
turienzo's lovechild said:
something that often gets overlooked...and i'm not sure i fully understand it so would be interested to know why it is often overlooked is that the crown gives the profits of its property portfolio (crown estate) to the treasury...the vastly exceeds the amount that we give them (for example 2007-8 they gave 200m and took 40m). "Republic" an anti-royalist pressure group estimate the total expenditure (after security costs etc.) is at most 184m....so even then we're in profit surely?

unless i'm greatly confused
Click to expand...
Let's face it,the crown estates are only parcels of land that they nicked a few centuries ago anyway !
 




You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here