Britain: Dump the monarchy?

[Sidhe]

You make some good points Sidhe, but I'm still surprised that so many people come to the UK with that as a major driver. I can think of numerous more desirable reasons to visit Britain than that. Mind you, I'm coming from the perspective of a country where the royals are just a part of the routine, I guess were so used to them, even here an ocean away, and that's why I can't see why other people would make such a big deal of it.

I don't understand the fascination either, but then I'm English? I get to see here all the time in the tabloids, frankly after seeing the intimate story of Charles and Di, and how x did what to y in the study with the candleabra, even if I didn't read the tripe, it does get dull after a while, there just normal people who happen to be fabulously wealthy, who the hell cares? Now the History of the Monarchy is about 3 million times more interesting to me.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

They wste millions of dollars that could go to the less fortunate.

How exactly do they 'waste' millions of dollars?

That's quite cheap is it? Where's my £37.4m a year, if it's "only" 62p per person?

How many foreigners do you draw to our Sceptred Isle?

Which costs would still need to be paid by the Government?

The national trust would need to pay the upkeep of the Royal grounds if they are going to retain the palaces. The cost of flying the British Head of State around the world with the cost of security attached wouldn't suddenly vanish either.

You don't need a whole family with highly expensive upkeeps.

The US doesn't pay for the cost of securing Bushes family?

Whenever someone tries to justify their expense, it's done so because of the "job" they do, and they should be paid like anyone else. But when they make an embarrasment, despite the fact that someone like a cabinet member - who lives on a fraction of the wealth - does something similar they usually have to resign, for the royals people make excuses like "Oh, they're only human".

Which is it - are they like the rest of us, or are they in a special privileged position?

They are in a special, privileged position. But that doesn't set them as having a 'higher' status as anyone else, as I've already pointed out. Just a different one to other roles.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

I don't understand the fascination either, but then I'm English? I get to see here all the time in the tabloids, frankly after seeing the intimate story of Charles and Di, and how x did what to y in the study with the candleabra, even if I didn't read the tripe, it does get dull after a while, there just normal people who happen to be fabulously wealthy, who the hell cares? Now the History of the Monarchy is about 3 million times more interesting to me.

Then instead of reading the tabloids now, save them and read them in 50 years

 

[Sidhe]

Then instead of reading the tabloids now, save them and read them in 50 years

Genius! Unfortunately the tabloids are all bunk.

@Cubsfan The royals do a lot of work for charity, that and adding royal approval to a charity can seriously increase donations. I kid ye not.

 

[col]

Ditch the lot of 'em - as soon as possible.

 

[Technocactus]

If you can find me a single "Prime Minister / President Combo" anywhere in the world. I'll shake your hand.

The Czech Republic.

 

[Virote_Considon]

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!

I would die to save the Monarchy. And dying for anything is a rarity for me.

 

[Virote_Considon]

The Czech Republic.

IIRC, so does France, too. I could be wrong, however...

 

[Ingvina Freyr]

Both France and the Czech Republic has a president and a prime minister.

funny the way meaningless rhetoric, apathy and tourism is all thats keeping them on the throne. to me, anyway.

Funny you should mention meaningless rhetoric, as logical reasoning is what I find so rare amongst republicans. Please present some of the latter.

 

[mdwh]

How exactly do they 'waste' millions of dollars?

How many foreigners do you draw to our Sceptred Isle?

A few. Give me a palace, a pompous title, and advertise me in the international news, it'll obviously be a lot more

My main point however it to show the flaw in the logic of "it's only 62p". If you make an argument that they are worth the X million, then that's fair enough - but many people throw the "it's only 62p" is if to imply it's nothing, and we shouldn't worry whether they're worth it or not.

The national trust would need to pay the upkeep of the Royal grounds if they are going to retain the palaces.

Of course, but at the same time I'm quite happy for them to keep their palace. Just leave them be as a rich family.

True about transport/security costs.

They are in a special, privileged position. But that doesn't set them as having a 'higher' status as anyone else, as I've already pointed out. Just a different one to other roles.

In which case, it's reasonable to hold them to a higher standard and not expect them to embarrass the nation.

 

[mdwh]

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!

I would die to save the Monarchy. And dying for anything is a rarity for me.

In what sense? You'd resort to violent means if the Government decided to get rid of the monarchy? Or in a more literally sense - you'd sacrifice your life to save the Queen's if she was in danger?

 

[BCLG100]

I used to think get rid of it whats the point, now i think we should keep it- the tourist revenue it brings in alone is more than anything else in the country (tourism wise) it makes no sense getting rid of a group of people who pay tax and have no real power anymore.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

The Czech Republic.

Nope.

Czech Republic
President: Václav Klaus
Prime Minister: Mirek Topolánek

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

My main point however it to show the flaw in the logic of "it's only 62p". If you make an argument that they are worth the X million, then that's fair enough - but many people throw the "it's only 62p" is if to imply it's nothing, and we shouldn't worry whether they're worth it or not.

In terms of what we get back, I don't believe £0.62 per year to be a huge expense. I'm sure those in the Tourist industry don't either, but I guse we'll have to agree to disagree.

Of course, but at the same time I'm quite happy for them to keep their palace. Just leave them be as a rich family.

Fair enough.

I'm actually not sure how much of the money generated at the various palaces actually goes into the State coffers. Do we get the majority or just the tax?

In which case, it's reasonable to hold them to a higher standard and not expect them to embarrass the nation.

If we hold them to a higher standard is it not us bestowing their "special status" upon them, rather than something they claim for themselves?

 

[Virote_Considon]

In what sense? You'd resort to violent means if the Government decided to get rid of the monarchy? Or in a more literally sense - you'd sacrifice your life to save the Queen's if she was in danger?

Well, option 2 would be an obvious choise, but yes, I would resort to violent means if I had no other choise (i.e. the Government wouldn't reason with it)

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Ditch the lot of 'em - as soon as possible.

Yup. A complete anachronism.

 

[Brighteye]

They don't harm me. I don't derive my sense of self-worth from whether my nation says I'm everyone's equal.
I know that I'm not the equal of many people. I have no problem with the royal family maintaining the title 'royal'. After all, they are the royal family. The fact that we don't use them to run the country any more doesn't change the fact. A statement 'abolishing' them won't do anything of the sort. They will still be the royal family.
The purpose of the head of state is nebulous anyway. I have no problem with it being the head of a family that has a place in British history. The head of state only seems to have a ceremonial role.

 

[Technocactus]

Nope.

Czech Republic
President: Václav Klaus
Prime Minister: Mirek Topolánek

Perhaps I misunderstood what it is you wanted. I thought you wanted a country that has both a President and a Prime Minister.

 

[Rossiya]

I really hate to play a part in evolving a thread series, but I really want to know.

There's plenty of support in the colonies for bringing about the end of the monarchy, but what about in mother Britannia herself?

Also, what is your opinion of the Commonwealth and should Britain to remain in it?

Let's here what the voices of the UK have to say!

I want the royal family to go to Siberia and never come back. Commonwealth is OK I suppose.

 

[mdwh]

In terms of what we get back, I don't believe £0.62 per year to be a huge expense. I'm sure those in the Tourist industry don't either, but I guse we'll have to agree to disagree.

Do you have some sources for what the Queen does personally to generate tourism - as opposed to people coming for the history/buildings/tradition/etc?

And if so, perhaps we should capitalise on this, and do away with all the bits of the monarchy that don't contribute towards tourism, then?