The Royals, Are They Worth It?

[PrinceOfLeigh]

Ok first of all I know this thread has been done before, but it seems to be that there are alot of new faces on CFC who should be allowed to voice their opinion without Thread Resurrecting.

The Royals annual accounts have been published again and this year they set us back £37.4 Million.

The Queen and the Royal Family cost the UK taxpayer £37.4m in the last financial year, her financial public accounts reveal.
The cost, equivalent to 62p per person in the UK, rose 4.2% over the previous year, accountants said. The increase was partly blamed on extra security vetting undertaken at Buckingham Palace.

Keeper of the Privy Purse Alan Reid said the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family were good value. "Given this is a World Cup year, 62p would buy you a ticket for one minute of England's game against Portugal on Saturday," he said. Mr Reid also said that more money was needed to maintain the royal palaces. "If we're going to maintain historic buildings that we're responsible for, we will need more money. We will putting more pressure on the Department for Culture, Media and Sport," he said.

Again the debate surrounds whether or not the Royals are value for money. I would argue that they are. For three main reasons:

1. Tourism. Why else would anyone come to our rain soaked misty isle? Definately not for our 'beaches'
2. Tradition. As Bozo quite rightly said in another thread. It is becoming more and more obvious that the traditions which hold Britian together are being abandoned to the point that only Sport defines us.
3. Charity. The Royals do a lot of work for various charities and causes which rely on the publicity their involvement brings

And now for your thoughts, the Royals worth keeping or not?

 

[Rik Meleet]

Yes.

They are the glue that holds your country together. What else have Scots in common with cockneys?
Read Frederick Fosyth's book Icon.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Certainly are. Living history.

 

[Marshy]

I believe that on the balance of things the royals are probably worth it, for the reasons stated in the original post. But some of the expediture could be cut back without any major impact.

In particular I'm thinking of the Royal Train. What's wrong with 1st class on a regular train?

 

[Samson]

No. Perhaps they are in a purly monatry sence, but in the sence of what they stand for they are a sign of our backwardness as a nation and should be got rid of ASAP.

 

[Marshy]

... but in the sence of what they stand for they are a sign of our backwardness as a nation and should be got rid of ASAP.

I would respectfully disagree. I believe that the continued existence of the royals is a sign of Britian's maturity as a nation.

While Britain has moved beyond the monarchy in terms of governance it is still able to recognise that the monarchy has played a crucial role in evolution of Britain. Nobody wants a return to the days when the monarch governed the country and thankfully that is unlikely to happen. But Britain has removed that aspect of the monarchy while keeping some of the more positive aspects. No point throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[bathsheba666]

Let's have a republic...

 

[Turner]

I thought this was going to be about the Kansas City Royals, to which I say, No, they're not worth it.

But since you mean the Queen of England & her family...sure, why not? Is £37.4 million really that much to pay? Seems to me the good outweighs the bad.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Are the Royals worth it? Heck no, they are consistently the worst team in baseball . . .

Oops, I mean, it is kind of weird for an American to think about this question. Supposedly Americans are jealous of the UK and others for having a royal family, but I've never seen it.

EDIT: I started my post before Turner, but got interrupted before posting.

 

[Abaddon]

Keep em, get the tourists in. An dont destroy history.. its always missed by those that don't have it.

 

[jamiethearcher]

As a Canadian, I like having the Queen as our head of state. The monarchy is an important part of our heritage, and should be respected.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

As a Canadian, I like having the Queen as our head of state. The monarchy is an important part of our heritage, and should be respected.

And how much of the bill is Canada footing? That may make a difference; it is easy to say that you are in favor of royalty if someone else is paying for it.

 

[Turner]

EDIT: I started my post before Turner, but got interrupted before posting.

Suuuuuuure ya did.

 

[Corlindale]

No. Perhaps they are in a purly monatry sence, but in the sence of what they stand for they are a sign of our backwardness as a nation and should be got rid of ASAP.

I agree with this. The royals might indirectly generate quite a bit of tourist income, but the continued existence of a royal family is a slap in the face of the ideals of democracy and freedom. It doesn't matter that they don't have actual political power, the mere fact that they can inevitably gain a certain position in society simply by virtue of their birth is what annoys me. What is even more disturbing is that the children of royals will not only be able to rise to this position, they will pretty much be forced into it. Not to mention that their lives will be followed intensely by the media from their birth and onwards, even if they choose to abdicate. They'll never have a choice about their lives, their parents will bring them up to become kings and queens and become part of the sick masquerade that is royalty today.

Another extremely unjust aspect of the constitutional monarchy is that the royal family is still above the law, which means that it is pretty much impossible to convict them of any crimes. If a prince get caught speeding, for example, all that will happen is that his parents will scold him, where's the justice there?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Suuuuuuure ya did.

Well, since I am posting from work (I work as a receptionist) and the owner called asking me to find something just before I hit reply, then yes.

How about other Royals? The only NBA title won by the franchise now known as the Sacramento Kings came in 1951, when they were playing in my hometown as the Rochester Royals. It is also Rochester's only major league championship in a major sport, although we have lots of titles in minor league baseball/soccer/hockey and in major league lacrosse.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

Another extremely unjust aspect of the constitutional monarchy is that the royal family is still above the law, which means that it is pretty much impossible to convict them of any crimes. If a prince get caught speeding, for example, all that will happen is that his parents will scold him, where's the justice there?

Ahh, not so

 

[Elrohir]

How much do England and Canada and Australia and co actually have to pay to support the Royal family each year? Is there a figure? How costly is it, and how much do they bring in from tourism and whatnot? I think those figures would be interesting.

 

[Corlindale]

Ahh, not so

I stand corrected I wasn't aware it wasn't so in England, but at least in Denmark I believe the Royal family is above the law, at least formally. Don't know exactly what they'd do if a prince went on a killing spree sometime.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

In Denmark I believe the Royal family is above the law, at least formally. Don't know exactly what they'd do if a prince got on a killing spree sometime.

Ask Nepal. Although I don't remember if the prince turned the gun on himself or if the guards got him.

 

[ComradeDavo]

I want to see the Monarchy abolished.

Principle - no one should be born into such a high posistion, no one should by birthright be automatically more important.

I want a proper democracy with a proper elected head of state.