If the UK were able to have a Brexit like vote, on whether to keep the royal family or give them the Spanish archer. What do you think the outcome would be.
Ps. Id be on the give them the elbow side.
Printable View
If the UK were able to have a Brexit like vote, on whether to keep the royal family or give them the Spanish archer. What do you think the outcome would be.
Ps. Id be on the give them the elbow side.
Polls suggest 3/4 of the UK support the royal family. Even with a margin of error that seems to suggest the UK would vote to keep them.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Treseder
It would be a landslide yes. There are things people disagree with but on the whole, the UK population are very much in favour of the royals.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Treseder
Like many other places, the majority of people of the UK can't seem to grasp how to vote in their best interests. Thus, a Tory government, Brexit and if it came to a vote, the royal family.
We ought to sell them to the Americans.Alaska plus a few trillion.:biggrin:
Royalty is a like dirty word over here. It's cute for other people to have royal families, but it's not for Americans.Quote:
Originally Posted by sneggyblubird
I wouldn't say it's a definite benefit that we got rid of the royals. Certainly, some things like Eugenie's wedding are an absolute joke, and doing up their houses but others, like having Buckingham Palace etc are probably worth keeping. If the royals didn't live there any more, I don't think anyone would care/would go.Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCBlue
Like the buildings in Paris and Rome, you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
Maybe, I don't know. VisitBritain reckons that tourism linked to royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle adds up to 2.7 million visitors a year. Brand Finance estimated in 2017 that the monarchy’s annual contribution to the UK economy to be around £1.8bn a year, drawing in an additional £550m of tourism revenues a year, and an increase in trade, from the Royal Family acting as ambassadors, supposedly worth £150m a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie
Now, who's to say that they'd get given similar numbers if they weren't there but they might? I don't think many people think any of the lesser royals (or even the royals themselves) should get the silver spoon treatment they currently get but I'm not sure it's as clear cut as people make out. I don't particularly care either way but I know a great deal of people who do.
The roles of royal families and the Heads of State are not primarily to bring in the tourists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
The roles of royal families and the Heads of State are not primarily to bring in the tourists. Maybe they should be taken off the current payroll and removed from any meaningful official roles and simply paid a few quid to dress up and thrill the foreign punters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
I think the tourism thing is a misnomer, look how many people visit Versaille.
I don't have a problem with the Royals themselves but if I had a vote I'd vote to get rid of them. **** paying for weddings and renovations when we could be helping homeless people.
Jesus,you sound like Boris and his 350m for the NHS pledge.:hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by Croesy Blue
People come for the buildings. It's not like you can meet or even see the royals. They're never there in summer time anyway. I bet more people visit the tower than visit the palace anyway. At least you can go inside.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
5.5 million a year visit the palace of Versailles, barely any getti go into Buckingham palace.
The whole tourism angle is bogus
I dont understand what royalty is tbh.
At one time long ago in history your family was the strongest and richest...that evolved into some type of blue blood magic.
utter garbage.Get rid or let them do do charity work for hospitals for kids and cancer.
Corrected for you 😂Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCBlue
You're the one that has to live there.Quote:
Originally Posted by JDerrida
Oakwood Park has more visitors a year than Windsor Castle. The French seem to manage the Palace of Versailles very well without having parasites living in it. In fact, if there were no royals, tourists would be able to visit a lot more of Buck House than they can at the moment, which would probably attract far more visitors like Versailles does.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
Let the queen see her stint out and then get rid.
It's an outdated mediaeval concept which bestows privileges and wealth on one family because their ancestors were the best liars, murderers and cheats during that period.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTaL ITK
So 🙄Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCBlue
The majority are wrong in your eyes.
That's it? Good, we got it 😊
If we didn't have a Royal Family then who would we have as President?
We cant even find anyone decent to be PM let alone find any decent candidates to be an elected head of state.
Keep it as it is with regard to influence and responsibilities but you have to be voted in and it's for a fixed term of 10 years, you can only run for president if you have been a past winner of a British Citizen Award, i.e you have to have done some remarkable work for your local community to qualify.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bloop
Seeing as the majority rely on the National Health Service, adequate policing and fire service and are not really served by military spending, seeing as Wales has received huge investment from the EU, then surely it can be argued that the people have not exactly voted in their own interest?Quote:
Originally Posted by JDerrida
It depends what type of president you are thinking about. The President of Germany, the Head of State, has a role more akin to the Queen in that the position has a mainly ceremonial role, but he can give direction to debates and has some important reserve powers that may be applied when there is political instability. Politicians elevated to the position adopt a neutral stance and do not engage in party politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bloop
And why not , theres is far worse to go afterQuote:
Originally Posted by qccfc
A bit like the speaker of the house of commons then 🙄😂Quote:
Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie
Guillotine or gallows. All a load of silver spoon wasters. More hangers on than a Christmas tree! Get rid and turn the crown estates into theme parks!Quote:
Originally Posted by William Treseder
Unfortunately it would probably be a landslide in favour of keeping them
Not as divisive or controlling as that chap and strange wife.Quote:
Originally Posted by JDerrida
And so it should be . We have to hang onto some Britishness, it stands for a lot in my view, some of us our proud of that heritage and its achievements to the modern world .Quote:
Originally Posted by City123
Yes to be fair members of the royal family have massively contributed to the achievements of the modern world. The queen mother inventing tarmac, Edward VII inventing the electric razor. Prince Andrew the Atkins diet, Prince Philip a champion of racialQuote:
Originally Posted by life on mars
tolerance, the list is endless😂😂😂
What achievements of the royal family are you proud of?Quote:
Originally Posted by life on mars