The Royal Family are too expensive?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Chat' started by Mesmerist, Jun 28, 2008.

  1. Mesmerist

    Mesmerist Well-Known Member

    So in view of the news that the Royal Family now costs us all £40,000,000 a year do you think this is money well spent or could it be used to improve all our livestyles by perhaps paying off National Debts or reducing fuel prices?
  2. The Wherryman

    The Wherryman Active Member

    "This year membership of the European Union will cost Britain £60.1 billion gross, or £50.6 billion net" (Source: The Bruge Group)

    Kinda puts the cost of the Royal Family into perspective, dunnit.
  3. Mesmerist

    Mesmerist Well-Known Member

    What are the figures for what we get back from being a member?
  4. dyl

    dyl Active Member

    A badge, poster, keyring and a quarterly newsletter.
  5. Mesmerist

    Mesmerist Well-Known Member

    :clap: :clap: :clap:
  6. Ipswich trom

    Ipswich trom Member

    Not to mention the thousands of immigrant Eastern European workers!
  7. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    - in the Polish language! ;)
  8. The Wherryman

    The Wherryman Active Member

    Not dodging the question, but the thread is about the value of the Royal Family. I was just putting your figure of £40,000,000 into some sort of perspective.

    But to continue with your line of thinking, what value do we get back in terms of tourist spending re Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, Sandringham, etc. and the pageantry associated with Royalty that attracts the tourists.

    In my opinion, not backed up with statistics or argument, but based on general observation from afar throughout the 50+ years of her reign, she has done a magnificent job and continues so to do. She has provided an outstanding example of honour, dedication and commitment, so lacking in this nation at present.

    Unfortunately, as with many of us, she suffers by having a somewhat dysfunctional family. My respect for her does not extend to them. I shall be very sad when her reign comes to an end.

    If it comes to a choice between King Charles and Queen Camilla or President Tony, I think I'll emigrate...
  9. PeterBale

    PeterBale Moderator Staff Member

    . . . the badge and poster have just been abolished as nobody could decide on a suitably PC image to display, the keyring is redundant due to the latest "Open door" policy, and since the latest metrication moves, the newsletter will appear when they have decided exactly how they will divide the year into ten :eek:
  10. Pythagoras

    Pythagoras Active Member

    That President Tony argument always really annoys me. Republicanism doesn't have to mean the American system. Why couldn't we have a system like in Ireland, where they have a President who basically does what the queen does here, but is democratically elected so isn't supporting the class system.

    Surely the relevant figure for both monarchy and europe in terms of money is the net figure, not how much something costs or how much it makes us. Although for me money is irrelevant in the monarchy issue. If something is wrong, it is still wrong if it is profit-making.

    Have no particular problem with Elizabeth Windsor, but why couldn't she stand for president?
  11. themusicalrentboy

    themusicalrentboy Active Member

    she's 82 for a start :D
  12. stevetrom

    stevetrom Well-Known Member

    It would still be another politician lining their own pocket and do you really think they would be any cheaper or better?

    President (Bo Bo) Johnson or Kinnock - please no !
  13. Pythagoras

    Pythagoras Active Member

    And Elizabeth Windsor doesn't make any money from being queen? If they weren't any better we could replace them at the next election, that's the point of democracy.
  14. Mesmerist

    Mesmerist Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Jun 28, 2008
  15. Pythagoras

    Pythagoras Active Member

    Totally Agree. Paris still gets tourists, even though the French got rid of their monarch.
  16. DMBabe

    DMBabe Supporting Member

    How about this for a plan? We democratically elect TMP members to replace the current royal family for say 5 yrs at a time and run at 10% of the cost of the current lot. The rest goes to worthwhile things like the NHS and Education and reducing fuel taxes.

    Sure we'd be a sight load better looking and more fun. Also we'd have useful talents to amuse the masses and may even make brass bands universally popular! A girl can dream.....:roll:
  17. DublinBass

    DublinBass Supporting Member

    I'd normally leave this to Pythagorus (since he teaches maths), but since he has passed up on this...
    If gross is 60.1 billion and is 50.6 billion, income must be 9.5 billion?

    As for the main question...lots of interesting points brought up (and I am probably not a suitable person to answer, but will anyways).

    Buildings would probably still be visited quite a bit even if there were no royal familiyl However, I doubt as much. I would not have gone to see Buckingham nor Windsor if it were not for royalty. I have stopped by Parliment, but never thought I could get a proper visit because of the business going on.

    I think merchandise sales can't be ignored either...Do you think George/Laura Bush postcards sell as well as Queen Elizabeth/ Prince William? (perhaps an unfair example).
  18. Rapier

    Rapier Supporting Member

    Apparently (according to the papers anyway) The Monarchy only costs us 62p each, per year. That's pretty good value in my book. The Pomp and Ceremony involved with Royalty make me proud to be British. Nothing much else does! I once swore an oath to the Queen, (my youngest son has too), nothing has changed to make me want to break that oath. And I'd guess that would go for most of our Armed Forces.

    If you are just worried about money, how much would it cost to change all the badges buttons, crests etc of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Police etc. and not just here but Australia, Canada and the rest of the Commonwealth?
  19. Jan H

    Jan H Moderator Staff Member

    I think the Louvre and Versailles get as many, if not more, visitors than Buckingham or Windsor...
    Like the Louvre, the palace of the Russian Czar in St Petersburg was turned into a museum as well (the Hermitage), iirc
  20. andywooler

    andywooler Supporting Member

    Don't forget though that the Queen pays tax voluntarily on her own income as does Charles (£3m in 2007) and for those who are debating the wider issue of republicanism, you should note that the Treason Felony Act of 1848 inhibits discussion of republican forms of government. ;)