Millions will pay fares on HS2 and get to travel for it. Millions will pay for the royal baby for many decades and only he will get to travel for it.

 

You seem to forget the Royal family and all the regal trappings that attracts tourism is estimated to be worth 1.2 billion to the economy per anum so a couple million to maintain the fantasy is still good business.

You seem to forget the Royal family and all the regal trappings that attracts tourism is estimated to be worth 1.2 billion to the economy per anum so a couple million to maintain the fantasy is still good business.

 

I've always considered that estimate to be a fantasy, just like the one that says most of us support the existence of royalty when all the evidence is of the opposite.

 

The tourism economic benefit results from those visiting this country, and they do that for a whole range of reasons, royalty being only a small part. And I've seen little evidence of the commercial benefits that are supposed to result from their overseas travels.

Erm ... Windsor? They should go back to the original family name of Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha ...

 

I stuck with Windsor as a compromise, since that's only true in part. This baby's great grandfather was born in Cyprus, Greece, into the Greek and Danish royal families who are of a different German family line.

I've always considered that estimate to be a fantasy, just like the one that says most of us support the existence of royalty when all the evidence is of the opposite.

 

The tourism economic benefit results from those visiting this country, and they do that for a whole range of reasons, royalty being only a small part. And I've seen little evidence of the commercial benefits that are supposed to result from their overseas travels.

 

You may consider it to be a fantasy flecc but that hardly makes your consideration right.

Where and what is this 'evidence' that says that most do not support the monarchy ?

 

My opinion is, that if there was a referendum on keeping the monarchy tomorrow, the answer would be a resounding yes......just my opinion, but I would be happy to put it to the test.

 

I also dont think that I, personally, have seen much evidence of commercial benefits arising from royal trips abroad, but thats just because I havent been personally involved and havent looked into it.....doesnt say that it hasnt happened.... just because you and I havent seen much evidence of it doesnt mean to say it doesnt exist

 

Lynda

I stuck with Windsor as a compromise, since that's only true in part. This baby's great grandfather was born in Cyprus, Greece, into the Greek and Danish royal families who are of a different German family line.

 

OK then ... how about Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha og Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg?

Where and what is this 'evidence' that says that most do not support the monarchy ?

 

My opinion is, that if there was a referendum on keeping the monarchy tomorrow, the answer would be a resounding yes......just my opinion, but I would be happy to put it to the test.

 

Lynda

 

Now that is an iteresting idea, a referendum about keeping the monarchy.

Probably popular in Northern Ireland and England, not much in Wales,

but Scotland?

The Scots would ask which Royal Family

Windsors or Stuarts?

Interesting

Now that is an iteresting idea, a referendum about keeping the monarchy.

Probably popular in Northern Ireland and England, not much in Wales,

but Scotland?

The Scots would ask which Royal Family

Windsors or Stuarts?

Interesting

 

Oh, I dunno Mike, I kind of get the impression that the welsh and the scots like the monarchy, I mean, why on earth wouldnt they

 

Sometimes things are hyped up so much that the truth of the matter is hidden, a bit like the hysteria over the forthcoming scottish referendum, which, according to all of my friends who either are scottish or live there, scotland will vote to stay part of the UK, no matter what that salmon nutter would like us to believe......

 

Lynda

Now that is an iteresting idea, a referendum about keeping the monarchy.

Probably popular in Northern Ireland and England, not much in Wales,

but Scotland?

The Scots would ask which Royal Family

Windsors or Stuarts?

Interesting

 

You are in luck, The Queen is related to Charles I via his sister Elizabeth Stuart who married Frederick V, which has a direct link to the Hanover line, which is also directly linked to the Windsors

Edited July 24, 201312 yr by jazper53

You may consider it to be a fantasy flecc but that hardly makes your consideration right.

 

The consideration is based on the fact I stated. The tourism income they claim results from royalty very obviously results from a whole host of reasons which are nothing to do with royalty. Have you already forgotten the Olympics for example? QED

 

Where and what is this 'evidence' that says that most do not support the monarchy ?

 

Lynda

 

The evidence is clearly shown online, one of the benefits of having the interpersonal communication internet which so reveals the way the authorities use propaganda to lie to us. Just look at this thread, only one person has openly declared full allegiance to royalty, though it appears a second probably does. The rest who are the majority don't.

 

If there were so many royalists they'd be furiously posting here in support of the institution.

The consideration is based on the fact I stated. The tourism income they claim results from royalty very obviously results from a whole host of reasons which are nothing to do with royalty. Have you already forgotten the Olympics for example? QED

 

 

 

The evidence is clearly shown online, one of the benefits of having the interpersonal communication internet which so reveals the way the authorities use propaganda to lie to us. Just look at this thread, only one person has openly declared full allegiance to royalty, though it appears a second probably does. The rest who are the majority don't.

 

If there were so many royalists they'd be furiously posting here in support of the institution.

 

You cannot count those who stay mute on the subject a vote for or against. The real question is what do you put in its place a politcal appointed Head of State???

Oh come on flecc, get real, this is hardly a representative thread on the popularity of the monarchy, it makes you sound like you are clutching at desperate straws to try to prove your half baked theory

 

Let me make my stance on royalty perfectly clear, whilst I dont agree with minor royalty 'hangers on' I think this great country would be a much poorer sadder place without our royal family and the tireless work that the main members do.

I am very proud to be British and very proud of our unique royal family and the special standing that I feel it gives us in the world at large.....is that definitive enough allegiance for you ?

 

Lynda

 

PS.....its just been announced the new prince is called George Alexander Louis.....

What a hilarious thread, I haven't had such a good laugh in ages. Hilarity aside, I do wish the little chap the very best of life, and as Royals go, I reckon Wills and his Mrs are well placed to make a valuable and constructive contribution to society, both here and abroad.

 

Nonetheless, for my five pennorth, I do consider myself to be a Royalist. I'm certainly not a fan of the myriad royal hangers-on, and the tax payer would be better served by restricting the civil list entitlement to just the top line solely. Eitherways, I'm sure they could manage without it if need be.

 

I believe her Royal Majesty The Queen Elizabeth is completely wonderful. Wealth, as the more enlightened of us will have realised, is only a measure of the fun you've had. There are plenty of rich miserable people about. The Queen has devoted her life to the fulfillment of her duties as a vocation. I certainly wouldn't want the job, even with a civil list entitlement.

 

I also would like The Queen to have an increased level of influence in the affairs of state, I think it's more important now than at any time in the last 100 years. Seeing as the current, self opinionated, corrupt, lying shower of sh*ts that run our alleged democracy are largely amongst the lowest of the low on the integrity scale, and continue to line their pockets through myriad corrupt schemes. Their sanction of major industries' disgusting goings on across all aspects of our well being and the environment appall me.

 

Ok, the royals have had their share of dirty laundry, what monarchy hasn't, but I believe the Queen and Prince Charles, despite his shortcomings, have a genuine altruistic desire to do good for their subjects, and not to mess up the planet.

 

Rant over, I'm off to my bunker as I suspect I may get some stick for this post. Godspeed to Prince whateverhisnameis, may he live long and prosper. Where are the descendants of Guy Fawkes? That's what I'd like to know.:o

Oh, I dunno Mike, I kind of get the impression that the welsh and the scots like the monarchy, I mean, why on earth wouldnt they

 

Lynda

Lynda,

Elizabeth is the Queen of England, not Britain.

A people know when they are snubbed.

I was at a Pavarotti in the park concert in Swansea some years ago. There were at least 5,000 people in the audience. The programme started with 'God Save the Queen'

About 20 people including my French student stood up, the rest remained lounging on the grass.

In contrast, when they played 'Mae Hen Wladd fy Nhadau' all the field stood up.

Still no reason for them not to like her though surely, I would think the majority of sane minded people would admire and look up to our queen, I think her work ethic is an inspiration.....a pity not more of our, albeit still small, but very expensive, congenital permanently work shy sub strata of humanity didnt share it.....

 

Lynda

Oh come on flecc, get real, this is hardly a representative thread on the popularity of the monarchy, it makes you sound like you are clutching at desperate straws to try to prove your half baked theory

 

Typical distortion, I gave that as an example of the online opinion, not as the whole evidence.

 

The anger, indeed often fury, of people over the media's excessive coverage of the royal birth reveals the truth. The majority of the population tolerate the royal family, but toleration isn't support.

 

That's my position too, I'm not a republican and am not greatly concerned about the pennies they cost us. But I do consider them an irrelevance and do not support the institution.

 

Just remember Lynda, the estimates of the financial benefits of tourism and royalty are just that, guesses by the government as they freely admit by stating them to be estimates. That means it's not for me to prove the figures are false, it's for them to prove they are true.

Well, flecc, I think if any distortion is being shown you are every bit as guilty of it.

 

Whilst some people undoubtably are angry at the excess coverage of the birth, I imagine their anger is against the media and not the royal family surely.

This 'anger' doesnt prove that they only tolerate, and not support, the royal family.... only that they dont like their normal programmes being disrupted for hours by coverage of the birth.

 

As for the financial benefits, whether real, imaginary or inflated, they make not a jot of difference to my opinion on having a Royal family.....they are a huge asset to this country that cannot always be measured by money, some benefits are far more important than money, in my opinion.

 

Lynda

PS.....its just been announced the new prince is called George Alexander Louis.....

 

So all that accession equality malarkey was because he's getting a 'gal's name' ?

my opinion on having a Royal family.....they are a huge asset to this country that cannot always be measured by money, some benefits are far more important than money, in my opinion.

 

Lynda

 

And I respect your opinion of course, while mine is the opposite. I won't be around for the outcome, but I don't think there's any certainty that George will one day be a king of England.

 

He could have well over 50 years to wait, and in that time this country will undergo huge changes. Any more decline and a departure from the EU and we could end up as the 51st state of the USA!

And I respect your opinion of course, while mine is the opposite. I won't be around for the outcome, but I don't think there's any certainty that George will one day be a king of England.

 

He could have well over 50 years to wait, and in that time this country will undergo huge changes. Any more decline and a departure from the EU and we could end up as the 51st state of the USA!

 

King George of Old England, 51st state of the USA, sounds all good to me, especially the departure of the EU, Things are starting to look up for the old country. Europe will die under a pile of paperwork.

Edited July 24, 201312 yr by jazper53

And I respect your opinion of course, while mine is the opposite. I won't be around for the outcome, but I don't think there's any certainty that George will one day be a king of England.

 

He could have well over 50 years to wait, and in that time this country will undergo huge changes. Any more decline and a departure from the EU and we could end up as the 51st state of the USA!

 

Well, you know what they say flecc.....the only thing certain in life is death

 

Its also certain that neither of us will be around to see him on the throne or even know if he ever is, or even if we do become the 51st state of the USA

 

Which is why I dont actually waste any of my precious life wondering or worrying about it....btw...nice to see more royalists coming out of the 'pedelecs woodwork' though isnt it

 

Lynda

Lynda,

I feel that you just do not understand the Welsh.

Why should I feel more at home here

rather than Westminster Abbey?

Even though she is presumably American, the musical director is acting just like we do in Wales at Cymanfa Ganau, explaining the hymn and getting the singing to improve.

... I would think the majority of sane minded people would admire and look up to our queen

 

I used to like her old Mum. Wonderful old dear, with great taste in hats. Apparently she had a habit of going up to people at receptions and starting conversations with "Hello. You look like you could do with a drink."

 

Top lady

Lynda,

I feel that you just do not understand the Welsh.

Why should I feel more at home here

rather than Westminster Abbey?

Even though she is presumably American, the musical director is acting just like we do in Wales at Cymanfa Ganau, explaining the hymn and getting the singing to improve.

 

 

Maybe I dont Mike, but I believe the queen is still queen of the United Kingdom not just england ?

 

They may have their own parliament or assembly but they are still part of the UK, along with scotland and northern Ireland.

 

Personally I find it very sad that countries and even counties these days say they want to leave the UK.

 

As far as I am concerned, if thats the case, let them go but let them go totally and not still depend on the rest of the UK to support them.

 

I think we all know that Wales, Cornwall, Scotland et al are not able to support themselves financially without being part of the whole UK.

 

Its the same in Spain,and as I say, I just find it sad and, no, I dont really understand why they would want to

 

Im more than happy to hear the reasoning behind that way of thinking, maybe Im missing something....

 

Lynda

You cannot count those who stay mute on the subject a vote for or against. The real question is what do you put in its place a politcal appointed Head of State???

I would hazard a guess the majority of the country might not be royalist but are either thoroughly indifferent to them or happy enough with the status quo.

I'm neither for nor against these days. I really couldn't care less about them, but I feel that Britain would be a sadder place if the RF were kicked out. Presidents come and go, and all you can say about them is that they were top dog in a filthy struggle, so what kind of person does that make them?

The UK RF has left all that crap behind and they can, for the most part, be themselves, especially nowadays and I must say the current lot are actually doing some useful stuff, unlike many of their illustrious forebears.

They may have their own parliament or assembly but they are still part of the UK, along with scotland and northern Ireland.

 

In truth being in the UK as a separation issue only belongs to Northern Ireland. England, Wales and Scotland are Britain so remain joined without the existence of the UK.

 

I think we all know that Wales, Cornwall, Scotland et al are not able to support themselves financially without being part of the whole UK.

 

Scotland can with ownership of their own oil and gas reserves, which with the new methods of getting far more out of wells previously thought exhausted will last them a long time.