Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Referendum against the monarchy Watch

  • View Poll Results: Monarchy or republic
    Monarchy
    130
    57.02%
    Republic
    98
    42.98%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tnetinbum)
    Being a republic won't be much different. You'll just pay millions to a president who does sod all, and is probably some slimy career politician.
    No president gets 70 million a year and he must be elected every 4 years
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pitch)
    Other countries are republics and have far more tourists.They come for monuments and monuments would still be here
    Lol I know. This idea that we will lose our tourism is absolute crap. If we get rid of the monarch we can open up the royal palaces and homes and any other tourist attraction. That way we will still get the tourist, then we can charge them to go in and have a look around. There we've just made a bigger profit!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Monarchy has nothing to do with that
    It has.Why should we pay very high fees,instead of cutting Charles luxury?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bellrosk)
    I'd vote for a Republic.



    I'm not too sure a monarchy composes a huge role in 'lefty' ideology.
    I didn't say I'm a raging socialist, I'm just that way inclined. The point I was making is that it isn't just British Empire bumming Tories that like the Monarchy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pitch)
    It has.Why should we pay very high fees,instead of cutting Charles luxury?
    is charles the only one you know the name of or something? this is you OP...

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiwiguy)
    are you actually an idiot? this is like the third thread you've made?

    Jealous much.
    are you actually a brain-farted slave?If you don't have free will and want to use your money to make Charles rich for doing nothing instead of public services,why don't you offer him your property?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    what's all this stuff about needing to replace the queen with a president what is wrong with having neither a queen or a president and simply sticking to a prime minister?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pitch)
    It has.Why should we pay very high fees,instead of cutting Charles luxury?
    Because the royal family brought in 500 Million in tourism last year
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Because the royal family brought in 500 Million in tourism last year
    Hmm got any links to back that up?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by karateworm)
    I didn't say I'm a raging socialist, I'm just that way inclined. The point I was making is that it isn't just British Empire bumming Tories that like the Monarchy.
    Ah okay, sorry I misread you there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    republic, easily
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Law123mus)
    Hmm got any links to back that up?
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...g-in-620m.html

    Thats for the royal wedding. Can't find the link for money brought in last year. I know there is a link on it in the other monarchy thread poll
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Im voting Monarchy because i like the idea of Kings and Queens rather than some suits at the top of the pile.

    If we are going for a social referendum mine and everyone else's vote should be with a total redesign of our society based on equal resources and job satisfaction with a feeling of accomplishment rather than a money based facade we consider civilised today http://www.thevenusproject.com/

    This is very very possible also if you take some time to look around and outside the site and the whole zeitgeist movement. IMO of course.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...g-in-620m.html

    Thats for the royal wedding. Can't find the link for money brought in last year. I know there is a link on it in the other monarchy thread poll
    How many tourists does Obama bring?lol And how many tourists did Britain lost because of Charles' scandals?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pitch)
    How many tourists does Obama bring?lol And how many tourists did Britain lost because of Charles' scandals?
    :facepalm: Some people really seem to have an almost irrational hatred of the monarchy.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    well tourism would still be there ! even without the monarchy.

    HECK! every tourist would pay to see the inside of Buckingham palace:rolleyes: .. tourism would probably double!!

    i wouldn't mind the monarchy as much, if they actually did something .. if they really get involved with the country.. such as the tuition fee rises. instead of clogging up my morning newspaper with wedding plans.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    We had a thread on this very subject just two weeks ago!

    Do I really have to go through all this again?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by getfunky!)
    well tourism would still be there ! even without the monarchy.
    I don't lean on the tourism argument much, but VisitBritain earlier this year produced stats that showed the main motivation for people visiting Britain is the history and royal connections.

    HECK! every tourist would pay to see the inside of Buckingham palace:rolleyes: .. tourism would probably double!![/quote]

    To see the inside of a dour, boring, garish town house? Really?

    Buckingham Palace is NOTHING like Versailles.

    i wouldn't mind the monarchy as much, if they actually did something .. if they really get involved with the country...
    They do. A phenomenal amount. Their level of charity work is incredible, there's few people more involved in the country as they.

    The monarchy's functions are broadly on a par to the presidencies of Germany and Italy - which are unelected and non-executive too.

    ...such as the tuition fee rises. instead of clogging up my morning newspaper with wedding plans.
    So you're arguing for an executive monarchy? :eek:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pitch)
    are you actually a brain-farted slave?If you don't have free will and want to use your money to make Charles rich for doing nothing instead of public services,why don't you offer him your property?
    Prince Charles is not funded by taxpayers money.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I don't mind them right now but they should pack it in the next 50 years. I can understand the appeal of Prince Philipp, Charles and the Queen but the next generations will not care about Harry or Beatrice. The Royals have become more "common" and less mysterious now that we see them falling out of clubs in drunken stupors.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.