Do you support the Royal Family?

Watch
This discussion is closed.
hitchhiker_13
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#261
Report 16 years ago
#261
(Original post by 2776)
In name only my friend, in name only...

Well name's the important thing. It's a question of ideology basically. I have nothing personally against the royal family, I feel quite sorry for them sometimes and then I tell myself to wise up. True they aren't as important as they used to be, but they still cost us a lot of money don't they? But for me, what really grates is that I am a subject and not a citizen. It's so medieval.
3
GH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#262
Report 16 years ago
#262
(Original post by hitchhiker_13)
Well name's the important thing. It's a question of ideology basically. I have nothing personally against the royal family, I feel quite sorry for them sometimes and then I tell myself to wise up. True they aren't as important as they used to be, but they still cost us a lot of money don't they? But for me, what really grates is that I am a subject and not a citizen. It's so medieval.
It all depends, do we have definite figures on how many people/ much money does the royal family earn for the state for tourism?

I bet it is mroe than we give out to them.
0
hitchhiker_13
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#263
Report 16 years ago
#263
(Original post by 2776)
It all depends, do we have definite figures on how many people/ much money does the royal family earn for the state for tourism?

I bet it is mroe than we give out to them.


I actually doubt that, and I also believe that many tourists would still come to see Buckingham Palace etc. if the royal family was there or not.

Anyway, this was not the point of my argument. It should be based on more than financial terms.
1
GH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#264
Report 16 years ago
#264
(Original post by hitchhiker_13)
I actually doubt that, and I also believe that many tourists would still come to see Buckingham Palace etc. if the royal family was there or not.

Anyway, this was not the point of my argument. It should be based on more than financial terms.
Yes, agreed. How much do we pay the royal family anyway? per year?
0
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#265
Report 16 years ago
#265
(Original post by 2776)
Yes, agreed. How much do we pay the royal family anyway? per year?
The so called financial 'cost' of the monarchy is a common misconception. If we ignore the tourism and business gains, the net gain to the country from having a monarchy is £127 million a year - or approximately £2.18 per person per year. This is due to the tax the country gets from royal ownings such as the 'Crown Estates' in central london. Revenue from the CE this year was £163 million, a lot compared to the £9 million the queen gets off the country in return!
0
GH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#266
Report 16 years ago
#266
(Original post by timeofyourlife)
The so called financial 'cost' of the monarchy is a common misconception. If we ignore the tourism and business gains, the net gain to the country from having a monarchy is £127 million a year - or approximately £2.18 per person per year. This is due to the tax the country gets from royal ownings such as the 'Crown Estates' in central london. Revenue from the CE this year was £163 million, a lot compared to the £9 million the queen gets off the country in return!
Hmmm thats what I was wanting, some figures...
0
pkonline
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#267
Report 16 years ago
#267
Whilst tax from Crown Estates is pretty sizeable, to whom does this belong to and where did it come from? Is it the royals' personal land? Is it the government's? A mixture? Then how can we be grateful for the tax off it if it's our's anyway?
0
GH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#268
Report 16 years ago
#268
(Original post by pkonline)
Whilst tax from Crown Estates is pretty sizeable, to whom does this belong to and where did it come from? Is it the royals' personal land? Is it the government's? A mixture? Then how can we be grateful for the tax off it if it's our's anyway?
Its the crowns estate. Belongs to the Queen.
0
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#269
Report 16 years ago
#269
(Original post by pkonline)
Whilst tax from Crown Estates is pretty sizeable, to whom does this belong to and where did it come from? Is it the royals' personal land? Is it the government's? A mixture? Then how can we be grateful for the tax off it if it's our's anyway?
It's a heriditory royal estate so the tax generated off it is actually of benefit. Republics show great reluctance in publishing the cost of their heads of state, but the cost of the British monarchy compares extremely favourably.
0
pkonline
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#270
Report 16 years ago
#270
The reason why I ask to whom the CE belong to is that whilst it is the Queen's (or reigning monarch), where it came from, how it was acquired, and the exact legalities of ownership are important.
0
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#271
Report 16 years ago
#271
(Original post by pkonline)
The reason why I ask to whom the CE belong to is that whilst it is the Queen's (or reigning monarch), where it came from, how it was acquired, and the exact legalities of ownership are important.
How the f*** should I know? (It's probably on google if you're keen). I presume it was acquired by the collective wealth of the royal families throughout the ages so does not have any particular affiliation with public money.
0
GH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#272
Report 16 years ago
#272
(Original post by timeofyourlife)
How the f*** should I know? (It's probably on google if you're keen). I presume it was acquired by the collective wealth of the royal families throughout the ages so does not have any particular affiliation with public money.
Let a revolution handle that minor detail...
0
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#273
Report 16 years ago
#273
(Original post by 2776)
Let a revolution handle that minor detail...
Judging by this poll, the queen's corgies (well the remaining ones) aren't having an attractive effect to lure people into liking the royals! I quite like things the way they are, with the exception of a few waste-of-space minor royals.
0
pkonline
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#274
Report 16 years ago
#274
(Original post by timeofyourlife)
How the f*** should I know? (It's probably on google if you're keen). I presume it was acquired by the collective wealth of the royal families throughout the ages so does not have any particular affiliation with public money.
Well I don't expect people to know but don't you think it's kinda important to know where the lands came from before claiming that we should all be grateful to the royal's for 'em?

Public money and the royals historically have gone togther hand in hand haven't they? When they are broke they call Parliament to raise tax? I'm thick at history so hopefully someone will enlighten me .
0
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#275
Report 16 years ago
#275
(Original post by pkonline)
Well I don't expect people to know but don't you think it's kinda important to know where the lands came from before claiming that we should all be grateful to the royal's for 'em?

Public money and the royals historically have gone togther hand in hand haven't they? When they are broke they call Parliament to raise tax? I'm thick at history so hopefully someone will enlighten me .
I'm not particularly great at History either (hence the medicine) but I think going back so far in history doesn't really have relevance to the current day funding and need for the royal family. If you trace anything back far enough then it stops being meaningful to what you're studying if you know what i mean. At the end of the day the estates owned and operated by the royals are generating more than enough tax to cover their own expenses and civil lists (which only the major royals are subscribed to) to justify their presence. Whether you agree with them being there for other matters is entirely down to personal opinion.
0
pkonline
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#276
Report 16 years ago
#276
(Original post by timeofyourlife)
I'm not particularly great at History either (hence the medicine) but I think going back so far in history doesn't really have relevance to the current day funding and need for the royal family. If you trace anything back far enough then it stops being meaningful to what you're studying if you know what i mean. At the end of the day the estates owned and operated by the royals are generating more than enough tax to cover their own expenses and civil lists (which only the major royals are subscribed to) to justify their presence. Whether you agree with them being there for other matters is entirely down to personal opinion.
Well history does have relevance cos if the lands aren't rightfullu theirs and are ours then why should we be grateful for the tax on it? Surely history is one reason why we have the royals in the first place?! If we started again we would be stupid to go for a monarchy.
0
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#277
Report 16 years ago
#277
(Original post by pkonline)
Well history does have relevance cos if the lands aren't rightfullu theirs and are ours then why should we be grateful for the tax on it? Surely history is one reason why we have the royals in the first place?! If we started again we would be stupid to go for a monarchy.
define 'ours'.
0
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#278
Report 16 years ago
#278
(Original post by pkonline)
Well history does have relevance cos if the lands aren't rightfullu theirs and are ours then why should we be grateful for the tax on it? Surely history is one reason why we have the royals in the first place?! If we started again we would be stupid to go for a monarchy.
I'd give you some rep if I could, you're started to make me think of why we're all here in the first place for some strange reason, lol. Nice to have a pointful thread.
0
LH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#279
Report 16 years ago
#279
(Original post by timeofyourlife)
The so called financial 'cost' of the monarchy is a common misconception. If we ignore the tourism and business gains, the net gain to the country from having a monarchy is £127 million a year - or approximately £2.18 per person per year. This is due to the tax the country gets from royal ownings such as the 'Crown Estates' in central london. Revenue from the CE this year was £163 million, a lot compared to the £9 million the queen gets off the country in return!
the Queen costs us about £75 million a year.
1
Muse
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#280
Report 16 years ago
#280
(Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
the Queen costs us about £75 million a year.
Admittedly, £9 million wasn't the total expenditure but £75 million (approx) was the figure at the start of the 90s. Government figures say that this year the Head of State expenditure for 2002-03 is at £36.2 million.
Head of State expenditure has reduced from £87.3 million in 1991-92, a reduction of 59%.
This is trivial considering the money generated by the queen's estates and tourism etc.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

How are you feeling ahead of results day?

Very Confident (54)
8.79%
Confident (80)
13.03%
Indifferent (87)
14.17%
Unsure (158)
25.73%
Worried (235)
38.27%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise