Will we ever get rid of the royal family? Watch

This discussion is closed.
CurlyBen
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#41
Report 11 years ago
#41
So is the implication that if we no longer had the Royal Family we'd save loads of money? The only way I can see that happening is by cutting back on all the official visits and other duties the Royal Family performs. What kind of an impression does that give to the rest of the world? Mind you, seems the FCO is keen to go down the budget foreign relations route anyway. The Civil List is not 'pay', it's for the pursuit of official duties. Of course, if we're going to make the taxpayer argument, it's probably worth pointing out the Prince Charles alone pays more than £3m in tax each year..
0
Lara C.
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#42
Report Thread starter 11 years ago
#42
(Original post by L i b)
A post that deserves nothing short of complete and utter contempt.



No, they most certainly do not.



Private media is free to be manipulated any way it likes.



They easily would, they're independently very wealthy.



The NH-****ing-S? That black hole? You could pour ten billion into that a year and it'd make bugger-all difference.

Moreover, Mohammed Al-Fayed doesn't have a 'few billion' going spare. But the very notion of selling one of our most significant national buildings to a traitorous, sinister foreign fantasist is nothing short of revolting.



I would if I hadn't used up today's rep and assigned tomorrow's already. You should be bloody well ashamed of yourself.
are you a BNP member by any chance?
0
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#43
Report 11 years ago
#43
(Original post by Dac.)
are you a BNP member by any chance?
Yes, yes of course I am... :rolleyes: Lots of BNP members go about with the UN flag on their TSR accounts: it's the fashion, don't'cha know.

I am actually a Libertarian.
0
pretz
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#44
Report 11 years ago
#44
I wonder what tastes better, libertarian or socialist smoothie..
0
jgupta
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#45
Report 11 years ago
#45
(Original post by L i b)
Really? Funny how we've (and indeed, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Spain (I could go on for quite a while here) managed it tremendously better than most presidential countries.

Edit: Well, apart from the secular one. We have no pretensions to secularism in the UK.
I said from a symbolic point of view, obviously the queen has no real power so cannot influence political decisions but thats hardly an argument for keeping her in power.

It is an annoying technicality that we live in this modern country, yet it is still technically governed by a hereditary monarch, I feel sick every time I hear "God save the Queen" and am fed up of the various publicity stunts they pull such as going into the Gulf with the army or whatever.
0
pretz
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#46
Report 11 years ago
#46
I can count the amount of times I hear God Save the Queen every year, or perhaps every 2 years, on one hand.
0
undercover agent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#47
Report 11 years ago
#47
cant see it happening, people see them as a symbol of national identity in a world where (alledgedly) national identities are being eroded and people feel like they are under threat.

add to that the fact that British people are terribly good at monaing about the status quo but rather bad at implementing drastic changes to it, and I think the monarchy are with us forever.
0
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#48
Report 11 years ago
#48
(Original post by jgupta)
I said from a symbolic point of view
So what? I think my point rather ably demonstrated that it's not remotely difficult from any point of view.
0
20083
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#49
Report 11 years ago
#49
(Original post by jgupta)
I said from a symbolic point of view, obviously the queen has no real power so cannot influence political decisions but thats hardly an argument for keeping her in power.

It is an annoying technicality that we live in this modern country, yet it is still technically governed by a hereditary monarch, I feel sick every time I hear "God save the Queen" and am fed up of the various publicity stunts they pull such as going into the Gulf with the army or whatever.
So why is it a "political stunt" if they do it, yet not for anyone else? Strange notion. Tell us then, what would you rather they were doing?
0
Lara C.
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#50
Report Thread starter 11 years ago
#50
or god i dont want to get into this debate. i was just making my point that i dont like the monarchy, its not that i have anything against them its just they are a bit taxing on the resources side (excuse the pun).
0
20083
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#51
Report 11 years ago
#51
(Original post by Dac.)
or god i dont want to get into this debate. i was just making my point that i dont like the monarchy, its not that i have anything against them its just they are a bit taxing on the resources side (excuse the pun).
Why post in D&D with it then?

Love the way you just want to make a point, but no one is allowed to make theirs btw.
0
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#52
Report 11 years ago
#52
(Original post by Dac.)
or god i dont want to get into this debate. i was just making my point that i dont like the monarchy, its not that i have anything against them its just they are a bit taxing on the resources side (excuse the pun).
So... you're simply going with the most easily dispelled republican myth there is?
0
Lara C.
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#53
Report Thread starter 11 years ago
#53
(Original post by SillyFencer)
Why post in D&D with it then?

Love the way you just want to make a point, but no one is allowed to make theirs btw.
no i think the debate is going to go too political. i was thinking more of a pro's and con's to the monarchy. i dont care about heritage and all that.
0
20083
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#54
Report 11 years ago
#54
(Original post by Dac.)
no i think the debate is going to go too political. i was thinking more of a pro's and con's to the monarchy. i dont care about heritage and all that.
But surely "heritage and all that" can be pros and cons of the monarchy?
0
jgupta
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#55
Report 11 years ago
#55
(Original post by SillyFencer)
So why is it a "political stunt" if they do it, yet not for anyone else? Strange notion. Tell us then, what would you rather they were doing?
It is a political stunt because they obviously did not *need* to have him out there...in fact his presence there was more likely to harm rather than aid the effort.
Secondly the whole "oh no the press have found out" was such utter bull*****. If he wanted to go and not get found out...it would not have been that hard...he / they wanted to be found, and either way its improved their public image.

I would rather 'they' as a concept didn't exist anymore - we don't need a royal family, we've outgrown having a hereditary monarch as our head of state.

There is no "ultimately compelling" reason to get rid of it, but there is a stronger case for getting rid of it than there is for keeping it - even if the difference is far from overwhelming.
The only reason we keep it, therefore, is because perhaps it would be too much effort to abolish it, or because 'its tradition'.

Let this queen finish serving
Bite the bullet
shut it down
problem solved
0
Lara C.
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#56
Report Thread starter 11 years ago
#56
(Original post by jgupta)
It is a political stunt because they obviously did not *need* to have him out there...in fact his presence there was more likely to harm rather than aid the effort.
Secondly the whole "oh no the press have found out" was such utter bull*****. If he wanted to go and not get found out...it would not have been that hard...he / they wanted to be found, and either way its improved their public image.

I would rather 'they' as a concept didn't exist anymore - we don't need a royal family, we've outgrown having a hereditary monarch as our head of state.

There is no "ultimately compelling" reason to get rid of it, but there is a stronger case for getting rid of it than there is for keeping it - even if the difference is far from overwhelming.
The only reason we keep it, therefore, is because perhaps it would be too much effort to abolish it, or because 'its tradition'.

Let this queen finish serving
Bite the bullet
shut it down
problem solved
i like how he was wearing full combat uniform and none of the media guys were lol
0
20083
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#57
Report 11 years ago
#57
(Original post by jgupta)
I would rather 'they' as a concept didn't exist anymore - we don't need a royal family, we've outgrown having a hereditary monarch as our head of state.
That's not answering the question though. Whether you like it or not, they do exist, so since they do exist, and you don't want them "going into the Gulf with the army or whatever" then what would you rather they were doing?
0
jgupta
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#58
Report 11 years ago
#58
To be honest I'd rather them just be sitting around in their palace than endangering the lives of real British troops
0
Lara C.
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#59
Report Thread starter 11 years ago
#59
ive been negged and repped already. wtf. why are people such pussies they wont sign it. if i want to know who you are i just have to pay £3.50.
0
Jerry Meandering
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#60
Report 11 years ago
#60
(Original post by L i b)

I am actually a Libertarian.
Are you really? I'm a Scorpio so that means your birthday is before mine.
0
X
new posts
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 did your AQA A-level Business Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (44)
16.42%
The paper was reasonable (131)
48.88%
Not feeling great about that exam... (60)
22.39%
It was TERRIBLE (33)
12.31%

Watched Threads

View All