How long with the Royal Family last?

Sweet.Science

Its 2020. Surely the time of Queens,Princes,Princesses,Dukes etc is up.

Maybe when the Queen dies it will fizzle out

Day Lewin

Doubt it.
Quite a little haul of jewels, palaces, paintings, there.
Anybody would be glad to inherit them!

donkeykong5

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Its 2020. Surely the time of Queens,Princes,Princesses,Dukes etc is up.

Maybe when the Queen dies it will fizzle out

Only person who ever deserved the title ROYAL in my opinion was diana

jimmii

No chance. Its bring in too many tourists. There will be a royal family if they like it or not!

ancapailldorcha

I'm sure they'll just invite another Germanic noble over to take the throne if they have to. This nonsense has persisted for over a millennium.

Sweet.Science

Day Lewin wrote: »

Doubt it.
Quite a little haul of jewels, palaces, paintings, there.
Anybody would be glad to inherit them!

How can the UK justify this when there are hundreds at food banks just a stones throw from the Palace

Sweet.Science

jimmii wrote: »

No chance. Its bring in too many tourists. There will be a royal family if they like it or not!

They could open Buckingham Palace for tourists. It would bring in a lot more.

ancapailldorcha

Sweet.Science wrote: »

They could open Buckingham Palace for tourists. It would bring in a lot more.

Seconded. I want to see the Corgis.

ELM327

The current one, not very long, perhaps similar for the current prince of wales, due to age
But then the one after charles will last a while.

riffmongous

jimmii wrote: »

No chance. Its bring in too many tourists. There will be a royal family if they like it or not!

France and Austria do pretty well with just the buildings

walshb

The Royal family probably brings in as much cash to the county as it costs to have them in place...

The Queen, herself is one of Britain's hardest working people.

GooglePlus

Sweet.Science wrote: »

How can the UK justify this when there are hundreds at food banks just a stones throw from the Palace

If it went to a vote, I reckon the people of the UK would vote in favour of keeping their royal family.

I think they're a waste of money too but they see it as part of their national identity.

Sardonicat

walshb wrote: »

The Royal family probably brings in as much cash to the county as it costs to have them in place...

The Queen, herself is one of Britain's hardest working people.

Yup. Up before dawn, on with the overalls and down the mines til dusk.

Winning_Stroke

Pretty sure the people would opt to keep a monarchy. And tbh, why not? Parliamentary democracies need some farce, figure-head position.

GLaDOS

Genuine question: How do the Royal family (the actual people) bring in tourists?

ancapailldorcha

GLaDOS wrote: »

Genuine question: How do the Royal family (the actual people) bring in tourists?

There are always throngs of people around The Mile and Buckingham Palace. It's one of those things that people just associate with Britain. Part of its soft power and brand if you will. Like Doctor Who, red phoneboxes, black cabs and so on.

irish_goat

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

There are always throngs of people around The Mile and Buckingham Palace. It's one of those things that people just associate with Britain. Part of its soft power and brand if you will. Like Doctor Who, red phoneboxes, black cabs and so on.

Getting rid of the Royal Family won't mean the Mile and Buckingham Palace disappear though...

jrmb

It'll survive in a more minimal form.

Sardonicat

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

There are always throngs of people around The Mile and Buckingham Palace. It's one of those things that people just associate with Britain. Part of its soft power and brand if you will. Like Doctor Who, red phoneboxes, black cabs and so on.

So is Versailles to France. There are no privileged parasites living there anymore, though. By all means have a monarch for Head of State, but why all the rest of the leeches?

ancapailldorcha

irish_goat wrote: »

Getting rid of the Royal Family won't mean the Mile and Buckingham Palace disappear though...

I don't recall claiming otherwise.

Sardonicat wrote: »

So is Versailles to France. There are no privileged parasites living there anymore, though. By all means have a monarch for Head of State, but why all the rest of the leeches?

I don't recall advocating for a monarchy.

Sardonicat

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't recall claiming otherwise.



I don't recall advocating for a monarchy.

I don't recall saying you did.

irish_goat

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't recall claiming otherwise.

The assumption was that you were replying to GLaDOS's question...

GLaDOS wrote:

Genuine question: How do the Royal family (the actual people) bring in tourists?

GLaDOS

Yeah that's kinda the point of my question above, tourists will still visit these places with or without a Royal family I would imagine.

faceman

An active royal family is far more popular than empty buildings. The royal family are hugely popular in the U.K. Just look at the papers today.

Can you imagine someone suggesting we scrap the role of the Irish president for similar reasons.

Sardonicat

faceman wrote: »

An active royal family is far more popular than empty buildings. The royal family are hugely popular in the U.K. Just look at the papers today.

Can you imagine someone suggesting we scrap the role of the Irish president for similar reasons.

The role of President does not confer unearned, lifelong privilege on extended members of the President's family.

easypazz

GLaDOS wrote: »

Yeah that's kinda the point of my question above, tourists will still visit these places with or without a Royal family I would imagine.

Maybe or maybe less people will bother.

The changing of the Queens guard takes place every day and is in itself a big tourist attraction.

If there was no Queen there would need for this.

Of course they could continue with it anyway just for the tourists.

People love scandal about the royals, and all helps attract people to the country.

They also visit the commonwealth countries which promotes the UK as a place to visit and do business.

Yurt2

The whole royals bring in tourism is a bit fuzzy to me. Are they doing surveys of tourists at Heathrow arrivals asking confused Chinese people are they here for Charles and Camilla or William and Kate?

I've never whipped out my credit card to book a flight somewhere because of a royal family in all my life.

I thoroughly enjoyed a long weekend in Stockholm last year but I don't think anyone on the flight gave a rattlers about their royal family. Monarchists there probably have the same arguement - "look at all the tourists here for our Queen / King!"

If there was evidence having royalty seriously drove tourism, Bord Fáilte would be conducting a nationwide search at this very moment to crown somebody.

The monarchy was archaic a century ago, long overdue for the scrapheap. All in favour of a meritocracy over birthright, ergo pull up your bootstraps and earn it.

Sardonicat

Sardonicat wrote: »

The role of President does not confer unearned, lifelong privilege on extended members of the President's family.

No. the people have to go through the farce of an election to decide which pointless head of state they want to do the job, before retiring on a large pension for the rest of their lives.

as has been said a million times, if you were starting from scratch, which Ireland effectively did, then you wouldn't consider a monarchy, but why go through the hassle of making the change for little or no benefit.

The Satanist

How long would they last in a Royal Rumble is the real question.

Iscreamkone

My lad is the same age as Prince George. My lad will be retired after a lifetime of work before Prince George will take up the job he was born to do - become King.

KWAG2019

Sweet.Science wrote: »

They could open Buckingham Palace for tourists. It would bring in a lot more.

It is. I did the tour. It was in bad nick tbh. Very interesting to see how the British state uses the whole “royal” thing to manage foreign visits etc. the splendor of some rooms and entryways is no doubt meant to be impressive or intimidating as the case may be. It’s a living lesson in British tradition and continuity for the masses. I’d recommend the tour: even in 2019 my Irish accent caused the shop assistant (yes the Firm has a very savvy retail thing going) to freeze the smile!

osarusan

Apparently the UK Republic party plans to wait until the queen dies and use the time between her death and the coronation of Charles to really try and highlight the issue of abolishing the monarchy.

But I don't think they're going anywhere any time soon. Younger people are more likely to just be indifferent to them, than actively be against them.

James Brown

Can't see it going anywhere. Might take a lower level in the day to day psyche. The days of the wealthy needing a monarch and one they agree with religiously, (power and money) are long gone though.

Ironicname

donkeykong5 wrote:

Only person who ever deserved the title ROYAL in my opinion was diana

Why in the name of **** is that?

Beta Ray Bill

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Its 2020. Surely the time of Queens,Princes,Princesses,Dukes etc is up.

Maybe when the Queen dies it will fizzle out

Very unlikely.

Parliament reports to the Queen.
She still has ultimate control (just never uses it) and selects members of the house of Lords

The membership of the House of Lords is drawn from the peerage and is made up of Lords Spiritual and Lords Temporal. The Lords Spiritual are 26 bishops in the established Church of England. Of the Lords Temporal, the majority are life peers who are appointed by the monarch on the advice of the Prime Minister, or on the advice of the House of Lords Appointments Commission. However, they also include some hereditary peers including four dukes

Note: The Supreme Governor of the Church of England is Queen Elizabeth II

"The Crown Corporation" is also one of the wealthiest organisations in the world.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I think ye're underestimating just how stone mad the British and much of the commonwealth populations (and, for some reason, koreans) are about the royal family.

I work in the English Market and still there is a steady unending stream of them coming there primarily because she visited, for half an hour, ten years ago. Posing beside a plaque on the wall to have their photo taken. With a plaque. Pat O Connell is still dining out on it. Very much the physical presence of the royals themselves is part of the appeal.

It's hard for Irish people to grasp I think, because there is NO social institution or establishment of the state that's afforded the same deference and mindless respect and affection as the royal family and monarchy are there.

It's archaic and frankly bizarre to observe from the outside and I'm glad we don't have one here but I can't see it going anywhere. They're one of the most enduring monarchies of the modern age, they've been beset by a lot of abdications, scandals, world wars that could and did fatally destabilise other monarchies and they've survived.

MadYaker

walshb wrote: »

The Royal family probably brings in as much cash to the county as it costs to have them in place...

The Queen, herself is one of Britain's hardest working people.

I see this said a lot but is it actually true. I find it hard to believe. Nobody gets to see the royals all you see is the outside of buckingham palace. There are far more impressive palaces in other european cities.

osarusan

MadYaker wrote: »

I see this said a lot but is it actually true.

an article from 2018 which mostly says that it's hard to calculate an answer to that:


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/royal-wedding-family-how-much-uk-economy-benefits-cost-meghan-markle-expense-a8345436.html

Beta Ray Bill

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

Very unlikely.

Parliament reports to the Queen.
She still has ultimate control (just never uses it) and selects members of the house of Lords

she has ultimate control, because Parliament gives her ultimate control. Parliament can remove it any time it likes.

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

"The Crown Corporation" is also one of the wealthiest organisations in the world.

the Crown Corporation has nothing to do with the Monarchy, it is the corporation that runs the City of London and is, in theory, a completely separate state to the rest of England. It is very very wealthy, but has nothing to do with the Windsors. in fact, theoretically, she is not allowed to enter the square mile unless invited by the Lord Mayor.

The Crown Estates is something different and covers things like many of the Royal Palaces, parklands, all the foreshore in the UK, as well as large amounts of commercial property. This was all handed over to the government by George III to settle the monarchy's debts and in return, a percentage of the income is given to the monarchy for their upkeep. This doesn't go in to their back pocket (well, some does) it goes to cover the salaries of their staff and the upkeep of the buildings they use, such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle.

state functions, security etc are all seperate and come directly from tax payers money, as it would for a president or any other head of state,

AlanG

At some stage a social media campaign is bound to take hold pointing out that believing blood line is the key to ruling a country is not a lot different to believing one race or gorup cna be born with rights over another. It amazes me that anyone of colour or from the former empire can support the royal family but lots currently do.

If a significant number of people start publicly turning down royal visits and OBEs etc then the view of royalty could change quite quickly. Cleverly anyone of influence in the Uk is given an OBE or similar and then then are unlikely to speak out about the institution that has conferred on them a badge of superiority.

4068ac1elhodqr

Madame tussauds has had enough anyway (of some of them), the fairly harmless and generally luke-warm-likeable couple
- seem to have been moved from top spot, and out to share another room with celebs such as the Beckhams (Posh spice is fairly posh anyway).

The only living creature I would address as a lord/lady/royal or master is the visiting stray cat and the pinscher out the back, when he's looking fed.
Only ever bow when a pencil is dropped, or when passing through Japan, even then they'll happily bow back in the same equal manner.

Thelonious Monk

Irish people seem to love knocking the royal family and going on about them being a waste of taxpayers money and antiquated. The thing is though English people absolutely love them, and want to keep them, so I say leave them to it.

4068ac1elhodqr

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The thing is though English people absolutely love them, and want to keep them, so I say leave them to it.

More likely indifferent, however have you ever read the comments section of England's biggest selling newspaper(s)? It ain't pretty.

Also the Americanos seem to have an issue with Megan, not sure why she seems normal enough, maybe they're just well-jel of the fame n' fortune.

paleoperson

I don't mind them existing, but they should be treated as normal people.

Use the NHS rather than the private royal health system. Draw the ordinary dole rather than the royal one if they don't work.

They still get perks beyond imagination - their palace, other assets and free celebrity status for life.

Thelonious Monk

Koa Great Vineyard wrote: »

More likely indifferent, however have you ever read the comments section of England's biggest selling newspaper(s)? It ain't pretty.

Also the Americanos seem to have an issue with Megan, not sure why she seems normal enough, maybe they're just well-jel of the fame n' fortune.

I don't know, my time living there there were street parties for birthdays and royal babies and weddings, and all my English friends always said they wouldn't want to get rid of them.

Sardonicat

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Irish people seem to love knocking the royal family and going on about them being a waste of taxpayers money and antiquated. The thing is though English people absolutely love them, and want to keep them, so I say leave them to it.

And the Scottish people? And the Welsh? I know plenty if English people who have no time for them.

MadYaker

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Irish people seem to love knocking the royal family and going on about them being a waste of taxpayers money and antiquated. The thing is though English people absolutely love them, and want to keep them, so I say leave them to it.

Have you been reading the reactions from the press and public? I’m not seeing much love. It’s absolutely vile. You’d swear the royals are animals in a zoo purely for public entertainment. How dare want to live private lives and not have their every move photographed and scrutinised. How could you raise a family in those conditions? The right ring press in the uk are disgusting.

silver2020

If the royal family did not exist, what would the tabloids & gutter press write about and what would their brain dead readership talk about?

the Daily Muck had SEVENTEEN pages on harry & megan today.

That alone proves they were right to tell the establishment and the gutter press to eff off

strandroad

Kensley Hissing Scorer wrote: »

I work in the English Market and still there is a steady unending stream of them coming there primarily because she visited, for half an hour, ten years ago. Posing beside a plaque on the wall to have their photo taken. With a plaque.

That's gas. Those people, who are they, visiting Brits? What ages?

Boredstiff666

I thought this was an Irish Forum.