I'm not a "Royalist"......

[SocketRocket]

Shoud they be asked to stop having kids then ? Should they be restricted in that way to ensure there arent too many Royal Kids ?

And i can assure you millions do come to the country just for a chance to see a Royal - anytime the Queen goes out the streets are lined ten rows back , look at the people that were there just for the Wedding of one of her nieces. The reaction around the world when one of her grankids is pregnant of gives birth - hundreds of thousands flock to the capital just for a chance to see the Royal baby with thousands flying across the globe to see them



Then William cant win - he does a job a very commendable one , dont think he gets any further recognition than anyone else. The Queen is 92 yet every day she is doing something and being out in the public eye , even if its just attending fund raising events raises the profile through the roof



Why should their birth right be taken away ? The cost to the "public" is dwarved by the level of funds they bring into the country by tourism.

You seem to be looking for an argument. Who said anything about how many kids they have, what has that got to do with how many of them are supported by the public purse..

I am not suggesting we dont have a monarch but i fail to see what difference supporting minor royals would make to the numbers of tourists.
What exactly does William have to win, he is second in line to the throne so would still be publicly financed by my suggestion. Regarding the Queen, imo she should have stood down years ago, in fact she should have to go at 65. Its ludicrous to have a monarch on the throne at her age.

With a reduced and reformed royal family there would be no impact on tourism ,

 

[Deleted member 15344]

You seem to be looking for an argument. Who said anything about how many kids they have, what has that got to do with how many of them are supported by the public purse..

Not looking for anything - just thought it was a debate , anytime someone challenges your opinion and reasoning doesn’t mean they are looking for an argument , surely you aren’t that insecure ?

How many are “supported” by the public purse - do they just then sit there and do nothing or are they out there earning that money , and also plenty of them have jobs and not just supported by the public purse. Also how many of those Royals use that public purse to keep a lot of people in employment - employment that would disappear during your royal family Cull ?

I am not suggesting we dont have a monarch but i fail to see what difference supporting minor royals would make to the numbers of tourists.
What exactly does William have to win, he is second in line to the throne so would still be publicly financed by my suggestion. Regarding the Queen, imo she should have stood down years ago, in fact she should have to go at 65. Its ludicrous to have a monarch on the throne at her age.

Why is it “ludicrous” ? Currently she feels capable of carrying out all her royal duties so feels happy to continue , surely the only person who should decide when it’s time to step down is herself.

With a reduced and reformed royal family there would be no impact on tourism ,

It’s not some company looking for streamlining or restructuring - it’s a family formed over centuries that are ingrained in our society and provide us with so much history - it’s quite bold to make suggestions of what would happen if things change when it’s quite clear it would be an unknown. As already stated it’s not just the impact on tourism but also the employment of UK citizens.

If we are that desperate to save a bit of public money there are a great deal amount of other areas to look at first

 

[USER1999]

I am not a royalist. Full stop


But, the Queen, awesome. Hope she lives forever.

 

[SocketRocket]

Not looking for anything - just thought it was a debate , anytime someone challenges your opinion and reasoning doesn’t mean they are looking for an argument , surely you aren’t that insecure ?

How many are “supported” by the public purse - do they just then sit there and do nothing or are they out there earning that money , and also plenty of them have jobs and not just supported by the public purse. Also how many of those Royals use that public purse to keep a lot of people in employment - employment that would disappear during your royal family Cull ?



Why is it “ludicrous” ? Currently she feels capable of carrying out all her royal duties so feels happy to continue , surely the only person who should decide when it’s time to step down is herself.



It’s not some company looking for streamlining or restructuring - it’s a family formed over centuries that are ingrained in our society and provide us with so much history - it’s quite bold to make suggestions of what would happen if things change when it’s quite clear it would be an unknown. As already stated it’s not just the impact on tourism but also the employment of UK citizens.

If we are that desperate to save a bit of public money there are a great deal amount of other areas to look at first

We obviously will not agree on this subject so I feel it a waste of time discussing it further with you. Notwithstanding we are both entitled to our opinions.

 

[howbow88]

And i can assure you millions do come to the country just for a chance to see a Royal - anytime the Queen goes out the streets are lined ten rows back , look at the people that were there just for the Wedding of one of her nieces. The reaction around the world when one of her grankids is pregnant of gives birth - hundreds of thousands flock to the capital just for a chance to see the Royal baby with thousands flying across the globe to see them

I can assure you, that is not quite true.

It's a great stat that is often pumped out - 'The Royals bring in £XXXmillions in tourism.' The thing is, it's a little bit of a lie. The stat comes from tourism surveys where one of the most ticked answers to 'Which sites will you visit in London?' is Buckingham Palace. This is then spun into 'people travel to London to see the Queen...' Depending on your viewpoint, that's either a lie or a stretching of the truth. I know this because I have worked in this sector

There hasn't been a royal family in Russia for over 100 years now, but people still to go to the quite incredible Winter Palace.

Harry and his brother seem like decent people.

 

[2blue]

I can assure you, that is not quite true.

It's a great stat that is often pumped out - 'The Royals bring in £XXXmillions in tourism.' The thing is, it's a little bit of a lie. The stat comes from tourism surveys where one of the most ticked answers to 'Which sites will you visit in London?' is Buckingham Palace. This is then spun into 'people travel to London to see the Queen...' Depending on your viewpoint, that's either a lie or a stretching of the truth. I know this because I have worked in this sector

There hasn't been a royal family in Russia for over 100 years now, but people still to go to the quite incredible Winter Palace.

Harry and his brother seem like decent people.

Yes!!! & France the greatest tourist destination in Europe.
Oh yes, the indoctrination on behalf of the Royals is impressive & embedded in Eng culture so am not surprised it affects so many.😉😉

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Only caught last 10mins or so of the programme - thought he and his sons (and even Camilla) came across as ok. Will watch it all on catch-up.

 

[Jamesbrown]

Not a royalist, but I’m looking forward to any bank holidays, mourning days, wedding days off in the future.