Is the current Monarchy too costly for the UK

[Deleted member 21784]

Why do you keep saying £1.29 ... It's upwards of £250000000

And royal families are more than adept at being power hungry and acting class less???

The cost is £1.29 per person in the UK

It does not cost me that does it. I don't even earn that.. simple

 

[Deleted member 18121]

No. Long may they be part of our fabric and funded by us.

 

[D-S]

No

 

[Deleted member 29109]

No. I suspect the parts of the UK that don’t like the monarchy cost the tax payer far more than the Royal Family.

 

[Captainron]

The monarchy is a core part of the tourism efforts in the UK. They are worth the cost for me.
And I don’t think they should be propping up the masses by ridding themselves of land/buildings etc to put into public coffers.

 

[Jimaroid]

Discussion about the system itself is not political

Tell me what I’m not understanding here.

The question in the OP is about taxation of the nation and if we as taxpayers should or shouldn’t change that in the funding of the monarchy.

If that’s not the root of all politics in the UK since 1600 and something I don’t know what is.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Where are you getting 1.29 from ? Does it make you feel better than saying 10s and 10s of millions?

Why do you keep saying £1.29 ... It's upwards of £250000000

And royal families are more than adept at being power hungry and acting class less???

Well Phil’s provided links to back up his claim, perhaps you could do the same?

 

[theoneandonly]

The question should be what's the point of a royal family in modern 21st century democracy. None I'd say.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Tell me what I’m not understanding here.

The question in the OP is about taxation of the nation and if we as taxpayers should or shouldn’t change that in the funding of the monarchy.

If that’s not the root of all politics in the UK since 1600 and something I don’t know what is.

Post 19 sets it out quite clearly

 

[theoneandonly]

Well Phil’s provided links to back up his claim, perhaps you could do the same?

Or perhaps you can do your own research rather than have me do it for you. Its easy to do, just Google it.

 

[chrisd]

I'm happy in the knowledge that we will still have a royal family for many years to come despite the views of the anti brigade on here.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Or perhaps you can do your own research rather than have me do it for you. Its easy to do, just Google it.

That’s a no then.

 

[theoneandonly]

That’s a no then.

No what ? It costs upwards of 250 million a year. I dont need to post links to make it true.
All Liverpool Phil has done and the other chap is classic obfuscation to try and make it sound like it peanuts. Rather than the actual paying of crazy money to keep a whole undeserving family in the lap of luxury.

 

[Swingalot]

The question should be what's the point of a royal family in modern 21st century democracy. None I'd say.

29 million people from the UK who watched yesterday would disagree, plus the billions who watched worldwide.

All about timing with a comment like yours and to be frank, your timing stinks.

 

[spongebob59]

I'm happy in the knowledge that we will still have a royal family for many years to come despite the views of the anti brigade on here.

Imagine the arguments there would be if we didn't have the royalty to put on currency/stamps etc ?

 

[theoneandonly]

29 million people from the UK who watched yesterday would disagree, plus the billions who watched worldwide.

All about timing with a comment like yours and to be frank, your timing stinks.

Timing is everything ? some real precious types on here , we get threatened and told to be respectful and stay out of that queen thread, so here we are and still getting whined at.

 

[Jimaroid]

Post 19 sets it out quite clearly

I disagree.

 

[theoneandonly]

I disagree.

Yes Harriet we know.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

I disagree.

Well that’s a drag

 

[Jimaroid]

Well that’s a drag

See you when you come back to lock the thread then.