Off Topic Royal Wedding
- Thread starter Zanjinho
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I meant outside my gaff because of my treasonous insinuatiWouldn't know saint I'm watching the grass grow in the back garden.
But what percent of that is from overseas? What % of that would have otherwise been spent in York, Blackpool, or Weston Super Mare.
Personally, I think they should have gone with shirt sponsors for this. How much would Coca Cola pay to sponsor the wedding party? Perhaps £30 million for having a logo on the grooms shirt. £100 million to be a wedding dress sponsor. £150 million to be a sponsor of the whole wedding.
This royal wedding brought to you by McDonalds, we love to see you smile. The royal family's income should come from how much they make from shirt sponsors.
For all its faults, at least a constitutional monarchy saves us from having someone like Bush, Trump or Putin in charge.
Republics aren't all they're cracked up to be.
Republics aren't all they're cracked up to be.
Does it?
Thatcher, Blair, May.
How has it prevented you having someone crap in charge? Queen isn't in charge.
But, Seriously, Charles is next in line. The doofus who once said Britain should hire out the military as mercenaries during peace time. The guy that once expressed a desire to be a tampon.
Having a monarch doesn't mean you can't have a terrible figurehead. Britain will have one once the Queen dies. Britain has had many in the past. What it does mean is you can't vote her out after X years.
Its not a real wedding until someone in the wedding party gets drunk and does something that results in the cops being called.
The royals are doing this wedding thing all wrong.
We don't have Trump or any of the above as a president. ..
So yeah... despite all those arseholes who can be elected they live or die by their party... not one vote just for them ...
Milk seriously ... you literally live in the country that proves ..... don't ****ing do it.????
I'm not sure why you take this so seriously.
Do you really think republics are better?
all enjoy the wedding you paid for but weren't invited to.
42 million quid
Where are the social justice ******s
Pie's parody is always on point
42 million quid
Where are the social justice ******s
Pie's parody is always on point
You must log in or register to see media
Britain more or less is a republic though already... Except for the royal family...
The royals only have a few nominal powers. I don't get the whole argument that if you stopped paying the royals you would suddenly elect Donald Trump or George W. Bush. The people will elect who the people will elect regardless of who the Queen is. Noone really thinks the Queen is in charge anyway. Even who she knights is told her by parliament.
I object to the whole concept of taking money from poor people to give to the rich (even if it is a minimal amount per person). I do think things like the house of Lord's and having a monarchy (however weak and benign) is an abhoration in the 21st Century. It's a free country, if she wants to call herself queen, I'm fine with that: but it shouldn't be backed up by the state. Certainly shouldn't be funded by the state.
Monarchy is a holdover from the days of feudalism, a symbolic holdover from the days when the evil minority would abuse and take advantage of the weak.
State sponsored monarchies should not exist in the modern world.
Well, I watched it and loved every minute of it. The only thing I found annoying was all the build-up to the days leading up to it.
The American Bishop was great, just went on a bit, and the gobs on Camilla and Kate were priceless. My mate met Camilla once, she said she's just a po-faced upstart masquerading as a royal. I thought Meghan's mum was lovely.
Yeah, the royals cost money, but look at the corrupt republics around the world, and don't tell me the American taxpayer doesn't pay for the White House and Air Force One.
The American Bishop was great, just went on a bit, and the gobs on Camilla and Kate were priceless. My mate met Camilla once, she said she's just a po-faced upstart masquerading as a royal. I thought Meghan's mum was lovely.
Yeah, the royals cost money, but look at the corrupt republics around the world, and don't tell me the American taxpayer doesn't pay for the White House and Air Force One.
You wouldn't be required to be America if you got rid of the Queen. You wouldn't be required to build a white house replica or an AF1 replica. You even wouldn't be required to elect Donald Trump. You wouldnt be obligated to mispronounce words like scone and zebra. All it would mean is some undeserving family doesn't get elevated above everyone and be funded to extreme wealth by the poor.
I don't get the comparisons with the US. America is pretty screwed up in many ways but getting rid of the royal family wouldn't turn Britian into the US.
How else are the royals ever going to get girls?
You'd be dooming those ugly munters to almost cert3sin extinction.
You'd be dooming those ugly munters to almost cert3sin extinction.
"the royals cost money"
Yeah wishi they do, the only one of them that should cost money is the monarch because of its status and responsibilities, the rest of them can **** off as far as I'm concerned, their family as a whole have already got enough money and assets to last a thousand lifetimes.
Yesterday's freebie cost the British taxpayer £25m?, while austerity hits the working class harder as time goes by, where is the justification in this day and age to have a medieval system of monarchy?, the monarchs ancestors rose to the top by slaughter and theft of land and riches of weaker adversaries, apart from the slaughter it's not much different these days for them, except these days they don't have to send out their army of armour clad soldiers to to get those things, they're handed to them on a plate by the government.
Yeah wishi they do, the only one of them that should cost money is the monarch because of its status and responsibilities, the rest of them can **** off as far as I'm concerned, their family as a whole have already got enough money and assets to last a thousand lifetimes.
Yesterday's freebie cost the British taxpayer £25m?, while austerity hits the working class harder as time goes by, where is the justification in this day and age to have a medieval system of monarchy?, the monarchs ancestors rose to the top by slaughter and theft of land and riches of weaker adversaries, apart from the slaughter it's not much different these days for them, except these days they don't have to send out their army of armour clad soldiers to to get those things, they're handed to them on a plate by the government.
Presidents cost money, too. Presidential palaces. Look at Putin. They can't get the ****er out of power and Russia's on its knees economically. Which is ironic considering what they did to the Tsar.
We own the Queen and the family hook line and sinker and they know it. It's not the other way round. I went to Holyrood House once and during the tour the guide said feel free to walk on the carpet because your taxes paid for it. We get the money back generated by the tourism they attract.
They have no power other than that.
And consider the irony of nations with no monarchy want a piece of ours. It makes me feel ****ing smug tbh.
Yesterday cheered a lot of people up; and I was comforted by the fact that a girl from a dysfunctional family - even worse than the one I come from - made it with the guy she loves.
Have a bucket.
Republicans would have us having a President. Imagine President Blair, or May. At least with the Royals you have the attached history which appeals to tourists. Also remember that the Crown Estates bring in a lot of money and the list of Royals who are supported has been reduced in recent years with the Queen now supporting a lot of the extended family.
I am more concerned about wealthy tax dodgers whether individuals or companies. If they could clamp down on them it would bring in a lot more money than getting rid of the Royals would save.
But......you never met the queen you reckon you own, the buildings and nationally owned jewels are what attract visitors and generate money.
Whether or not you agree with the American system you'll know that presidents of the US generate the money that keeps that nation rich, the Queen(monarch)doesn't have the powers of parliament(Senate,Whitehouse etc) to do the same, she's an icon and an overly overpaid face of this country who doesn't represent the working classes or doesn't represent reality of our modern day society as a whole.
There are a lot of people I haven't met. I know what she is, too, a figure head.
Stalin and Lenin represented the working class and look what happened there. No system is perfect.