lol

 

I haven't been on this site for a number of years up till a month or so ago.....I did wonder what happened to PSLewis.....thought he/she/it had joined theholy choir in the sky or had been banned - mystery solved

 

oh by the way I damn well hate royalty - another parasite to be supported by the tax payer - come the revolution

 

i care not for either babies or royalty............both are a drain on resources and a waste of time

 

Can you believe that some businesses have already started to encash the birth of the royal female newborn? I've had an email from Hobbycraft with the title "It's a girl!", and they're advertising their material to make crochet tiara and promoting their baby shower range with the excuse.

Honestly, some people!

 

Oh goody, another royal baby.

I'm so looking forward to being taxed on my pension to help pay for feed, nappies, nurses, clothes etc etc..........NOT:mad;

 

At least dads got semblance of real job

 

And the royal family bring in more through tourism than they take out.

 

including fixing up their lodgings. ?

 

SuperDrug are also spamming with "Hooray, it's a girl!", and trying to promote Sudocrem sales from their counters.

Very childish imo.

 

I thought the same until I saw this.


It's good for tourism
This claim is untrue and irrelevant. Even VisitBritain, our national tourist agency, can't find any evidence for it.

Chester Zoo, Stonehenge and the Roman Baths are all more successful tourist attractions than Windsor Castle, which is the only occupied royal residence to attract visitors in large numbers. If Windsor Castle was included in the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA) list of top attractions it would come in at number 24.

Research shows that tourists come here for our world class museums, beautiful scenery, fantastic shopping and captivating history - not because they might catch a glimpse of Prince Andrew. In a republic, royal properties such as Buckingham Palace would be open all year round, so visitors that do want to explore our royal heritage would have even more opportunity to do so.

But, even if the claim were true, do we really want the whims of visiting tourists to determine what kind of political system we have?

Royal residence admission numbers can be found in the Royal Collection Trust's annual reports
- See more at: https://republic.org.uk/what-we-want....S2EfN51j.dpuf

 

Whats the odds on the new baby being called Diana lol

 

Yeah congrats and the only time you see these lot is if a child is being born,wills and Harry playing soldiers and pilots,or Charlie boy dressed to the hilt in medals on rememberance day etc.....

 

aye.........right..........


Been playing soldiers and air force for years, could never decide which he was in, then always seemed to be off on some visit, or at home.

What's he ACTUALLY do?

 

PR for international relations. Inherited job.

His red head brother dances abroad with the foreign tribal people for the same purpose.

His dad also did similar things, and still does them when he gets a chance.

 

utter crap, then. Not a real job and CERTAINLY NOT worth his salary.

 

And Fergies two do even less. I think one of them has been on holiday for the last four months.

 

 

So the 3 million plus who visit the tower or Buck palace don't count do they?

 

Yes, they count - but any reasonably intelligent person would accept they would come regardless off whether we have a monarchy

And presumably they are here anyway, unless they teleport direct to these tourist attractions

So the "point" is ridiculous

The palace of Versailles is one of Europe's biggest attractions, the French have not had a monarchy for hundreds of years

 

Versailles is a world heritage site, id rather that than some stuffy prison

 

There's your problem hodgy

 

More people visit the French palaces, and they got rid of their monarchy years ago.

 

LOL

 

Obviously reasonably unintelligent people would not realise that at 56p per day per person they are the countries greatest asset.

The Royal family generate close to £500 million every year for British tourism with The Tower of London, Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace the most popular Royal destinations.

I see visitor numbers at Westminster Abbey were up 600,000 annually after the royal wedding there brining in an extra £12m annually. BARGAIN!!!!

 

Totally agree.

Even if the Royal family is a theatrical stunt for business in this day and age, the country citizens are paying too much to the generational actors. I find it difficult to believe that the financial gain in more than the loss, with this business. Political gains must be of significant value, hence the expense sharing for it is mandatory. It may simply be a feature of a spineless democracy; a 'unitary' one, with the ritualistic Royalty believed to be a USP. Or 'Kaa' politics with logical fallacies.

 

They go to take selfies and pics in front of the bricks and mortar,I take the tourists know they won't come face to face or hardly see a glimpse of a royal,same as other famous buildings around the world,people go because its there.Me and the gf still visit Prague castle even though we've been dozens of times,its a lovely place and a great attraction,they have soldiers dressed up like we have here guarding the entrance of the castle and it hasn't seen royalty in years.people from all over go to visit,Americans,Vietnamese,nationalities from across Europe.

 

Usual claptrap, I'm afraid.

Those areas would still get visitors, and if we opened up all the royal houses WE own, think what money could be generated then?

 

So where do you suppose the money that is raised now goes to then? To running the business that is the royal family. And no, visitor number would not be the same. The attendance figures for Westminster abbey are testament to that.

Try taking the blinkers off for once.

 

Darling baby Charlotte received a 41 gun salute .
In 1945 I received a V2 salute.