AIBU to not give a monkeys about royal baby

[glamourousgranny42]

Thats it really. A wealthy woman who has married into a wealthy family who takes even more money from hard working people is having a baby. So fucking what! I cant understand why people cow tow to a group of people who are unelected and have no admirable qualities at all. Before you tell me how much money they bring in - imagine the increase in tourism if we could actually get into the properties that we own once we kick them out.

I can go to Paris to see the eiffel tower yet still go round the shops/museams/places of interest. Just because they come to see the palace and other royal places doesn't mean they will do only that and not go round the shops or visit other places. The Royal interest plays a big part in what alot of tourists come to see in London.

peanut, do you have evidence for these claims, or is it your opinion? The latter is fine, but I think you are on dangerous ground with your assumptions about tourist motivations and foreign views. I'm not sure that disinterested (ie, not managed by tour operators, etc) surveys of tourist interests would back up what you are saying...

I'm also not sure that pleasing tourists is a great basis for governing a country, but that's another question...

I wouldn't recognise the queen out and about

It was because i am well aware not every American and Chinese loves them, there are an awful lot of American and Chinese people in the world and even if you said half loved them and half hated them - that is still alot of people who love it with a percentage who will come here as a tourist and the royal family are a big part of the reason. Some don't just come to see that, but it plays a big part in it and generates lots of revenue.

so do you really think people will stop coming in their millions every year if we become a republic no

they will then be part of our history which is of interest to many

i never said they are not of interest just i do not believe people come here because we have a royal family apart from a few mainly americans (who are not the biggest spenders) who come here to be part of the royal weddings. tourists come here for a number of reasons as they also go to paris or barcelona

They don't actually get to see the royals, though, do they, Peanut. It's just selected bits of the palaces they can see, anyway - until we become a republic and it can all be opened up to the public. As a tourist, I would pay more to see the queen's loo and telly room than I would a secondary ball room, hardly used. Now think about the tourist money THEN!

Try researching it brdgrl. It is known that people who do not like the royal family will always say they don't bring anything into the country to support their view.

Must admit I`m dreading days and days of Royal baby all over the news and papers, I cant understand why they announced that she was in Labour this morning.

I have a passing interest in the names (just for history interest) but thats a far as it goes. Its all a bit of a circus, and a bit outdated now (having such a large Royal Family).

Imagine if the baby turns out to be just like it's Great Uncle Andrew.

I am so uninterested that I haven't even read this thread.

Try researching it brdgrl. It is known that people who do not like the royal family will always say they don't bring anything into the country to support their view.

I am happy to research topics before I make declarative statements.

I have researched it which is why i am saying it

I don't care if people hate the royal family, i am not a fanatic either, but it is quite niave to deny they bring anything to this country. I don't think i will waste my time trying to convince people who don't want to open their eyes

Omg there's a crown smiley.

What I mean is that the claims that the monarchy bring in vast sums of money thru tourism, and these offset their costs TO the system, are the sort of claims which need to be closely examined, not just repeated as fact to support the opinion that the monarchy is a great thing. Who is asking the questions, what questions are they asking, how are they determining that the income generated would not have happened otherwise, that sort of thing! An interest in royal history doesn't necessarily equate to support for the monarchy, either...France is a good example, someone mentioned Versailles...

You are right that I haven't examined the statistics, and frankly, I probably won't. Which is why I am not saying that the claims are flat out wrong. I just think they are questionable and open to distortion (not unlike the recent claims about how much the Olympics generated...) and there are other factors which need to be considered - like the potential LOSS to tourism by those who don't like the monarchy (has this ever been looked at, I wonder?).

But mostly, I think it doesn't really matter. The UK should not have a monarch because that nets the most income - that seems like a really bad basis on which to decide upon the best form of government.

This thread has got some gems in it (Crown jewels!) particularly Squoosh and NicholasTeacozy.

Must admit I'm only interested in passing but also find wall to wall coverage a bit much.
In my grumpier moments, I do think 'oh go away' about most of the Royal Family but that's because they feel a bit thrust upon us through the media. Imagine being a Royal 'correspondent' - surely the least desirable job in broadcasting?!!

But since you have researched it, could you point me to where I can see the figures, maybe that would 'open my eyes' as you say?

I wouldn't mind the coverage as much if it weren't so insistent on the claim that we all care so much! The entire world is apparently waiting with baited breath....really...

Shiney Dave,just said we are all waiting.

oh goody, a thread for me. I wonder what evilness will be slipped in while all the sheeple are glued to baby news.
And if they get in my fucking way when I need to get down Praed street in a hurry on thursday I will be very miffed.

According to the news,there is no news.

^^I wonder what evilness will be slipped in while all the sheeple are glued to baby news.

Cameron could bugger Osborne atop the fourth plinth on Trafalgar Square while singing "Anarchy in the UK" and no-one would bat an eyelid, not with wall to wall coverage of Jennie Bond frotting herself senseless about the state of Kate's cervix.

Just heard.....its a baby!

Got ya!

'Cameron could bugger Osborne atop the fourth plinth on Trafalgar Square while singing "Anarchy in the UK" and no-one would bat an eyelid, not with wall to wall coverage of Jennie Bond frotting herself senseless about the state of Kate's cervix.'

I would actually stop rolling a fag to watch that

The queen does do a good job but the question is should the job exist in the first place. getting a job simply because of who your parents are is not really modern thinking is it?
perhaps we should be like the French and have a republic?