To think Prince William and his wife are lacking appreciation of their position

[fideline]

and good fortune?

He just seems a bit of an over-privileged posh boy?

I know everyone says he has lovely manners, but we can expect a bit more than that, surely?

They have just hired a 'forrin' nanny a) after making an enormous PR fuss about not having one b) at a time of high UK unemployment.

The list of god-parents for their baby was a bit multi-barrelled and No foreign royals, as is traditional, but Not the slightest whiff of any demographic diversity either.

There seem to be a LOT of luxury holidays going on with these two.

The uni course he is doing has been especially designed for him and seems designed to prepare him for inheriting the enormous (private) Duchy of Cornwall. Not exactly public-spirited?

In the much-hyped first post-baby interview, he was keen to promote a charity saving Kenyan Rhinos. Nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but the line between animals he shoots for fun and animals he wants to save is unclear and anyhow a charity for under-privileged (UK?) children would have been the nice, publicity-shrewd thing to do, maybe?

For a couple with a great deal of expensive PR expertise at their disposal they seem to be slightly missing the mark a bit too often.

I suspect Kate's wealthy family may pay for a lot of her holidays but the security details would still be paid by taxpayer.

They don't work hard. That has always been a bollocks argument. I am sure there will be lots of talk of their 'gruelling' tour of Aus and NZ.

If they were flying on a budget airline, staying in shitholes, doing their own packing and driving themselves around then it might be gruelling.

No, they do not work hard. There are members of the royal family that do work extremely hard (or at least put in the hours), and I'm happy to admit that. But William and Kate do not fall into that category. Not by a long stretch.

I don't really care what they do. What I do resent is (a) this ridiculous pretence that they are just like you and me and (b) that Kate is some kind of role model for young women. Well, she isn't. I have a History of Art degree, as do many other people I know, and every one of us has achieved far more than she ever has or will. She is the last woman on earth that I would waste my admiration on, however much the Daily Mail and assorted other sycophants would like me to. It is not "jealousy" to refuse to bow and scrape to a woman who, having had the best education money can buy, ends up performing the role of a semi-animated clothes hanger.

"And do people travel "to see the Royal family" or to see the palaces etc?"

One million people travelled to London for William and Kate's wedding so that suggests they do.

HadABadDay no offensive is seeing my lovely mil die at 62 because her crap GP missed her cancer symptoms and ignored her repeated requests for referral by which time the cancer had spread and she died.

All serious illnesses are dreadful but they are far far worse to endure if you are poor, as my inlaws were, and with poor access to medical facilities.

when the royals get sick they are treated like gold.

what's offensive in pointing out the truth here?

Isn't William the chap who's Mother died in a car crash as she was trying to escape the press? And then photographers snapped her when she was dying in the car? And didn't topless picture of his wife appear in magazines after she was snapped with a long lens when she was caught by the paps?

There must be some kind of downside to his life.

It's the William whose mum died because she got into a car with a drunk driver and didn't wear a seatbelt

Tiggy his mother died because she was being driven at high speed and had no seatbelt on. That could happen to anyone anywhere and so what if the press were following her? what did she expect?

Kate was photographed topless? so fucking what? but of a twit to stand topless in a balcony wasn't she really?

this notion of jealousy of their wealth?

hilarious, I don't mind them being wealthy but I object to paying for their wealth. I object to a head if state they is unelected and unable to be thrown out.

millions of tourists come to Stratford every year but they don't expect to see bloody William Shakespeare.

the tourism argument is quite frankly daft.

Yes, Nancy I expect that facet to her death made it far easier to bear for the fifteen year old to bear. I expect he woke up every single day, and thought, "well, I'd be sad, but as she wasn't wearing her seatbelt, it was the silly mare's own fault. It doesn't hurt a bit, because of that. Lucky, that".

How many fifteen-year-olds have to cope with the level of public ghoulishness, he did? He, and his twelve-year-old brother, had to do a meet-and-greet, on the day of their mother's funeral, to accept the public's condolences, for the sake of the public's comfort.

Remember that? Because I do.

And the above goes for you bodybooboo.

they work hard? really seriously people actually think that. Jesus then your definition of working hard and mine are very very different.

Tilly please don't lecture me on the suffering if a 12 year old.

my own 12 year old saw her teacher die in her last school trip. she and her friends were cut out of a coach with serious injuries.

she and the other adults/children are still suffering, still waiting for a court case and compensation.

we are struggling every day and do are these now teenage girls.

the difference is we aren't wealthy or important so don't get justice or help.

unlike the princes assuredly did.

Tilly - those would be excellent point if anybody had actually said what you claim. But they didn't.

Oh I think some people think if you are rich and privileged, you are not really human, have no feelings and deserve to be put up against the wall and shot.

They didn't choose this life and yes while they could have walked away from it, there are royals who have done that and they were hauled over the coals as well.

Just because a normal person's 12yo has had a traumatic experience (obviously many normal people have them every day, that's life) it does not somehow trump a 12 and 15yo losing their mum in horrendously public circumstances, just becasue they are rich and royal.

What next, the princes in the tower deserved to die, the rich, privileged, imprisoned, tortured little gits?

You can be opposed to the monarchy and want to get rid of it without having to wave goodbye to your compassion.

If you don't want to be lectured, don't necessitate it. Tiggy said that his life must have had some downside, quite pointedly, and you tried to dodge that by talking about Diana's choices with the seatbelt.

Diana had a choice in putting a seatbelt on. William and Harry did not get to choose whether she put a seatbelt on, did they?

When you speak about the experiences of one person (A) losing a parent (B), it is utterly irrelevant to say that B could have done this or that. Because that does not mean A's life is magically less painful.

Yes the time my Dsis, age 56, was diagnosed with cancer, she was told if she didn't have an operation she would die within 6 months.

That week, Prince Philip age 93 was taken into hospital for his 'stomach complaint' was operated on next day and nothing more was said, only he wouldn't be doing any duties for a few months.

My Dsis had her crucial operation cancelled and was done 3 weeks later, but even on that day it was touch and go whether it would go ahead.

This inequality makes me livid.

I agree that some people seem to think that the rich and privileged don't feel the pain of something like bereavement as keenly as 'ordinary' people.

I very much felt that when David and Samantha Cameron's son Ivan died.

Nancy I didn't claim anyone had said that or typed that. I merely responded to the implications.

Just like you responded to mine.

Body was there no counselling on offer for your DD through school or the GP?

You say you are waiting for a court hearing and compensation and that you are not getting any justice. How was the failure to prosecute justified to you? If nobody is going to be prosecuted I guess it will be difficult to get anyone to accept liability and therefore pay compensation.

Nancy this I agree with you on. I notice how Ivan gets blotted out of history on those "David and Samantha have # children".

He's a tory, not Satan embodied. He does deserve to have his child's life recognised.

I didn't imply that at all though Tilly.

I just get pissed off with the belief that the press killed Diana. They didn't. A drunk driver did.

And normal people have their cases brought to court and prosecuted all the time - it happened to me last year. It took a few years to come to court, and it won't happen unless the cps decides there is a case to prosecute, but that's because these things take time. If it doesn't happen, it's not because you're not a member of the royal family!

Being rich and famous and being ill doesn't mean you are likely to be in a better Heath regardless of Heath care.

Look at the celebs who have made thier own weath who have passed away because of cancer.

Kate middleton when pregnant would have had the same treatment to those who have suffered, but on top of that had some radio station calling the hospital and still had to face the press after discharge without telling them to fuck off.

"Why would they, a bit paranoid there"

Why wouldn't they? Its a bit naive to believe some statistics that are published in a newsletter without really knowing where they came from or having them verified in any way.

It is FAR more in their interests to say "Well the RF produce more than they spend"

"How many fifteen-year-olds have to cope with the level of public ghoulishness, he did? He, and his twelve-year-old brother, had to do a meet-and-greet, on the day of their mother's funeral, to accept the public's condolences, for the sake of the public's comfort."

I thought that it was rather more because it was a state funeral.

I can't get I involved with the discussion of Diana's death /kids suffering/whether its hard work/money raised by tourism/risk to life by terrorism /charitable works/ tax evasion /kates hair/birth place of nanny or any of the points being argued about .
This is because the position they hold is an inherited one funded by the state . If they recoup the cost its irrelevant . If they work tirelessly its irrelevant .
ITS MORALLY WRONG .ITS UNDEMOCRATIC .
William himself could champion a move towards a fairer system that represents the age we are in. His generation should be screaming for change .