To be edging towards an anti-Monarchy position purely because of the Cambridges?

[Buxhoeveden]

As a couple they are starting to grate.

Is it too early to focus on them?

The economy is down the drain. Zero hour contracts, bad pay, over worked and over qualified.

Yet the entire extended Royal family ( Not just Katie and Co, there's bloody hundreds of them) do NOTHING.

Land inheritance, the class system renders these particular chosen, lucky few ridiculously entitled.

Why?

How there hasn't been a revolt in the UK by now boggles my mind.

Of course people go to France "specifically for Versailles" and other places of historic interest.

Of course, the key word there is 'and'. Who goes to France, tours Versailles and then goes home having seen nothing else of France? People put Versailles on their itinerary but it's not the sole reason to visit. And they do that despite the misfortune France has suffered in not having a current monarch.

'Royal duty is a job like any other'.

You are being facetious, right?

Love to see Harry in that steel works in Rawtenstall.

Bobochic, are you Kate?!

I am not being facetious. It's a job - not a routine job but there are plenty of unique jobs out there. Not everyone has to be a tiny cog grinding away in the huge machinery of society. Society cannot function on tiny replaceable cogs alone, however much that news might hurt the tiny egos of the tiny cogs

Is there a precedent for the grandchildren of the monarch being expected to carry out royal duties?
Royalty have not impinged much on my life and to be honest I thought they all just spent their time in country sports and the kind of things upper class people do to fill in their time (whatever that may be).
I do have great respect for the Queen, but I am pretty sure by the time William becomes King Britain will have a Dutch style monarchy, which seems a lot lower key than ours.

My history teacher went to France specifically to visit Versailles.

He said he made his family get there before it opened so there wouldn't be too many visitors.

Then he made them walk behind him while he imagined what it must have been like to be Louis XIV.

He was a bit odd though.

He doesn't get paid to be a rescue pilot.

Well yes, he does, but he donates his whole salary to charity.

I don't care but they bring in more revenue than they cost so I would keep them. Tourists love them!

I am more annoyed about tube drivers and worried about the economic state of Europe.

I don't care but they bring in more revenue than they cost so I would keep them. Tourists love them!

If you believe that then I've got some marshland I'd like to sell you...

Also re the tourism argument - Legoland Windsor gets more visits than Windsor Castle!

Indeed, Sapat. Generating tourist revenue is a perfectly respectable activity. A job like any other.

Just wondering if any of the monarchists on here knows who pays for their police and security?

Why can't posters see that Kate works fantastically hard at the role she has taken on?

I'd have thought because it's not glaringly obvious that she does work 'fantastically hard'.

I thought the new generation of Royals could be a breath of fresh air but I'm starting to think they could signal the end of the monarchy.
I know she's just had a baby but if Kate is up to scuba diving in Mustique she's up to carrying out some charitable duties.

BoboChic at 09:46:13
The Duchess of Cambridge is currently on maternity leave. Her public appearances are in a private capacity (maternity leave doesn't mean she isn't allowed out of the house). She can go to Wimbledon all she likes. She is not on royal duty and is not "giving back" at present.

I think the flaw on your insistence that she is on maternity leave is that:

a) before she was married she was not employed for long other than a short stint working at Jigsaw. She did not have a career or even a "job" to speak of, so it's hard to reconcile that with "maternity leave"

b) since her marriage, she has not embraced the official engagement gig in the way many had hoped. The Queen does over 350 engagaments per year, Duke of Edinburgh around 200, Charles something like 400. Catherine did 76 according to this

So maternity leave is a bit strong, although she could well see herself as a SAHM.

You could argue it's a job, but like all jobs there are parts of them that you don't like but you just have to get on with it and do it. But William and Kate aren't, they are just taking the good bits.

"I know she's just had a baby but if Kate is up to scuba diving in Mustique she's up to carrying out some charitable duties."

The other thing of course is that it could just be a couple of hrs out of the day.

It's not as if she would be having to leave the kids all day every day!

What she did or did not do before marriage, which gave her her current role, is entirely irrelevant to her entitlement to maternity leave. She is on maternity leave from royal duties. Let us not forget that getting pregnant was her top priority royal duty

She's on maternity leave from royal duties ... and her main royal duty was to get pregnant? So she's on maternity leave from having to do that? That's just fucked up in so many ways, and certainly knocks the 'it's a job like any other' argument right out of the park!

She's on 'maternity leave' from knackers all, let's stop tying ourselves in knots pretending that she works hard or that the way she spends her life is any kind of a 'job'. It isn't.

How many people have a uniformed nanny when they're on maternity leave?

I hope you are right better. I have been a staunch republican for years, but even I quite like the old queen . The rest of them just seem thick and lazy to me.

Obviously I think the OP is NBU.

joni - where I live having a nanny is the norm. I didn't have one for DD (though the DSSs had one until they were 12 and 14 ) but school expects DC to have a nanny and rather looks down on families who use after school care.

Bobochic. I know people who have or have had nannies but they all tend to work in jobs such as the law or medicine. They are a necessity rather, as in the case of the Duchess, a very extravagant luxury.

Generating tourist revenue is a perfectly respectable activity. A job like any other.

I am not convinced that they generate tourist revenue that we wouldn't receive anyway. I have plenty of "filthy foreigner" relatives and, over the years, they have come here to see the following:

• Liverpool Football Club
• Harry Potter-related locations
• Art Galleries and Museums
• Cotswold villages
• Shakespeare performed at Stratford
• Loch Ness / Scottish Highlands
• The Lake District

Yes, they might take a picture of themselves outside Buck House, but this is something they would do whether we had a current monarchy or if it was consigned to history.

However, if generating tourist revenue is the main argument that we can make in favour of the royal family, I suggest that the lot of them are put in a zoo and we can make mega-bucks from charging tourists to see them in their guilded enclosures. We could have Prince Harry in one, playing strip billiards with a bevy of beauties. The Duke of Edinburgh carriage-racing round another while occasionally stopping to insult any tourists that looked particularly funny and foreign. And the Duchess of Cambridge would just sit and have her hair styled all day. Now that would generate serious tourist revenue, plus we could open up all their houses to tourists as well.

YANBU.
William - Petulant,throws his toys out the pram.
Kate -Spoilt,wants the lifestyle but not the graft that comes with the title.