Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

We should all be thankful for the 2 billion a year the royal family earn us

116 replies

Itsgonnabeacoldone · 20/11/2017 07:46

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/881710/Royal-Family-monarchy-Queen-Prince-Philip-Prince-William-Prince-Harry

Just that really!

OP posts:
Want2bSupermum · 20/11/2017 19:31

Oh and I wish the media would stop referring to DofC as Kate Middleton. She has been married for over 5 years. I don't recall her opting to keep her maiden name upon marriage. It's just rude at this point.

Kittykatmacbill · 20/11/2017 19:52

Yabu.

I don’t have a problem with them existing, but I don’t think we should pay for them, they should pay there own building repairs , security and taxes. They could still ‘bring in tourists’, who are no way hear because of the fall of pound makes it a stupendously cheap trip... Hmm

logicalmum · 20/11/2017 20:16

www.owen.org/blog/414
Just to counteract what guest2013 put up.

guest2013 · 20/11/2017 21:09

Until we know exactly what the alternative would be like then I think we shouldn't be asking for it to go.
I don't know who that Owen guy is in that blog but I do know how the UK is viewed outside of it. How the queen and royals are definitely of benefit to UK brands and in particular Asia loves anything to do with the queen.
Besides all of that, I'll reiterate that you'd never see the money taken from your tax if it didn't go to the royal family and there's always going to be someone richer than you because of who their parents are. Prime minister's and presidents aren't just anybody, they usually come from wealthy families so why is that any better?

logicalmum · 20/11/2017 21:57

The alternative would be a fairer society. We shouldn't be paying for one families lavish lifestyle. The royal family, as always completely ignore the financial pressures facing the majority of the country. They represent a feudal society of medieval England, and it breeds excessive deference, none of which should have a place in a democratic society.

Just about EVERYTHING is wrong in having a royal family in this day and age, and of course it's better to have an elected president, rich or poor. The fact that they would be ELECTED is what counts, not because of the accident of birth.

underneaththeash · 20/11/2017 21:59

I think they're great..massive value for money.

guest2013 · 20/11/2017 22:02

Yes, just like the current elected prime minister.. Oh wait....

logicalmum · 20/11/2017 22:13

underneath in what way are they "massive value for money"?

oldlaundbooth · 20/11/2017 22:15

Why are you not actually revolting?

There's so many threads on here about the NHS, teaching, zero hours etc I don't see why we continue to pay for these idiots.

logicalmum · 20/11/2017 22:41

I'm afraid it's always been the way, no matter the state of the country, the homeless, the destitute,the sanctions, the failure of the government to look after it's most vulnerable..... the utter misery and despair.

The deference to one family will blindly continue. Utter madness, i despair.

PiffleandWiffle · 21/11/2017 08:18

We shouldn't be paying for one families lavish lifestyle

Again, I'd rather pay for their lifestyle because they bring cash & people into the country than the lifestyles of people that don't bring anything in at all.

Deny it all you like, they do bring in money & business.

logicalmum · 21/11/2017 08:46

The true cost of the RF is estimated at £334 million a year. They're practically bleeding us dry. How can you possibly think they're bringing money into the country, just HOW. As has been stated umpteen times, we do not depend on this family to bring tourists in. France has proved that. We would get more tourists if they weren't here, as does France.

Our business dealings with the rest of the world would still be the same if we didn't have them, as if our trading deals would fall apart if we didn't have a family of over privileged toffs representing us, it would more than likely improve. They are an embarrassment, a relic of a bygone age. The sooner they're gone the better for us all.

LaurieMarlow · 21/11/2017 09:23

So, just to put some colour on the figures, Prince Charles spent 1.3 million charting private jets for 2 trips a year or two back. If you're happy your money gets spent on that when there are people starving I'd suggest your priorities are totally fucked.

logicalmum · 21/11/2017 09:51

metro.co.uk/2017/06/27/prince-charles-trip-on-royal-train-cost-taxpayers-46000-6737229/

What a marvellous asset to the country he is.

Nettletheelf · 21/11/2017 09:57

I can’t bear the lazy sods either, and nor do I understand the fawning over them. Jennie Bond (TV ‘royal correspondent’) makes me feel nauseous. She’s still cranking out stories about things dear old princess Diana said to her in 1995.

What I’d like to know is, exactly how much money and how many assets do they have access to, and where are the cash and assets kept? Why isn’t this information out there? We pay for them. We have a right to know.

I really dislike that whenever anybody asks these questions, some posh lickspittle weasel representing the royal family gives a partial answer. For example, they will omit the cash and assets in the royal trusts from the total, or will claim that queenie doesn’t really control particular assets because they are notionally held by another entity.

Somebody else mentioned the smoke and mirrors about what they actually cost us. Usually the number quoted is the civil list payments, less whatever they pay in tax from the income on the massive tracts of land (most of Lancashire and Cornwall) that they own. It completely omits, as somebody upthread mentioned, security costs etc.

Remember that they only reluctantly started to pay tax in the 1990s. Grabbing bastards.

I can’t believe how quickly the ‘paradise papers’ (I prefer to call them the parasite papers) furore died down. What the feck were they thinking, hiding assets offshore?

I’d put queenie on a salary and a clothing allowance, and give her an apartment to live in in Buckingham Palace. Some people in other parts of the world are daft enough to buy British things because of the ridiculous ‘heritage’ she represents, so why cut off that income stream? Open the rest of the palace permanently to tourists.

Family members who do proper trade visits (so not fat Andy flying off to South Africa to play golf, for example) can go on public transport and get appearance fees, and can wear clothes gifted to them by designers if they don’t buy their own.

The rest of them can bloody well fend for themselves. No doubt they would emulate the former Greek and Yugoslavian royal families: nick a load of assets from the country then sponge off other european royals, moaning about the unfairness of it all but insisting on retaining the abolished royal title.

logicalmum · 21/11/2017 10:11

I agree nettle, as far as i know they don't actually own all those crown estates, they'll revert back to us once they're gone. Just imagine the surge in tourism if all those palaces were empty, none of the royal palaces are even in the top ten of most visited places anyway, unlike France. I'm sick of all the lies and BS regarding the tourists who flock here because of the royals. Absolute BS.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread