The Royals jumping ship... part 2

[Wolfgirrl]

Shiny new thread now we have had some royal crumbs thrown our way.

Will William rejoin the air ambulance like he has been threatening to do? Or was it a bit of lip service in the hope we will all go away and leave him to enjoy his 5* lockdown experience?

Charles has pointlessly 'opened' a hospital via video link, praising the NHS whose rules he flouted by flying to his rural second home country estate, whilst experience coronavirus symptoms. Such a shame he just had to make an emergency dash out of London, being holed up in a Scottish manor surrounded by red squirrels and coniferous forest must be simply awful. I'm sure he would much prefer a 2 bedroom house with a courtyard garden, much cosier.

Harry and Megs have hopped over the pond and now live in LA. Being professionals in self isolation, I'm sure they will be just fine.

On the upside the Queen will be addressing the nation on Sunday, genuinely thrilled for my grandparents who will no doubt be watching with a glass of whisky and a silk cut.

Onto the next chapter...

Thank you @Wolfgirrl. It's amazing how some can continue to defend the indefensible.

Some if you really don't understand the set up ,yes of course William can just turn up and start building a hospital because there's no security etc to take in to account !!!
A lot of thing is tradition they don't cost you anymore than if we had a president etc so really what's the problem
There 2 nd homes they live in part of the year anyway so nothing unusual about that
You can't compare them to even another celebrity family as it just doesn't work like that

@Easilyanxious - Well, it's been estimated that they cost 300 million GBP annually in security. Even if that figure was halved, that is atrocious.

Also, France, Germany, Italy...pretty much every major European destination blows the tourism theory out of the water. In fact, if the palaces and royal estates that belonged to the Crown reverted to the State (who is the rightful owner as the Monarch only holds the properties in trust for the nation), then I reckon tourism would actually increase as people would flock to see all the palaces and castles and beautiful grounds that have been solely used by the royal family and not open to anyone else.

But that would fade pretty soon if there was no existing royal family .

I'm not sure anyone literally expects William to turn up with a shovel and wheelbarrow and start building a hospital. But there is so, so, SO much more they can be doing. Look at Sofia of Sweden...she is working as a healthcare assistant with her country's national health system. There are definitely workarounds that factor in security and safety should William and Kate actually want to get out there and do something more but they seems pretty happy being firmly ensconced in their country mansion, amid acres of greenery with an entire staff dedicated to their comfort.

Also, holding on to something for the sake of tradition only is laughable. Slavery, poor human rights, lack of education for women etc were very much 'tradition' but we realised that they were morally wrong and we moved on from those times. The royal family is a costly anachronism in a modern world.

Where did you get your 300 million figure from I can't find that source
And when you li look it says how they being in more than they cost so therefore what's the issue

@Easilyanxious - no, it wouldn't. France has been (with the exception of a few failed stints of Monarchy) a Republic for over 230 years, Germany for over 100 years and Italy for almost 75 years.

The beauty of the architecture, the grand masterpieces of art that no one but Elizabeth and her family are able to enjoy (yet are 'held in trust for the nation'), the sprawling acres of gardens and parkland...the beauty of those things do not diminish because they are not owned by a 'Royal'.

@Easilyanxious - www.republic.org.uk/what-we-want/royal-finances. Of course, that figure may be somewhat exaggerated considering the source, but again if the cost was even half that, it is madness.

Of course it says they bring in more than they cost but digging a bit deeper will show you that is not the case. How is it even estimated what they bring in? The sources making arbitrary claims of increased tourism due to the Royal family are erroneous (see example re: France which has some of the highest tourism figures in the World).

I'll continue the convo tomorrow, if that is alright with you. Off now to finish a report that I've been delaying all day. Have a good night!

@Easilyanxious

No one visits Windsor Castle because they might meet the Queen. No one visits the Tower of London because they might meet..... well - exactly my point. They come for the history, the architecture and the sheer Englishness. The same as people visit the Kremlin, or the Whitehouse - they don’t go expecting to catch a glimpse of those presidents in the flesh. It’s the buildings themselves, not the personalities.

The Royals are an outdated rip-off and I am shocked so called intelligent people can think otherwise. No doubt the same people will clap at their doors for the NHS workers on Thursday.

@mummmy2017 The Crown and the Queen are 2 different things. One is the company that runs everything and essentially belongs to the state (us) the other is a person, she doesn’t own any of it but is using it all for free while she’s alive and drawing an income from it (as well as various relatives and hangers on). HTH

Yes because we would still have changing if the guards without a royal family etc . Not many visit royal palaces in France it’s totally different kid of things to go and see . Your against the royals full stop personally I can take them or leave them but there is protocols and tradition that’s gets follows that’s just the way it is

@Easilyanxious their Palace of Versailles is more visited than Buckingham Palace. In fact it is the most visited palace in the world. How do you square that?

Probably because Buckingham Palace is a working building as the administrative centre and a residence of the monarchy so is only open to the public for a limited period. Versailles is a public monument so open most of the year. It is the pageantry associated with the royal family that draws in the tourists as well as the buildings - outdated ceremonies like Changing of the Guard etc. I would prefer a modern, slimmed-down royal family but wouldn't want to get shot of them totally.

As PPs have said the "tourism" myth was debunked a long time ago, so it's a bit surprising that people still harp on about this one really

The "what they cost us" is harder since the big ticket item of security's never discussed (though I'd have thought it possible to disclose what the arrangements cost without saying what they actually are). Add to that their exemption from the FoI Act and the endless squirrelling away of costs in government departments and we'll probably never know the full story

Which is all pretty convenient for the RF ...