Do Harry and Meghan realise hardly anyone supports them?

[Spck]

So everywhere there seems to be complete negativity towards the Netflix documentary and the autobiography coming out. They seem to be universally slated as whingers.
so how much do you think this feeds back to them? It must be v easy to live in a bubble with close supporters telling them they are doing a grand job. But how much reality do you think gets through of how badly they are coming across,

It isn’t. If you’re going to compare the cost of two systems you need to include all the elements. It’s perfectly reasonable to include the costs of a presidential election.

You dont know what Andrew's was, though. That £3m is just a guess in a newspaper based on some unknown factors and calculation. The cleaner could have provided it as far we know.
Of course it's a mooted figure because we don't know. Only the people who do the budgeting for the protection officers know. So when you talk about a mooted 100m, there's only a small chance that's the actual case. If you don't think it's evidentially based, why repeat it?
It doesnt sting, it's just adds no value to the discussion. I was using actual figures based on what they received, different from your figures of what they spent. You add on security which is a valid point and then come up with a figure of 100m. You can't in any way justify that figure so you add in 'mooted'. But I'm mooting 20 quid a day and a sandwich. Which is equally unuseful. They're both pointless additions to the valid argument of there being costs of security on top of the sovereign grant.

I support Harry and have bought the book for my children to read so they can learn from a man who is trying to learn and grown.

...and supply fridges and freezers out of their own money to help those food banks provide more.

Hes 38. Let's hope your kids aren't still wittering on about their bedroom size when theyre 38.

@Blossomtoes

i’m not sure how much the election costs, but a presidential election is similar to an eu/referendum

www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2017-10-24/114/

the total referendum costs were about E30m (didn’t share with any other elections). Terms are different for local and general elections so they can’t be combined

Here is the source above of some indicative costs (they are more than 5 years old so would have increased. Elections are still paper based j. Ireland and the presidential term is 7 years (capped at 2 terms). These are the costs for a population of 5m - they would be higher for the U.K. with its substantially larger population

I just don’t think the savings would be the scale that @roussette imagines without a royal family.

I have quoted a possible figure because the general public are not allowed to know what it is. It is a possible figure out there.

Why do you keep going on about sandwiches and cleaners doing the security?

V odd.

I don't 'come up with a figure of £100M'... I quote various reports that say it could be that amount

You tell me what you think security might be then. That isn't £20 a day and a sandwich.

On second thoughts, don't bother, this to and fro is very boring and pointless.

All I know is... their security will cost millions. What that figure is, we don't know but it won't be £20 a day. It will be millions a year.

@Ohnonevermind

Why are you doing an @ to me on this? I haven't contributed to your conversation

@Roussette

as you were talking about the cost of supporting the royals, I thought you would be interested in a realistic costing of an alternative, but obviously not

That's not axiomatic as there can be multiple reasons for people buying the book. Some will be supporters, some not supportive and some curious in a manner similar to the rubbernecking phenomenon.

On the flip side, it's not axiomatic that not buying the book means the vast majority of the 66 million population of the UK is firmly against Harry.

Multiple reasons can explain the collective. Binary views like yours does not.

Thank you. That’s really helpful

I was talking about the cost of security for the Royals, I talked nothing about the scale of savings
I thought I was missing somethere there!

All I know is... an alternative would cost less and they would do more and be accountable and be voted out if they weren't doing what they should be.

All I know is... an alternative would cost less and they would do more and be accountable and be voted out if they weren't doing what they should be.

How do you “know” this? You don’t. What more would they do? Who decides what they should do? Who monitors it? You think that might be the case and your opinion is as valid as anyone else’s but you certainly don’t know.

..and supply fridges and freezers out of their own money to help those food banks provide more.

Isn't this the scam at the heart of the monarchy?

Instead of instating that the elected government take concrete measure to address structural inequality, we are applauding an unelected family at the top of the hierarchy for donating to food banks?

Surely the idea is to address the need for the food banks in the first place, not applaud the contributions of a well heeled monarch (and his family) who does not even pay inheritance tax?

Surely the idea is to address the need for the food banks in the first place, not applaud the contributions of a well heeled monarch (and his family) who does not even pay inheritance tax?

It’s not an either/or choice. I find it perfectly possible to do both. He’s doing more than the PM whose wealth significantly exceeds the King’s - and who ran the economy for almost three years.

This is an institutional problem, not an individual one. You had food banks before Rishi was PM, and you will after. And the royals will continue to donate to them. Why not look at lasting means of addressing structural inequalities. Like making the monarch pay inheritance tax like every other person?

You had food banks before Rishi was PM, and you will after.

We had very few foodbanks indeed before 2010. This is a Tory government problem. The answer is to vote in a decent government to replace the one that thinks foodbanks are a good thing.

www.statista.com/statistics/382695/uk-foodbank-users/

That's the kind of structural thinking I was calling for, thank you. Not just accepting, as @MarshaMelrose does, that food banks are inevitable and aren't the royals wonderful to donate to them.

It's weird to use food banks as publicity for royals!!

Well.... the tories don't call them foodbanks anymore. Apparently, they are 'pantries'

WTAF

And they’re “uplifting”.

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Food banks 'rather uplifting' www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41264965

@Blossomtoes

We may not agree on M&H but we are as one on the political climate!

Pantries I know are different from food banks. Food banks give away food for free whereas pantries sell it but very cheaply. For example one you join (for free) and then you can chose ten items for £2.50 once a week. The items would typically be around £10 to £20 at full prices. I think the idea is to help families on low budgets but not such emergency situations as food banks and do so with a bit more dignity as you are still buying it. They may also give away supermarket surplus for free (normally too short-dated to sell in the pantry)

I just find the word 'pantry' does not sit right with the pay cheap for food store that is used by those that are struggling.
Nigella has a pantry.
Aristocrats all have pantries. Stately Homes have pantries.

I think Pantry is more of an old-fashioned word discarded through the installation of fitted kitchens. My grandmother had a pantry (but not a fitted kitchen) in her small terrace house.

Absolutely.

I hate to tell you this but I’ve got a pantry. 😉