Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Well do we? Do the current Royals actually serve a purpose?

Amity75> Heck, you could ask: Does any modern democracy need a monarchy?

Nope: Outdated remnants from the past.

Ummmm....does Britain need a royal family I'd say yes, but then again, I'm an American so I only really base my oppinion on the fact that the royal family is a part of your history.
WE have our own famous families....but there is something romantic and special about there being royalty

yep we know they are outdated but the monarchy holds no power. We only have them now for tourism and plus due to our history plus they do no harm so i see why not

or:

Yup: old treaty demands it to have one

ah history...such a lovely thing

You pose two questions: Do we need a monarchy and do they serve a purpose.

No - obviously we don't "need" them.
Yes - They serve a purpose. (From Tourism to the head of the church etc)

The real questions are "do we want them" and "how do we get rid of them in a humane way"

I take it you'd like to get rid of them....

Whatever gives you that idea? I'm open minded....




I'm thinking some sort of quiet affair with gas or injection would be best - even tho we could probably make back some of the money they have drained out of the state by holding a cull and inviting people to hunt them.

they are a good tourist attraction, leave then at that, they have no real power any more!

I like the royal family. they do a lot of charity work and stuff and i like the whole traditional side to it. the queen also works as an ambassador for our country and stuff. So she does have her uses. No we dont need royalty but its part of the UK.

and you wonder why you got voted most sarcastic hysterical

That would be about 40, 50p a year per person?

Do you have a point or are you just showing off that you can work out basic maths problems?

Because if it's the second - redo your sums.

If it aint broke ......

Again I have to ask - are you on the verge of having an opinion about this topic or just in love with the clickety clack of your own typing.

My point was that most can afford it.

I was guessing, as I am too young to have studied the taxation system at the moment. I divided 8 million by 56(56 million in engalnd?), to equal 15, and multiplied it a few times to give an estimate.

I see no problems with it i mean we are a country of history and we should be proud of our heritage. Thats the reason alone we should keep the Monarchy also again they help attract alot of tourists to London which does help the economy.

Thats an oft repeated pile of BS. When the hell did you last hear anyone say "I went to the Uk because they have a monarchy and we just couldn't resist any longer." Tourism my poop-hole.

lol yeah believe it or not most people visit London because of the Queen.

People are actually envious of us Brits

We went to London to see the magnificent palaces of the monarchs of Britain. Also to see their rooms and thrones throughout the cathedrals of London, and the houses of parliament.

You are pulling these "facts" directly out of your ass. People think we are repressed miserable mini-americans with a worse climate, lousy personal hygiene and bad teeth.

London, Home to a vast range of historical architecture, remarkable art and a thriving theatre district but MOST people visit London because of the queen who is almost never here and does come outside even when she is.

Yep- Im convinced.

To be honest as an American Tourist I would like visit Buckingham Palace. As for the Royalty I'm not very interested. They are part of England's history so I don't see a reason to get rid of them. But as far as taking a bow in front of them....NAAAAH! I don't kneel for any king or queen.

Yeah we dont have to kneel anymore.

Mr Zero really people love to vist the tower of London, Changing of the gaurd.Its all part of the attraction

That's good enough for me. And yeah the tower of London would be one the places I would love to tour. If giving the choice I'd much rather see all that than to visit the British Parliament. When I go on vacation I don't want to know about politics.

I don't see why the monachy should be a problem. They might cost you guys eight million pounds a year, but they probably help bring back in just as much on the tourism side of things.

The only problem I have with the monachy is that they still have a hold, albeit not that strongly, on my country...but then again, it's up to us to vote to become a republic, and last time we turned it down...

its like your proud of not knowing what you are talking about...

Not only is it expected that you will bow and scrape if you meet the queen, she insists that all her staff (who see her all day every day) continue to do so.

I'm not advocating burning down the tower or turning Buck house into a McDonalds - do you think people go to the tower and are disappointed that nobody is being beheaded? Its still a historical building...

To answer the question of the thread, no we definately dont need them. I spent my first 24yrs in London and i still can see how they have made the country better, except maybe to give the rest of the world the impresson that weve got sticks up our arses. They cost the taxpayers a fortune and they do a bit of charity work - whoopee! Theyve got homes the size of stadiums (some of which arnt even lived in) and yet there are still thousands of homeless people on the streets. The problem is how do you get rid of them? I cant see a realistic way, so i guess were stuck with them. At least they dont run half the world anymore, they were kind enough to give most of those countries back to their rightful owners. Cheers Queenie.

if this doesn't attract tourists, i wouldn't know what would...

Is that...real...?

Been to London several times never looked for BP nor the queen, and the only thing I envy the Brits are their chance to watch great football every weekend.
By the way we have a royal family in Norway too and they happen to be related to the royal family in the UK. So hooray for royal inbreeding cause both UK and Norway have retarded monarchs

I made an estimate of 50p a year. You could probably find it under your sofa seats.
They have old money, land from when they were powerful, and they don't give it up any more than your grandparents would sell their "Best granny ever" or "Mother won't let you go to the theme park? Talk to granddad" mugs. The homes are special. You aren't legally required to give up your property as far as i know.

You want to dispose of the Queen, to remove a vital part of our heritage? It's like getting rid of Big Ben, because we have atomic clocks. Though getting rid of the Statue of Liberty because Americans have Bush would be closer to reality in my opinion. The British Royalty is a brilliant addition to the UK, and I personally am not willing to "get rid" of them for a mere 50p.

On topics of heritage, doesn't it make you laugh the way die-hard Brits who love the monarchy, hate the Germans because of the war yet don't even know their own history enough to know that our current monarchy is of German descendancy anyway.

No, we don't need a monarchy. We have one, but we don't need one. They have no power anyway, it's status. Status does nothing in their position.

-AC

they have the power to reject a parliament in Norway, they done it once when the Nationalistic party couped the government in 1940, the king refused to acknowledge that parliament which made the self appointed government traitors. These nationalist were led by Quisling who`s name is now synonymous with traitor.

So in fact the king/royals in Norway have certain power but I would love to see him reject a legitimate elected government.
Nah we dont need the monarchy in Norway any more, cant say anything about Britain since I aint a citizen of that commonwealth, but they are inbreeders as well as the rest of royal Europe

Thats cool, no one is asking you to get rid of them. The 50p each point is ok until you collect all that together and what do you get for it? As for me personally the royal family isnt technically part of my heritage. My dads Jamaican and my mums Scottish so forgive me if i dont hold them or their forfathers in high asteem. Im proud to be british but its got nothing to do with the royal family.

I like traditions, so why not keep the "monarchy" which isn't really a monarchy ((after all, it's a show lol))

People are saying that the monarchy is part of our history, however, weve had so many kings and queens from different countries that it dosent really make a difference anymore, Queen Elizabeth is a German, so....nuff said.
They dont do anything at all, they have no power in the government, constitutionally the queen can decline laws (all new laws have to go through her) however she hasnt refused since 1708 (I'm doing a law degree and i know what I'm talking about) there are certain traditions which rely on the queen, but at the end of the day she is not essential as the Prime Minister is always there anyway.
The fact that she is the head of the church also has no meaning in modern day Britain, as where are so many different ethnic minorities here now with so many different religions that with the view of treating everyone equally, it is no longer regarded, plus the fact that religion has seriously diminished in the UK over the last 50 years (and i know I'm going to get abuse about that comment)
so in answer to the post, Politically, Socially and Economically Britain does NOT need a monarchy, but the chances of it being abolished is unlikely, so people will just do what they do now, and pay no attention to the Royal Family untill one dies, then we will be interested for about a week, and only because (if its the queen) we will get the day off work for her funeral!!!!!!

Excellent post.

Cheers

It's good for the tourism industry. And it gives the tabloid newspapers something to talk about