The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
As a subject I have some strong views on, I thought I’d try to stir up some debate. If you could, what would you do with the Royal Family in the UK?
a) Have them go the way of Charles I. Behead the lot of them!
b) Sell off all their property and make them get real jobs.
c) Let them keep most of what they have, but stop funding them through taxes and take away what ceremonial power they have.
d) Leave things as they are.
e) Give them more money to continue their good work and uphold the good name of Britons around the World!
Personally, I think Royalty, as a concept, is a totally unjust way of ruling over a people. It’s essentially a dictatorship; only the next dictator is born into the job. In practice, the Royal family in this country has very little actual power nowadays anyway, so what’s my problem?
Well, therein lies part of my problem. People insist the Royals have a hard job, but what do they actually do? The Queen, in theory, has the power to make someone a minister or dismiss them (even the Prime Minister I believe), to pass or refuse to pass a bill into law, and to declare war and make peace. Does she do any of these? No. Many insist the Monarch is all that stands between us and having President Blair. But what would be the difference between President and Prime Minister Blair? Not much. The occasional trip to the Palace to ask for something that will inevitably be granted anyway. An unnecessary formality.
Yet more people tell me they represent us abroad. Jetting off to foreign countries to meet smiling diplomats and exchanging pleasantries with them. Sounds like an easy job to me really. Does this list of responsibilities really warrant the vast sums spent on them? And do you really feel proud with Prince Charles ‘representing’ you and your country? Lets face it, his bumbling antics are far more Mr. Bean than James Bond
And it’s not only the money we still spend on them. It’s what they’ve got in our name. A fair old while back, probably a couple of years now, a program was on investigating just how much the Royals were worth. As well as the income they gain through public money, they have a whole stash of goodies locked up that, in theory at least, belong to ‘the Nation’ and are simply held by the Monarchy in trust. Are they doing the Nation any good? No. They’re locked away in Palaces, never to be seen by members of the public, let alone benefiting them. Amongst some of the most expensive items was a rare kind of gem. Not only was it rare, it was the largest of it’s kind in the world. Not just a bit bigger than average, but so much bigger that experts couldn’t even guess what it would fetch at auction as it was so ‘off the scale’ of what they normally came across.
That’s not the end of the story. Millions of pounds are pumped into the Royals (not literally) every year. Transport costs, keeping their numerous palaces in full working order, even the Ministry of Defence, charged with defending the Queens Realm, forking out to use land on Duchy’s owned by the Royals.
So, what have we covered? Their pointless jobs, their vast wages… Oh, the army boy as well. Prince Harry doing all this rigorous training at Sandhurst. What’s the point? Is he really ever going to be fighting in the front line? Doubtful, seeing as he has a panic button to call heavily armed guards to his aid even while training to ‘Be the Best’ as it were. If there are intruders he should be gunning them down Rambo-style now that he’s in the army, not cowering behind large men in sharp suits.
Sorry, I’ll stop my anti-Royal tirade there.
But what do I think should be done with them? Well, since I’m vaguely realistic, I think we should keep them as ‘Royals’. But we shouldn’t be giving them any money whatsoever. Frankly, they can afford to sustain themselves, and if not they can always make up some sex scandal to sell to the News of the World. They can keep a palace or two to live in, but the rest should be opened as tourist attractions. The Americans love the whole Royal thing apparently. We should be selling some of the huge collection of art, jewels and other items they’re storing, or at least putting them in public galleries to be enjoyed by all. Finally, the supposed powers the Queen has should really be revoked. At least with someone who’s been elected we can boot them out again. Even after a beheading, the Royal family still came back like a very expensive rash.
Well, enough of my ranting. What do you think?
a) Have them go the way of Charles I. Behead the lot of them!
b) Sell off all their property and make them get real jobs.
c) Let them keep most of what they have, but stop funding them through taxes and take away what ceremonial power they have.
d) Leave things as they are.
e) Give them more money to continue their good work and uphold the good name of Britons around the World!
Personally, I think Royalty, as a concept, is a totally unjust way of ruling over a people. It’s essentially a dictatorship; only the next dictator is born into the job. In practice, the Royal family in this country has very little actual power nowadays anyway, so what’s my problem?
Well, therein lies part of my problem. People insist the Royals have a hard job, but what do they actually do? The Queen, in theory, has the power to make someone a minister or dismiss them (even the Prime Minister I believe), to pass or refuse to pass a bill into law, and to declare war and make peace. Does she do any of these? No. Many insist the Monarch is all that stands between us and having President Blair. But what would be the difference between President and Prime Minister Blair? Not much. The occasional trip to the Palace to ask for something that will inevitably be granted anyway. An unnecessary formality.
Yet more people tell me they represent us abroad. Jetting off to foreign countries to meet smiling diplomats and exchanging pleasantries with them. Sounds like an easy job to me really. Does this list of responsibilities really warrant the vast sums spent on them? And do you really feel proud with Prince Charles ‘representing’ you and your country? Lets face it, his bumbling antics are far more Mr. Bean than James Bond
And it’s not only the money we still spend on them. It’s what they’ve got in our name. A fair old while back, probably a couple of years now, a program was on investigating just how much the Royals were worth. As well as the income they gain through public money, they have a whole stash of goodies locked up that, in theory at least, belong to ‘the Nation’ and are simply held by the Monarchy in trust. Are they doing the Nation any good? No. They’re locked away in Palaces, never to be seen by members of the public, let alone benefiting them. Amongst some of the most expensive items was a rare kind of gem. Not only was it rare, it was the largest of it’s kind in the world. Not just a bit bigger than average, but so much bigger that experts couldn’t even guess what it would fetch at auction as it was so ‘off the scale’ of what they normally came across.
That’s not the end of the story. Millions of pounds are pumped into the Royals (not literally) every year. Transport costs, keeping their numerous palaces in full working order, even the Ministry of Defence, charged with defending the Queens Realm, forking out to use land on Duchy’s owned by the Royals.
So, what have we covered? Their pointless jobs, their vast wages… Oh, the army boy as well. Prince Harry doing all this rigorous training at Sandhurst. What’s the point? Is he really ever going to be fighting in the front line? Doubtful, seeing as he has a panic button to call heavily armed guards to his aid even while training to ‘Be the Best’ as it were. If there are intruders he should be gunning them down Rambo-style now that he’s in the army, not cowering behind large men in sharp suits.
Sorry, I’ll stop my anti-Royal tirade there.
But what do I think should be done with them? Well, since I’m vaguely realistic, I think we should keep them as ‘Royals’. But we shouldn’t be giving them any money whatsoever. Frankly, they can afford to sustain themselves, and if not they can always make up some sex scandal to sell to the News of the World. They can keep a palace or two to live in, but the rest should be opened as tourist attractions. The Americans love the whole Royal thing apparently. We should be selling some of the huge collection of art, jewels and other items they’re storing, or at least putting them in public galleries to be enjoyed by all. Finally, the supposed powers the Queen has should really be revoked. At least with someone who’s been elected we can boot them out again. Even after a beheading, the Royal family still came back like a very expensive rash.
Well, enough of my ranting. What do you think?
Page:
As a subject I have some strong views on, I thought I’d try to stir up some debate. If you could, what would you do with the Royal Family in the UK?
a) Have them go the way of Charles I. Behead the lot of them!
b) Sell off all their property and make them get real jobs.
c) Let them keep most of what they have, but stop funding them through taxes and take away what ceremonial power they have.
d) Leave things as they are.
e) Give them more money to continue their good work and uphold the good name of Britons around the World!
Personally, I think Royalty, as a concept, is a totally unjust way of ruling over a people. It’s essentially a dictatorship; only the next dictator is born into the job. In practice, the Royal family in this country has very little actual power nowadays anyway, so what’s my problem?
Well, therein lies part of my problem. People insist the Royals have a hard job, but what do they actually do? The Queen, in theory, has the power to make someone a minister or dismiss them (even the Prime Minister I believe), to pass or refuse to pass a bill into law, and to declare war and make peace. Does she do any of these? No. Many insist the Monarch is all that stands between us and having President Blair. But what would be the difference between President and Prime Minister Blair? Not much. The occasional trip to the Palace to ask for something that will inevitably be granted anyway. An unnecessary formality.
Yet more people tell me they represent us abroad. Jetting off to foreign countries to meet smiling diplomats and exchanging pleasantries with them. Sounds like an easy job to me really. Does this list of responsibilities really warrant the vast sums spent on them? And do you really feel proud with Prince Charles ‘representing’ you and your country? Lets face it, his bumbling antics are far more Mr. Bean than James Bond
And it’s not only the money we still spend on them. It’s what they’ve got in our name. A fair old while back, probably a couple of years now, a program was on investigating just how much the Royals were worth. As well as the income they gain through public money, they have a whole stash of goodies locked up that, in theory at least, belong to ‘the Nation’ and are simply held by the Monarchy in trust. Are they doing the Nation any good? No. They’re locked away in Palaces, never to be seen by members of the public, let alone benefiting them. Amongst some of the most expensive items was a rare kind of gem. Not only was it rare, it was the largest of it’s kind in the world. Not just a bit bigger than average, but so much bigger that experts couldn’t even guess what it would fetch at auction as it was so ‘off the scale’ of what they normally came across.
That’s not the end of the story. Millions of pounds are pumped into the Royals (not literally) every year. Transport costs, keeping their numerous palaces in full working order, even the Ministry of Defence, charged with defending the Queens Realm, forking out to use land on Duchy’s owned by the Royals.
So, what have we covered? Their pointless jobs, their vast wages… Oh, the army boy as well. Prince Harry doing all this rigorous training at Sandhurst. What’s the point? Is he really ever going to be fighting in the front line? Doubtful, seeing as he has a panic button to call heavily armed guards to his aid even while training to ‘Be the Best’ as it were. If there are intruders he should be gunning them down Rambo-style now that he’s in the army, not cowering behind large men in sharp suits.
Sorry, I’ll stop my anti-Royal tirade there.
But what do I think should be done with them? Well, since I’m vaguely realistic, I think we should keep them as ‘Royals’. But we shouldn’t be giving them any money whatsoever. Frankly, they can afford to sustain themselves, and if not they can always make up some sex scandal to sell to the News of the World. They can keep a palace or two to live in, but the rest should be opened as tourist attractions. The Americans love the whole Royal thing apparently. We should be selling some of the huge collection of art, jewels and other items they’re storing, or at least putting them in public galleries to be enjoyed by all. Finally, the supposed powers the Queen has should really be revoked. At least with someone who’s been elected we can boot them out again. Even after a beheading, the Royal family still came back like a very expensive rash.
Well, enough of my ranting. What do you think?
a) Have them go the way of Charles I. Behead the lot of them!
b) Sell off all their property and make them get real jobs.
c) Let them keep most of what they have, but stop funding them through taxes and take away what ceremonial power they have.
d) Leave things as they are.
e) Give them more money to continue their good work and uphold the good name of Britons around the World!
Personally, I think Royalty, as a concept, is a totally unjust way of ruling over a people. It’s essentially a dictatorship; only the next dictator is born into the job. In practice, the Royal family in this country has very little actual power nowadays anyway, so what’s my problem?
Well, therein lies part of my problem. People insist the Royals have a hard job, but what do they actually do? The Queen, in theory, has the power to make someone a minister or dismiss them (even the Prime Minister I believe), to pass or refuse to pass a bill into law, and to declare war and make peace. Does she do any of these? No. Many insist the Monarch is all that stands between us and having President Blair. But what would be the difference between President and Prime Minister Blair? Not much. The occasional trip to the Palace to ask for something that will inevitably be granted anyway. An unnecessary formality.
Yet more people tell me they represent us abroad. Jetting off to foreign countries to meet smiling diplomats and exchanging pleasantries with them. Sounds like an easy job to me really. Does this list of responsibilities really warrant the vast sums spent on them? And do you really feel proud with Prince Charles ‘representing’ you and your country? Lets face it, his bumbling antics are far more Mr. Bean than James Bond
And it’s not only the money we still spend on them. It’s what they’ve got in our name. A fair old while back, probably a couple of years now, a program was on investigating just how much the Royals were worth. As well as the income they gain through public money, they have a whole stash of goodies locked up that, in theory at least, belong to ‘the Nation’ and are simply held by the Monarchy in trust. Are they doing the Nation any good? No. They’re locked away in Palaces, never to be seen by members of the public, let alone benefiting them. Amongst some of the most expensive items was a rare kind of gem. Not only was it rare, it was the largest of it’s kind in the world. Not just a bit bigger than average, but so much bigger that experts couldn’t even guess what it would fetch at auction as it was so ‘off the scale’ of what they normally came across.
That’s not the end of the story. Millions of pounds are pumped into the Royals (not literally) every year. Transport costs, keeping their numerous palaces in full working order, even the Ministry of Defence, charged with defending the Queens Realm, forking out to use land on Duchy’s owned by the Royals.
So, what have we covered? Their pointless jobs, their vast wages… Oh, the army boy as well. Prince Harry doing all this rigorous training at Sandhurst. What’s the point? Is he really ever going to be fighting in the front line? Doubtful, seeing as he has a panic button to call heavily armed guards to his aid even while training to ‘Be the Best’ as it were. If there are intruders he should be gunning them down Rambo-style now that he’s in the army, not cowering behind large men in sharp suits.
Sorry, I’ll stop my anti-Royal tirade there.
But what do I think should be done with them? Well, since I’m vaguely realistic, I think we should keep them as ‘Royals’. But we shouldn’t be giving them any money whatsoever. Frankly, they can afford to sustain themselves, and if not they can always make up some sex scandal to sell to the News of the World. They can keep a palace or two to live in, but the rest should be opened as tourist attractions. The Americans love the whole Royal thing apparently. We should be selling some of the huge collection of art, jewels and other items they’re storing, or at least putting them in public galleries to be enjoyed by all. Finally, the supposed powers the Queen has should really be revoked. At least with someone who’s been elected we can boot them out again. Even after a beheading, the Royal family still came back like a very expensive rash.
Well, enough of my ranting. What do you think?
As I see it, they don't have any real power, and no real use, and everyone knows it. They're basically a bit of a novelty, and essentially harmless.
However, apparently they pay for themselves in tourism, so I don't mind them staying.
I think that these days they're striking a pretty good balance between doing enough not to be a complete financial black hole, and keeping quiet enough for most people not to object particularly strongly to their presence.
I wonder what society would be like without them. People may not consciously recognise them as role-models, but they are a part of the pool of celebrities that people, at least in some regard, look up to. Take them out of the equation and you have a lot less to counterbalance the waves of airhead models, hollow pop stars and chavy footballers.
However, apparently they pay for themselves in tourism, so I don't mind them staying.
I think that these days they're striking a pretty good balance between doing enough not to be a complete financial black hole, and keeping quiet enough for most people not to object particularly strongly to their presence.
I wonder what society would be like without them. People may not consciously recognise them as role-models, but they are a part of the pool of celebrities that people, at least in some regard, look up to. Take them out of the equation and you have a lot less to counterbalance the waves of airhead models, hollow pop stars and chavy footballers.
With regard to the celebrity angle, I think that's a problem with our society. The fact that we give people such high regard just because they're famous and rich is rather silly. Many newspapers are little more than a few 'big' stories followed by celebrity gossip that should be left to rags like Hello et al.
Just because the Royals might be slightly better role models than a lot of other 'celebrities', doesn't justify them. If people weren't so obsessed with celebrity in the first place the argument would hold no water, and personally I think the obsession with fame and fortune is far from a good one...
With regards to sustaining themselves, I know they do get a fair bit of money from their own enteprises, for example Charles has a company (selling organic food produce I think?). The problem with it, is that he's not obliged to pay any corporation tax, when clearly his enterprise amounts to a corporation. He voluntarily pays some tax, but I doubt it's anywhere near the amount he'd need to pay were he a normal company.
Again, the Queen voluntarily pays some taxes, but it's doubtful the amount the rest of us would have to pay if we had such a fortune.
Just because the Royals might be slightly better role models than a lot of other 'celebrities', doesn't justify them. If people weren't so obsessed with celebrity in the first place the argument would hold no water, and personally I think the obsession with fame and fortune is far from a good one...
With regards to sustaining themselves, I know they do get a fair bit of money from their own enteprises, for example Charles has a company (selling organic food produce I think?). The problem with it, is that he's not obliged to pay any corporation tax, when clearly his enterprise amounts to a corporation. He voluntarily pays some tax, but I doubt it's anywhere near the amount he'd need to pay were he a normal company.
Again, the Queen voluntarily pays some taxes, but it's doubtful the amount the rest of us would have to pay if we had such a fortune.
I'm not convinced it'd ever be possible to get rid of the notion of celebrity. Though a massive cultural shift could maybe throw more deserving people, or beter role-models, into the spotlight.
Still, while we have the current climate - where joe public do love their celebrity gossip, anybody who conducts themself with some dignity has to be a worth something to offset the mongs.
I wonder how role models who you can never match - simply because you weren't born into the right family - stack against role models joe public maybe could match, but only for doing worthless things and being a bit unpleasant.
The tax thing? Yeah, I agree. But if they didn't get special treatment, it wouldn't be the royal family - they'd just be normal rich people. All the concessions are a part of what makes them 'royal'. So long as they continue to pay for themselves in tourism, I can handle the costs.
{Edit: Not an offer to pay for them myself :^) ]
Still, while we have the current climate - where joe public do love their celebrity gossip, anybody who conducts themself with some dignity has to be a worth something to offset the mongs.
I wonder how role models who you can never match - simply because you weren't born into the right family - stack against role models joe public maybe could match, but only for doing worthless things and being a bit unpleasant.
The tax thing? Yeah, I agree. But if they didn't get special treatment, it wouldn't be the royal family - they'd just be normal rich people. All the concessions are a part of what makes them 'royal'. So long as they continue to pay for themselves in tourism, I can handle the costs.
{Edit: Not an offer to pay for them myself :^) ]
See, I'm not entirely convinced people come here because of the Royals themselves... More due to the palaces and suchlike. If we're taking the tourist angle, I'm sure a hell of a lot more money could be generated by actually opening more palaces (or sections of them) to the public for guided tours or whatnot.
Oh, and giftshops with horrendously expensive souveniers, obviously...
Oh, and giftshops with horrendously expensive souveniers, obviously...
I wonder if a mixed race child will ever be born into the royal family. Anyway, i've always hated the queen and most of the royal family. The only one which I don't hate is the ginger one, he is hot.
I'm not really in favour of the Royal family, but it's nice to see where we have come from because Britain has a suprisingly good past e.g. we actually used to rule most of the world, and were a force to be reckoned with. Also things like the trooping of the colour etc is just as pointless as the royal family, but still most people enjoy it. So I guess I am about half and half for and against the royal family :s
But is ruling about half of the world necessarily a good thing? It depends how we ruled it and took it over. It seems we did neither fairly or democratically, and as such, surely these endevours should be frowned upon nowadays...?
I choose... b!
Sell off the property they "own" and make them get real jobs. (maybe turn the palace/castle thing into a museum)
The idea of royalty nowadays is stupid.
Does America have a royal family? no. Have they ever, no! (then again, those that first moved to america were from britain and ireland, so i guess the british royal family is kinda theirs too)
Sure it was a good idea back when it was like the 1700's, but up untill like 1800's if you didnt have a king, then someone would come from another place and take total control over the country. Now, we have no use for them, they have no right to the status of royalty. Maybe the older ones, like charles, and the queen, they were born into alot of royalty, and havent done anything stupid. Where as the next generation of royals, prince harry and what not, are going around being stupid. Prince harry is a slacker, he slacked in the army, where he didnt need to do anything! He was in a special part of the army, and he like chickened out every other week, and for ages. Not to mention his run in with drugs, and also going to a party dressed up as a nazi, also hiring prostitutes (well, escorts, but they are kinda the same)...
As soon as the older ones in the royal family are gone, they should get rid of the royal family, we pay them to sit around and act posh, and stuff. Its a new era, technology, parliament has more power over what happens now a days than the royal family.. Just get rid of the royal family and make sure its for good.
In the olden days, of wars, kings would go to war with them, invading countries and claiming the country theirs. We are currently at war, well, not technically as we have "won" the iraq war, yet we are still there. I dont recall any of the royal family over in iraq killing anyone, even visiting the place.. Its a disgrace, what the royal family used to be, has been reduced to just a status, and not of power. They do not wage war, they do not have the power to make someone kill someone, they do not have the same power to have slaves, or a dungeon. (dungeons could soo rock, think about it ^^) All they have now, is their status, their reputation, and their palace, or where ever they live.
This overall, sums up, that they are not needed anymore, their jobs have been replaced with better working ones, they should just accept that, and move on. Get a job, and quit leaching off of everyone.
Thats why i chose b. :)
Sell off the property they "own" and make them get real jobs. (maybe turn the palace/castle thing into a museum)
The idea of royalty nowadays is stupid.
Does America have a royal family? no. Have they ever, no! (then again, those that first moved to america were from britain and ireland, so i guess the british royal family is kinda theirs too)
Sure it was a good idea back when it was like the 1700's, but up untill like 1800's if you didnt have a king, then someone would come from another place and take total control over the country. Now, we have no use for them, they have no right to the status of royalty. Maybe the older ones, like charles, and the queen, they were born into alot of royalty, and havent done anything stupid. Where as the next generation of royals, prince harry and what not, are going around being stupid. Prince harry is a slacker, he slacked in the army, where he didnt need to do anything! He was in a special part of the army, and he like chickened out every other week, and for ages. Not to mention his run in with drugs, and also going to a party dressed up as a nazi, also hiring prostitutes (well, escorts, but they are kinda the same)...
As soon as the older ones in the royal family are gone, they should get rid of the royal family, we pay them to sit around and act posh, and stuff. Its a new era, technology, parliament has more power over what happens now a days than the royal family.. Just get rid of the royal family and make sure its for good.
In the olden days, of wars, kings would go to war with them, invading countries and claiming the country theirs. We are currently at war, well, not technically as we have "won" the iraq war, yet we are still there. I dont recall any of the royal family over in iraq killing anyone, even visiting the place.. Its a disgrace, what the royal family used to be, has been reduced to just a status, and not of power. They do not wage war, they do not have the power to make someone kill someone, they do not have the same power to have slaves, or a dungeon. (dungeons could soo rock, think about it ^^) All they have now, is their status, their reputation, and their palace, or where ever they live.
This overall, sums up, that they are not needed anymore, their jobs have been replaced with better working ones, they should just accept that, and move on. Get a job, and quit leaching off of everyone.
Thats why i chose b. :)
Sibs wrote:
> But is ruling about half of the world necessarily a good thing?
> It depends how we ruled it and took it over. It seems we did
> neither fairly or democratically, and as such, surely these
> endevours should be frowned upon nowadays...?
There's an interesting argument here. By 'modern' standards, the empire improved the lives and economies of a lot of countries.
That probably couldn't have happened in a fully democratic society.
Of course, an argument that it is legitimate for one party to impose its rules and politics on another, simply because it believes they are the best or 'right' way of life is a pretty dangerous one to subscribe to.
> But is ruling about half of the world necessarily a good thing?
> It depends how we ruled it and took it over. It seems we did
> neither fairly or democratically, and as such, surely these
> endevours should be frowned upon nowadays...?
There's an interesting argument here. By 'modern' standards, the empire improved the lives and economies of a lot of countries.
That probably couldn't have happened in a fully democratic society.
Of course, an argument that it is legitimate for one party to impose its rules and politics on another, simply because it believes they are the best or 'right' way of life is a pretty dangerous one to subscribe to.
Page: