Independent Leyton Orient Forum

Fairly sure multiple sources have confirmed multiple times that the Royal Family bring in more money than they cost.

You can want to get rid for all sorts of reasons, but them costing the country/taxpayer/me/you money isn't one of them.

I think the tourism argument is a bit of a cliche.
The leading countries in tourism numbers don't have royalty.
https://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indica ... L/rankings

Used to think the tourist angle was a weak argument until I worked in Westminster and had foreign tourists asking for it a dozen times a day

I live in a republic and people here can't believe the UK still has a monarch let alone a popular one. Kings in this part if the world were mostly autocratic despots and deserved their removal but when l explain that our queen "rules" because we give her permission to do so, they can't believe it. It gives me the opportunity to demonstrate British intrinsic superiority - which is difficult when Boris opens his mouth.

duplicate deleted

Let em keep Buckingham Palace but have no other power. We become a democratic republic and take back all of their other property and land which was all stolen from us centuries ago. Still get the tourism and it doesn’t cost us a penny. We are quids in and the hat-doffers can still have their wonderful inbred family of Germans to bow down to. Every 10 years we elect a head of state and they can enter a suitable candidate if they like.

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 4:36 pm Used to think the tourist angle was a weak argument until I worked in Westminster and had foreign tourists asking for it a dozen times a day

Six foot five and model looks, I’m not surprised.

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:28 pm

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 4:36 pm Used to think the tourist angle was a weak argument until I worked in Westminster and had foreign tourists asking for it a dozen times a day

Six foot five and model looks, I’m not surprised.

6'6"*

But how many tourists actually see the royals. They see the buildings and the history inside, which would still be there if we did get rid of the royal family. I voted to keep them by the way

They think they live there, if you have an afternoon tea company around Victoria then you'll be creaming it (pun intended) based on having tea near Buck Pal

The tourism will drop off once Charles takes over I'd imagine

they are untouchable just ask Andrew.

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:45 pm

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:28 pm

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 4:36 pm Used to think the tourist angle was a weak argument until I worked in Westminster and had foreign tourists asking for it a dozen times a day

Six foot five and model looks, I’m not surprised.

6'6"*

Got to be honest, that’s less appealing.

Six thee to six five is the optimum for impressing the ladies, imo. More than that starts to get freakish or gangly. Unless you’re all in proportion, of course.

Time well overdue playmates. Kathy Burke - 1st President .

'God save the Queen'.

Off with your heads! It should have been made clear at the outset that the IP addresses and login details of all the Get Ridders would be passed to MI5. Sorted (or soon will be)!

Personally, i think the argument that says, they are good for tourism is nonsense. without the Monarchy, tourism would still be at the same level.
How many countries dont have a monarchy, but still get high levels of tourism, like USA, France, Italy, Spain, etc

Jack wrote: ↑Tue Nov 23, 2021 1:15 pm Personally, i think the argument that says, they are good for tourism is nonsense. without the Monarchy, tourism would still be at the same level.
How many countries dont have a monarchy, but still get high levels of tourism, like USA, France, Italy, Spain, etc

There are many reasons anyone visits any country. For some people the monarchy and all of the history that goes with it is important, as Currychip suggested before.

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 10:11 pm

Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 7:45 pm

Ronnie Hotdogs wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 6:28 pm

Six foot five and model looks, I’m not surprised.

6'6"*

Got to be honest, that’s less appealing.

Six thee to six five is the optimum for impressing the ladies, imo. More than that starts to get freakish or gangly. Unless you’re all in proportion, of course.

Was certainly the case in my yoof but now I weigh 17 Stone and have killa shoulders

And how much of this wealth is down to acquisition gained by inheritance, including wealth gained by the proceeds of the slave trade.

Half of England is owned by less than 1% of the population
Research by author reveals corporations and aristocrats are the biggest landowners
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/ ... ers-author

The fact that this even needs to be said...

I've got no problem with them. apart from those rats - Andrew and Harry (and now Charles)

Should be scaled down a lot after the Queen goes.
Did I hear right that last year the royals cost the tax payers £100 million pounds, ridiculous if so and with all the land they own, surely by now, they should be self sufficient.

Sid Bishop wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:21 pm Should be scaled down a lot after the Queen goes.
Did I hear right that last year the royals cost the tax payers £100 million pounds, ridiculous if so and with all the land they own, surely by now, they should be self sufficient.

Can you imagine the security costs alone? It'll be way more than £100m.

Get the parasites out and repurpose all those lovely castles and palaces for the whole people of Britain, not just one family.

Gary the Plumber wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:22 pm

Sid Bishop wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:21 pm Should be scaled down a lot after the Queen goes.
Did I hear right that last year the royals cost the tax payers £100 million pounds, ridiculous if so and with all the land they own, surely by now, they should be self sufficient.

Can you imagine the security costs alone? It'll be way more than £100m.

Get the parasites out and repurpose all those lovely castles and palaces for the whole people of Britain, not just one family.

The Royals own so many houses, country estates and castles and amazing that half of England is owned by less than 1% of the population !
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/ ... ers-author

PutneyO wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 2:14 pm I've got no problem with them. apart from those rats - Andrew and Harry (and now Charles)

Spot on .The Queen has been impeccable and William and Kate will be fine . However Andrew , Harry and Charles are three arseholes