flag of convenience Posted September 13, 2013 Author Share Posted September 13, 2013 Well since we have chosen to leave the UK should it really matter to us what the Royals do? Well yes as a matter of fact. The Queen remains head of state in Australia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted September 13, 2013 Author Share Posted September 13, 2013 He seems to have a better personality than his uncle and is not so up himself as they say. Hopefully he will find a niche. Elephants and Rhino's seem to be his thing. Animal preservation in Africa anyway. Very noble but surely his talents could be better used at home in any number of capacities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix16 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 Well said. Exactly my take. He could at least live off his own assets if he wants to retreat from reality. What if a fellow from a council estate said he was going to take a year off, (on the dole) from looking for work? The tabloid brigade would I suspect be out in arms. A bit of a reality escape from someone whose has had the best money can buy. I imagine the average bloke going out to work wouldn't mind a year off either but has to chip away until he's done his time. They usually end up on a front page daily mail spread about bring dole wallahs and scrounges!!! Those with no money of course..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix16 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 not anti royal at all but jeez.. perhaps a starring role on Made in Chelsea will help bring the bacon home... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted September 13, 2013 Author Share Posted September 13, 2013 I thought a couple of days a week piloting an air ambulance. As an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix16 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I thought a couple of days a week piloting an air ambulance. As an example. i think you're right, there is something he could do, to add value, and to give back to the community. he has just become a father, along with the millions of others who simply can't leave their jobs, no matter how much they desire to when they look into the eyes of their new born child. Most get the instinct to work harder and harder to provide the best they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petals Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I would hate their life, all I think is Kate must really love him because why would you want to do all that hand shaking stuff year in year out, yes it comes with benefits, but they they would have benefits anyway silver spoon. Same with him. They are just money attractors for charities and why I do not know. Why do people think anyone is better than them, no-one is. We all come into the world and we all leave and are forgotten for the most part Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmjg Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 As Aussie tax payers we don't personally but I'm pretty sure as a nation we pay some fees (possibly very large fees!) for being part of the commonwealth and having the royals as our head of state, I think we are allowed an opinion on their choices and behaviors although that's all it can be, 'an opinion'!!! just a little bit disappointing that for all their 'we're normal' they're not really and they're not particularly representing real life in as much as they could! My view.... Nope, and a twenty second search would mean you could post something correct rather than propagating mistruths to try and support your opinion. it's only Wikipedia, but its the most succinct of all the returns Finance[edit source | editbeta] Australians do not pay any money to the Queen, either for personal income or to support the royal residences outside of Australia. Only when the Queen is in Australia, or acting abroad as Queen of Australia, does the Australian government support her in the performance of her duties. This rule applies equally to other members of the Royal Family. Usually the Queen's Australian governments pays only for the costs associated with the governor-general and governors in their exercising of the powers of the Crown on behalf of the Queen, including travel, security, residences, offices and ceremonial occasions, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Australia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted September 14, 2013 Author Share Posted September 14, 2013 I would hate their life, all I think is Kate must really love him because why would you want to do all that hand shaking stuff year in year out, yes it comes with benefits, but they they would have benefits anyway silver spoon. Same with him. They are just money attractors for charities and why I do not know. Why do people think anyone is better than them, no-one is. We all come into the world and we all leave and are forgotten for the most part I take it was quite a step up for her. I suppose being waited on hands and foot can lead to the illusion of being something other than a mere mortal. Still early days yet though. I get the impression William has been given a rather easy ride to date by the media. He sounds to be a little confused into what to occupy himself with now that he is without a job. The animal in Africa thing sounds a little like a gap year job or end of life one. Still think he could do something for part of value as he must the ability to contribute a lot, rather than a years sabbatical at 31. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tina2 Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 Hope Prince Philip now retires from public life, he can be a bit of an embarrassment at times and he has more than served his time as a Royal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest66881 Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 Hope Prince Philip now retires from public life, he can be a bit of an embarrassment at times and he has more than served his time as a Royal. On the contrary i think Phil should be at the front of the royals not at the back or in the shadows, hes saying it as it is:wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest littlesarah Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 If I'm honest, I don't really care what he does as long as it doesn't harm anyone. Anyone who seriously thinks that the royal family is about to start living like the rest of us can't see that's not how things will be in the near future. Their lifestyle is not like that of the rest of us. Would it be less shocking if he were to stay home & look after the baby while Kate went back to work?! Not that that will happen, of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 If people want him to be treated like everyone else he is entitled to at least 6 months paternity leave anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Que Sera Sera Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 I bet he does far more than anyone gives him credit for. He's a credit not only to Britain but to the commonwealth, all power to him and I wish him all the very best in whatever path he chooses because I know that the Royal Family do huge amounts for the economy and I believe generate more income than they spend . This is our future King and I believe his role in the future is going to be massive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyHeart Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 I think most people in Britain would vote to keep the monarchy..as it is. Not many people want a republic. British society wouldn't be what it is without them. All those that harp on about Britain being great....the royals are a big part of that. They're not normal people, they're born to a life of great wealth and privilege..of which some of them have historically renounced. Do you think theyre any happier than any of us? Would YOU want the responsibility of being a future King? They're no better of than the rest of us mere mortals in the grand scheme of things...I don't begrudge him any of it, he could take ten years off for me..his job is 'being royal' and all that that entails. It doesnt grind my gears at all...good luck to him I say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammy1 Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 I bet he does far more than anyone gives him credit for. He's a credit not only to Britain but to the commonwealth, all power to him and I wish him all the very best in whatever path he chooses because I know that the Royal Family do huge amounts for the economy and I believe generate more income than they spend . This is our future King and I believe his role in the future is going to be massive. That's where I have to disagree. I believe the role of a royal will mean less and less in future years. Britain has undergone enormous change in a short space of time and this will be reflected in future generations perception and acceptance of a royal family.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flag of convenience Posted September 14, 2013 Author Share Posted September 14, 2013 That's where I have to disagree. I believe the role of a royal will mean less and less in future years. Britain has undergone enormous change in a short space of time and this will be reflected in future generations perception and acceptance of a royal family.. It will be a natural process. I think in time they will become more normal and behave more akin to European royal families. Moves have been under way quite sometime. The reaction to Diana's death was a wake up call if ever. It will be hard for the present Queen to venture too far out of her comfort zone, especially at her age. The next generation will see greater change but still maintain the important parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 Would Britain (and Australia) really be better off with a republican form of government? We have already had one failed experiment, 1649-1660. So has Spain, in more modern times. How do the world's republics compare to monarchies? Fairer government? Better government? Cheaper government? Lower taxes? Happier people? The ideal place to compare a republic to a monarchy could be in North America. Where would you prefer to live? The USA or Canada? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Rose Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 Ironic, if you ask me, that he wants to be a spokesman for protecting the interests of wildlife, yet openly shoots them and arranges for his brother to do the same: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/09/22/peta-begs-kate-middleton-to-stop-prince-william-from-shooting-birds/ Call me cynical, but I have never met an animal lover who shoots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 Personally im against the civil list and the monarchy,as regards them bringing in millions im not so sure,i think its "their" palaces etc that bring in the visitors,its not like any tourists sit down and has a bacon butty with them is it The palace of Versailles does ok for visitors too,yet no royal family. If we never had a royal family atm,and the gvnmt ran a poll asking...... Shall we parachute this family in,and a wagon load of servants and hangers on,pay them millions of pounds a year,maintain the umpteen Palaces that we will allocate them, pay out untold millions in security,give them vast swathes of land like the Duchy of Lancaster,and Cornwall,and give the Duchy of Cornwall tax breaks,what d'yer reckon uk citizens? I think most would answer nah,lets not! Theyre part of the furniture,people cant imagine the uk without them,its just what people are used to,thats all,the people being "commoners" of course lmao,but the majority love them! I dont hate them,nor expect the uk to become a republic,but they should have the vast majority of their palaces and lands taken off them,and uk plc can use them for the uk,viva la revolution!!!:jiggy::wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incata Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 Personally im against the civil list and the monarchy,as regards them bringing in millions im not so sure,i think its "their" palaces etc that bring in the visitors,its not like any tourists sit down and has a bacon butty with them is it The palace of Versailles does ok for visitors too,yet no royal family. If we never had a royal family atm,and the gvnmt ran a poll asking...... Shall we parachute this family in,and a wagon load of servants and hangers on,pay them millions of pounds a year,maintain the umpteen Palaces that we will allocate them, pay out untold millions in security,give them vast swathes of land like the Duchy of Lancaster,and Cornwall,and give the Duchy of Cornwall tax breaks,what d'yer reckon uk citizens? I think most would answer nah,lets not! Theyre part of the furniture,people cant imagine the uk without them,its just what people are used to,thats all,the people being "commoners" of course lmao,but the majority love them! I dont hate them,nor expect the uk to become a republic,but they should have the vast majority of their palaces and lands taken off them,and uk plc can use them for the uk,viva la revolution!!!:jiggy::wink: Why should they have their palaces and their land taken off them? They have been in their family for hundreds of years and the newer ones have been bought at full market rate. Would you like it if someone turned round and said they will take your house off you for the good of the country? What would the country do with them? Turn them into social housing so more unemployed Romanians can be accommodated at UK tax payers expense? Use them for Parliamentarians to have nice weekends away, aka Chequers? Silly idea Pablo. Need to give it a little more thought before coming out with unthought out left wing stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 Why should they have their palaces and their land taken off them? They have been in their family for hundreds of years and the newer ones have been bought at full market rate. #The land that it all started from was because of right of conquest,so i still say this is basically stealing,it might have been the way it was,but it doesnt make it right,wouldnt today anyway,and im applying todays laws in retrospect# Would you like it if someone turned round and said they will take your house off you for the good of the country? #Its not a "house" exactly is it?how many palaces does one family need?,also i dont receive millions and millions for eternity off the uk,so not sureof the relevance of that question regarding my little place# What would the country do with them? Turn them into social housing so more unemployed Romanians can be accommodated at UK tax payers expense? Use them for Parliamentarians to have nice weekends away, aka Chequers? Silly idea Pablo. Need to give it a little more thought before coming out with unthought out left wing stuff. Its a silly idea is it?in your opinion it is,i think its silly that the likes of you think its perfectly normal to bow and curtsey to "anyone",let alone the royal family,but each to their own eh? What would we do with them? we could turn some of them into convalescence homes for injured service people,we could open "all" the rooms of these Palaces to the public,we could even farm the land and get the profits,they could be used and hired out for weddings,conferences etc,thats just off the top of my "unthinking" head,im sure others could think of better ideas,and i dont recall suggesting we use them as social housing did i?,nor did i mention Romanian benefit drains on the uk,that you talking "right wing stuff?" I said they should have the majority of their palaces taken off them,one palace should do most families i would think,not such a hardship in my eyes. So just because you cant picture a uk with a much reduced royal role in the uk,doesnt mean others have to think the same way does it? As regards the usual "left wing" comment,it has nothing to do with left wing,i just have a different opinion on the royal family than you,so no,my suggestions aren't stupid in my eyes,they just mean not believing the status quo there is now has to be forever,change should happen,and it wouldnt surprise me if it does,despite the indignation and anger of royalists like you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 So, we change our constitution and our form of government, not because it needs to be changed, not because there is a better alternative, but simply because 'change SHOULD happen!' And when we do change, if things get worse, 'oh well, **** happens!' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrshire2oz Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 To quote Mel Brooks - It's good to be the King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablo Posted September 14, 2013 Share Posted September 14, 2013 So, we change our constitution and our form of government, not because it needs to be changed, not because there is a better alternative, but simply because 'change SHOULD happen!' And when we do change, if things get worse, 'oh well, **** happens!' No,that isnt going to happen,i'm a realist,the majority of us commoners would keep the royals(i wouldnt, obv),i know that,im suggesting that they dont need umpteen castles,palaces and hectare upon hectare of land to still carry out the duties they do now,dont know why thats such a difficult scenario for people to get their head round tbh,it baffles me It seems its a case of, "well,thats just the way it is,its always been that way,so lets leave it the way it is",apathy and tame acceptance,its rife in the uk,ive recommended everyone to read the ragged trousered philanthropist loads of times on pio,and the theme of that book rings true every time theres a debate about our civil list and class system in the uk,the hoi polloi are their biggest supporters,yer couldnt script it! they must be laffing there heads off,i am anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.