General
06 May 19
07 May 19
@fireagate saidThat's baloney.
@Very-Rusty
The royal biographer thought that their relationship was a bridge between the young English generation and the royal family. Interesting observations. Fireagate
There is no bridge between the young English generation and the Royal family.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
07 May 19
@the-gravedigger said57% of 18-24 year old Brits are apparently in support of the monarchy (60% of 25 -34 year olds) which increases to 77% of the over 55's.
That's baloney.
There is no bridge between the young English generation and the Royal family.
Congrats to the royal couple on the new addition.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/863893/support-for-the-monarchy-in-britain-by-age/
@divegeester saidYes, that is what I said about leaving a lot of people out, perhaps I should have said Great Britain? I understand tensions are high over across the pond what with Brexit and all.
You are leaving out about 16,000,000 people.
Yes, it is the British taxpayer who funds the monarchy and all its paraphernalia, but Great Britain is more than just “England”.
-VR
@very-rusty saidI love all of the Royal Baby nonsense 🙂 It’s a welcome relief from the endless, boring Brexit details and the tragic stories about terrorist attacks, migrants drowning, plane crashes, the London stabbings, plastic in oceans ... ... ...
What do our English members think about the Royal Baby, is everyone excited?
-VR
@drewnogal saidThere is a statement I can't argue! 😉
I love all of the Royal Baby nonsense 🙂 It’s a welcome relief from the endless, boring Brexit details and the tragic stories about terrorist attacks, migrants drowning, plane crashes, the London stabbings, plastic in oceans ... ... ...
-VR
08 May 19
@biffo-konker saidAaw... just watched the video.
The baby weighed 7lbs 3oz. Not bad - slightly more than half a stone.
Whoever created the hat and shawl are in for a massive sales deal as they are the items every baby will be wearing for the next few months!
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@divegeester saidTheir opinion doesn't count, as amply proven the last half decade.
What about the Scotts, the Northern Irish and the Welsh?
@shallow-blue saidGeeze, let it rest everyone is celebrating a birth here!!!
Their opinion doesn't count, as amply proven the last half decade.
-VR
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@divegeester saidOf course, what Republicans also usually "forget" is that you shouldn't compare the cost of a monarchy against that of a vacuum. You should compare against a presidency, which tends to be rather pricy itself, what with the inevitable egos and grandstanding.
The cost of the monarchy is easily covered by estimated tourism revenues it brings, however commentators and statical bodies have noted that the net receipts from tourism are huge compared to the monarchy element which is relatively small. So whether or not the overall interest in visiting the UK would be negatively impacted if there was no longer a sitting royal family remains to be speculated on.
08 May 19
@shallow-blue saidNo one is suggesting that, what are you on about.
Of course, what Republicans also usually "forget" is that you shouldn't compare the cost of a monarchy against that of a vacuum.
08 May 19
@shallow-blue saidWhat are you on about now!
Their opinion doesn't count, as amply proven the last half decade.
08 May 19
@shallow-blue saidUnless you live in a monarchy, you may find it difficult to see why it's important to so many.
Of course, what Republicans also usually "forget" is that you shouldn't compare the cost of a monarchy against that of a vacuum. You should compare against a presidency, which tends to be rather pricy itself, what with the inevitable egos and grandstanding.
