Coronavirus

[lenziebud]

1 hour ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

Are they still value for money? Half a million spent on a holiday and attending a funeral seams excessive. 

Should be abolished on principle whether value for money or not.

[ALBIONSAINT]

1 hour ago, Long John Baldy said:

Aren't "they"? 

With London closed to tourists I would not imagine so. The general argument that is put forward when defending the monarchy is that they bring in so much income to the country (London, Windsor) that it outweighs the expense of the taxpayers contribution. However that was all well and fine in the “before time “ the new post Covid world has reduced foreign travel and meetings done on zoom. You could now argue that that the Royals don’t need to travel around the world at great expense to promote British commerce as it can be done from home. 

[Bud the Baker]

People still visit places like Versailles in France and they no longer have a royal family, I'm not suggesting the obvious, just that when we emerge from the other side of the pandemic we would still have the tourist sites plus the pomp & circumstance without the  necessity for the royals.

 

As for Prince Charles urging swift action on climate change & remember it's less than a year since the Duck & Drake of Sussex were pontificating on this subject too - quality banter!  

[Bud the Baker]

8 minutes ago, Long John Baldy said:

The tourists rise significantly when the royals make an appearance.

It's not just about looking at Lyndsay Buckingham Palace. 

Is that a fact or just one of them Rumours?

[ALBIONSAINT]

58 minutes ago, Long John Baldy said:

So, to summarise, at this moment they aren't, due to restrictions on tourism, not entirely much they can do about that.

It's not just London/Windsor that get tourists, Scotland does pretty well out of it in case you hadn't noticed. 

As far as I know they AREN'T still traveling around the world? 

I strongly disagree that these tours/visits could achieve the same via a Zoom meeting. 

 

Personally I hadn’t, I know they have a residence in Balmoral that probably attracts lots of cruise ship tourists that are bused in for the day, buy some tat and disappear. They probably employ some staff to run the place but so does Donald Trump and we don’t subsidise him. Tourists from over seas generally come to Scotland for the history, castles, clans, scenery, I don’t think the Royal family are the primary reason they visit. 

Edited September 25, 2020 by ALBIONSAINT
Spelling

[antrin]

1 hour ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

With London closed to tourists I would not imagine so. The general argument that is put forward when defending the monarchy is that they bring in so much income to the country (London, Windsor) that it outweighs the expense of the taxpayers contribution. However that was all well and fine in the “before time “ the new post Covid world has reduced foreign travel and meetings done on zoom. You could now argue that that the Royals don’t need to travel around the world at great expense to promote British commerce as it can be done from home. 

London’s only closed-ish to Overseas tourists - a heck of a lot of normal tourists are homegrown.

A monarchy is no help whatsoever to bring in tourists.  Look at the nearby example who guillotined their monarchy and get in considerably more tourists from overseas than come to Britain.  We might learn from France.

people come to see”the old/mother country” or simply to see the amazing scenery and gaze in shock and awe at the old royal palaces, decaying castles and amazing archaeology.

Funding an already excessively rich family is simply unnecessary.  At any time.  Don’t need a virus to highlight that.

[StanleySaint]

I would also add that most of France is a good deal warmer than the UK and that may factor into their tourist numbers.

[Bud the Baker]

1 hour ago, Long John Baldy said:

2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

3 hours ago, Long John Baldy said:

The tourists rise significantly when the royals make an appearance.

It's not just about looking at Lyndsay Buckingham Palace. 

Is that a fact or just one of them Rumours?

Just because you don't like it doesn't make it not true. 

What's more the ceremonies and event attended by royal family generate media attention from the Commonwealth and around the world and it generates hundreds of millions of pounds of free publicity. The diamond jubilee and the wedding in 2011 caused a surge of interest in the royal family. The tourists, the extra merchandise sales, the wave of new visitors to Royal palaces and the media coverage will make the Diamond jubilee a more significant event than William and Kate's wedding.

The wedding of William and Kate was watched by around 2 billion people worldwide. A lot of tourists came to central London, around 360,000 tourists, so the retailers encouraged a spending bonanza with celebratory merchandise and souvenirs contributing to the spirit of the event and the government gave everyone another day off work. The total wedding related revenue generated thought additional retrail spending, tourism and pub sales, ranged from £1 billion to £2 billion. The sale of commemorative products such as mugs, photos, pens, bags... exceed £0.5 billion.

My Lindsay Buckingham comment was really intended as a pun, however even the Daily Express  admits that estimates as to how much tourism revenue the Royal Family generates is "subjective".

Quote

 Consultancy Brand Finance said that in 2017 the monarchy contributed £550  to the UK economy from tourism.

However, the validity of this and the exact figure of financial contribution from the monarchy is very hard to prove.

Fact-checking site Full Fact reported: “This estimate is largely subjective depending on what factors you think should or shouldn’t be included.”

and concluded

Quote

In the end, the question of whether the Royal Family is worth it, or not, is probably less a financial question than a political, moral and aesthetic one.

The case against should also include that the RF is treated generously in terms of Income & Inheritance Taxes and their annual cost to the taxpayer (including security) is £345M, even if you're correct and they are value for money overall I'd still be in favour of a republic.

The older royals like the Queen, Philip, Chuck & his brothers all seem pretty unpleasant to me while Will & Kate's recent strides to show they're normal and that they are subject to the same stresses as the rest of us are just risible. I know it's probably an impossibility but for me they'd do well to say as little as possible publicly and stick to cutting ribbons.

The Sussex's are the smart ones realizing that like any other form of showbiz the big money is in cracking the US market - Rock'n'Roll! 

PS - Gotta Love Barbados 

Edited September 25, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[Bud the Baker]

2 minutes ago, Long John Baldy said:

So, the royals making an appearance (weddings, annual events, special appearances etc) will boost tourism and bring in lots of money for various business's, which was my initial point to your post. 

I'm well aware figures that people don't like, it's common theme with a few on here, can be dissected but it's likely that the interest in historical royalty would fade without the continued presence of members of the royal family. 

I disagree on your personal view on the Queen and Charles who, overall, have been excellent servants to the Royal family and the UK. 

Are they value for money? I agree that's debatable, but inconclusive so no real yes/no answer to that one. 

Anyhow, they will be around for a long time yet. 

PS puns, on the whole are shite, that's a fact. 

The post that started it was from @lenziebud who said the RF "Should be abolished on principle whether value for money or not." to which you replied "Aren't they?" so there was always two sides to the equation.

PS - There's only one thing that's gonna stop me from making bad jokes....⚰️

[ALBIONSAINT]

2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

The post that started it was from @lenziebud who said the RF "Should be abolished on principle whether value for money or not." to which you replied "Aren't they?" so there was always two sides to the equation.

PS - There's only one thing that's gonna stop me from making bad jokes....⚰️

It was me that posted a bbc news report saying Covid had resulted in a £35 million deficit for the royals. I asked if they were still value for money. The difficulty I have with the institute of Royalty is that equality can never really be taken seriously in this country when we have an unelected family that lives a life of luxury by there birth rights. No matter how you look at it economically it’s just morally unjustified. 

[Bud the Baker]

I would have thought "they" would have done this 6-9 months ago....

Quote

UK scientists begin study of how long Covid can survive in the air

Researchers will test length of time virus stays infectious in different climatic conditions

 

 

[Bud the Baker]

12 hours ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

It was me that posted a bbc news report saying Covid had resulted in a £35 million deficit for the royals. I asked if they were still value for money. The difficulty I have with the institute of Royalty is that equality can never really be taken seriously in this country when we have an unelected family that lives a life of luxury by there birth rights. No matter how you look at it economically it’s just morally unjustified. 

I apologise. 

[antrin]

19 hours ago, Long John Baldy said:

Oh dear.............................

So, the British monarchy is actually an expensive institution as it costs more than 30 million pounds per year to British taxpayers, but the existence of the monarchy brings – according to many estimates – more than 25 billion pounds to the United Kingdom economy through tourism and “good will” generated for the name “Great Britain” through world by the Queen, the Princes, the Princesses and all the others Royals. 

Apart from tabloids,  who exploit the most dysfunctional family in the UK to sell their papers...

(and, like the Royals, such newspapers are also a redundant, archaic and dwindling facet of modern society)

... only simpletons and cretins could pretend  or believe that the monarchy actually generates income.
(I’m assuming that’s where you got your utterly bollox “25 billion pounds” from!?

”many estimates”... sheer bollocking lies.  Even tabloids wouldn’t print that shite.

 

The French got rid of their royal family yet more tourists got to France and visit chateaus and palaces even more than they come to UK.
Poor French - making more money from monarchy-free tourism than UK -  when they could be making even more interesting money, if they’d kept them alive. 
 

like goldfish...  but pricier to keep alive.

Edited September 26, 2020 by antrin

[ALBIONSAINT]

14 minutes ago, antrin said:

Apart from tabloids,  who exploit the most dysfunctional family in the UK to sell their papers...

(and, like the Royals, such newspapers are also a redundant, archaic and dwindling facet of modern society)

... only simpletons and cretins could pretend  or believe that the monarchy actually generates income.
(I’m assuming that’s where you got your utterly bollox “25 billion pounds” from!?

”many estimates”... sheer bollocking lies.  Even tabloids wouldn’t print that shite.

 

The French got rid of their royal family yet more tourists got to France and visit chateaus and palaces even more than they come to UK.
Poor French - making more money from monarchy-free tourism than UK -  when they could be making even more interesting money, if they’d kept them alive. 
 

like goldfish...  but pricier to keep alive.

I agree with this apart from the highlighted sentence. Why wouldn’t ordinary people believe this money generating myth? The Royals employ a full time PR company to push there agenda. However I can understand that there are lots of people who value the institution of the Royal family and to them it’s not really about money. I always imagine it’s a bit like someone saying “right we are going to drain Loch Lomond because there is a seam of gold under it” it’s not about the money for many people (probably more so in England) it’s about a sense of ......well I don’t really know because I don’t feel it? 

 

[antrin]

31 minutes ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

I agree with this apart from the highlighted sentence. Why wouldn’t ordinary people believe this money generating myth? The Royals employ a full time PR company to push there agenda. However I can understand that there are lots of people who value the institution of the Royal family and to them it’s not really about money. I always imagine it’s a bit like someone saying “right we are going to drain Loch Lomond because there is a seam of gold under it” it’s not about the money for many people (probably more so in England) it’s about a sense of ......well I don’t really know because I don’t feel it? 

 

Fair comment.

Most of the sources of 'knowledge' for the majority of people are controlled by those who profit from the status quo.

Perhaps I should have said that only simpletons or cretins would post such shite on here and expect it to go unchallenged?

Edited September 26, 2020 by antrin

[ALBIONSAINT]

God knows what they would have done if he wasn’t wearing a mask!! 

[oaksoft]

4 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

I would have thought "they" would have done this 6-9 months ago....

 

They would have had to have come up with the idea, decided how to do the experiment to make it feasible and then apply for funding.

Then the researcher leads would need to staff the project with the postdocs and PhD students who do the actual research.

Nobody is just sitting on research money.

That would explain at least a few months of the delay.

Edited September 26, 2020 by oaksoft

[antrin]

43 minutes ago, Long John Baldy said:

Stopped reading after the first sentence, you're way to good for me and the forum. 

Seems to be your normal, you don't like the numbers so you disregard them, and anyone who chooses to believe them, as if you are better than everybody, yet provide no evidence.

You being a pretentious twat doesn't make you right. 

It's plainly simple, like you, that you're not.

Do us all a favour and just do one. 

Having worked in the tourist industry for 12 years, I just might know a bit more about its reality than you .  Meanwhile... how about coming clean about that HUGE fact which I've challenged you on and that you appear have desperately tried to ignore...

the £25 BILLION brought to this country by the royals, that MANY sources have revealed to you?

 

Show me that monopoly money - ya bawbag!

[antrin]

PS this sentence of yours...

"It's plainly simple, like you, that you're not."

...makes zero sense, other than that you may think I am not simple, which is a given.

Can you please shuffle the words into a real sentence, one that computes?

I know it's probably an intended insult so I'd like to feel the burn - if there is one. 

 

Edited September 26, 2020 by antrin

[oaksoft]

1 minute ago, antrin said:

PS this sentence of yours...

"It's plainly simple, like you, that you're not."

...makes zero sense, other than that you make think I am not simple, which is a given.

Can you please shuffle the words into a real sentence, one that computes?

I know it's probably an intended insult so I'd like to feel the burn - if there is one. 

 

What?

[antrin]

21 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

What?

It makes no sense because he intends it as an insult - as it says I am NOT simple.

But I/we know that, already - which renders it pointless.

ps Ooops.

My apologies there was a typo - now corrected.

fartaway could now say that his 25 BILLION was similarly just a mind-fart and apologise, too.  

But he won't, will he?

Edited September 26, 2020 by antrin

[antrin]

Just now, Long John Baldy said:

He's angry, loses the plot and posts in a rage. 

Very amusing and ironic. 

I accept that I'm very amusing and ironic - but less of the compliments and show us where this £25 BILLION coming in figure comes from?

[antrin]

23 minutes ago, Long John Baldy said:

Stick to what you're good at........................

 

Unlike you, I'm not a one (possibly) trick pony.

I am a man of many skills and talents.  And reasonably accomplished in all.

Which would you like me to stick at?

I have taught... I could maybe teach you how to count up to 25 Billion?

Edited September 26, 2020 by antrin

[antrin]

2 minutes ago, Long John Baldy said:

Ding ding, fares please..........................

That'll be £25Billion, ya munter!

[antrin]

2 minutes ago, Yflab said:

Too much hair for Antrin. 

Fartaway would probably think that I have 25 billion bristles on my bonce!