llamatron Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 Royals cost us about 65p each per year... cheers, sorry couldn't be bothered but I knew it was less than £1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 You're probably right..did we get any business form this trip? You tell me?.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 You tell me?.... I thought you were the one with all the facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glennis Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 I can't stand it ..its going to be on the news at saturation levels for months and months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 I thought you were the one with all the facts? I presented an argument and the facts to you, you counter argue with the facts to prove your point. Thats how a debate works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missymoo73 Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 I for one am delighted with the announcement. Congratulations to them both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noob Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 Give her a few years and she will be involved in an "accident" just like Diana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 I presented an argument and the facts to you, you counter argue with the facts to prove your point. Thats how a debate works. You were inferring that the trip to the Far east wasn't value for money...can you back that up...easy question..where are your facts that it wasn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 you gained the benefit of the tax that has been spent by the tourists The tourism argument doesn't work for me. If anything the monarchy is an hindrance to tourism, because the houses and points of interest are in use and the tourists can't go in. Do you truly believe people come to London to stand outside Buckingham Palace and admire the flag flying? Surely the tourists would be more than happy to pay and go inside. The Tower of London serves a better purpose as a tourist trap than a political prison. If tourism is the only reason for an unjust form of rule then i can happily do without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 Yes. The "something else" is called a republic. Don't you find it strange that many of the people most interested in our royal family come from one of the biggest republics in the world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.