Royal Families incomes doubled.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

It wasn't double income and authorise an extra £360 million. It was doubling income in order to pay for the £360 million renovation of Buckingham Palace. The Royal Family won't benefit from the increased income, it is going towards the renovation.

It's not "income" at all- merely a maintenance payment, Sovereign Grant.

[Penistone999]

I need new central heating and a downstairs loo. Will they double my pension to pay for that for me please? I promise I won't spend £360 million....

 

Does your family generate millions of pounds through tourism/ foreign visitors for the country each year ?

 

If so , yes you have earned the money for your central heating.

[Andbreathe]

Does your family generate millions of pounds through tourism/ foreign visitors for the country each year ?

 

If so , yes you have earned the money for your central heating.

 

So royalty and the royal family were devised by the state for the state to enhance income through tourism??

 

What a dork!!

[TORONTONY]

Does your family generate millions of pounds through tourism/ foreign visitors for the country each year ?

 

If so , yes you have earned the money for your central heating.

 

The question is. where does that money generated by tourism actually go? It probably does not help Anna B. or any other ordinary people in the Country.

Edited March 5, 2017 by TORONTONY

[iansheff]

The question is. where does that money generated by tourism actually go? It probably does not help Anna B. or any other ordinary people in the Country.

 

Mostly London area I imagine as that is where the Queen is based, sod the peasants north of Watford Gap.

[Robin-H]

The question is. where does that money generated by tourism actually go? It probably does not help Anna B. or any other ordinary people in the Country.

 

I'm confused by this logic. Why wouldn't ordinary people benefit from the extra income that in generated from the Royal Family 'brand'?

 

I accept that a lot of this extra benefit would probably go to people in and around London, but there are a lot of 'ordinary' people in London, and in addition to that anything that increases what is in the coffers of the exchequer will be good for the country generally, wherever you live.

[Bob Arctor]

So royalty and the royal family were devised by the state for the state to enhance income through tourism??

 

What a dork!!

 

And we covered this before; Paris has far more tourists than London so on that basis it will raise more revenue to guillotine them.

[Robin-H]

And we covered this before; Paris has far more tourists than London so on that basis it will raise more revenue to guillotine them.

 

We have covered this yes.

 

There is a lot more to the Royal Family 'brand' than people coming to gawp at Buckingham Palace - tourism that would arguably still continue without a monarchy.

 

We would no longer have events, such as the Jubilees, Royal Weddings, Royal Births etc. These generate billions for the economy, and would not happen without a monarchy.

 

The report states: “When special one-off events … are taken into consideration, the benefit for the economy is enormous.

 

“Novelty mugs and tea towels aside, the public relations benefits generated through the world’s intense interest in the Royal family are equally significant … The value of what is essentially free publicity for the United Kingdom when considered in the long term, is enormous.

 

“The halo effect which results from the pageantry and history it represents, is something which is leveraged effectively by numerous brands, as well as the Monarchy itself, to provide a boost to both the economy and the brand of the United Kingdom currently valued at £44 billion.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/the_queens_diamond_jubilee/9292607/The-Queen-gets-a-44bn-valuation-for-family-Firm.html

[Bob Arctor]

We have covered this yes.

 

There is a lot more to the Royal Family 'brand' than people coming to gawp at Buckingham Palace - tourism that would arguably still continue without a monarchy.

 

We would no longer have events, such as the Jubilees, Royal Weddings, Royal Births etc. These generate billions for the economy, and would not happen without a monarchy.

 

The report states: “When special one-off events … are taken into consideration, the benefit for the economy is enormous.

 

“Novelty mugs and tea towels aside, the public relations benefits generated through the world’s intense interest in the Royal family are equally significant … The value of what is essentially free publicity for the United Kingdom when considered in the long term, is enormous.

 

“The halo effect which results from the pageantry and history it represents, is something which is leveraged effectively by numerous brands, as well as the Monarchy itself, to provide a boost to both the economy and the brand of the United Kingdom currently valued at £44 billion.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/the_queens_diamond_jubilee/9292607/The-Queen-gets-a-44bn-valuation-for-family-Firm.html

 

These kinds of vague valuations get trotted out for all sorts of things, from trees to drug dealers to unpaid carers. It's all finger in the wind figures.

[Robin-H]

These kinds of vague valuations get trotted out for all sorts of things, from trees to drug dealers to unpaid carers. It's all finger in the wind figures.

 

The numbers might be vague because they are difficult to quantify. It does not mean they don't exist.