Is the Royal Family a waste of money

[Robertclive]

I think it is because I'm sure people would still visit the UK without them.

[mp0295]

Says the person with the American flag avatar....
Loss of the royals would take away 85% of my motivation for going to London

[Niles Crane]

I was just thinking about this last night! No, they are not a waste of money. The tourism industry brings in a lot of money thanks to the Royal Family - significantly more than is actually needed to support them. Certainly, we could get rid of them, but I expect that most of the charm and wonder than it is found in visiting places like Buckingham Palace is the realisation that the most famous Head of State actively inhabits the house. If you take that away, it just becomes an empty, lifeless shell like any old National Trust building.

[Robertclive]

I would visit Buckingham palace to see the palace, not the royal family.

[Niles Crane]

Well, no, you don't see the Royal Family by going to Buckingham Palace. I doubt if they would even appreciate being put on display for you. But it's that link to them that draws a lot of people. That and the Changing of the Guard.

[Påsan]

I think it is because I'm sure people would still visit the UK without them.

*Facepalm* The Royal Family is not a Bloody Turist attraction.

Someone close this tread

[Robertclive]

yall are making it seem like it is.

[Niles Crane]

yall are making it seem like it is.

They're not there to be a tourist attraction, but that's what a lot of tourists go to the UK for. I was merely retorting your original point. When next you say the Royal Family does nothing, I will provide evidence against that.

[Påsan]

I think it is because I'm sure people would still visit the UK without them.

*Sigh*
The Royal Family is not a bloody turist attraction.

Someone close this tread

[Pious Agnost]

Our Queen dosen't waste a cent of our money .

(New Zealander)

[ly0_ly0]

I fail to see how the royal family keeps england's tourism running though.I mean the palace,castles and all the culture will still be there if the family just dissapeared.

[General Brittanicus]

If we got rid of the Queen we would still have to pay for somebody else to be our head of state. Most of her payments from the government go towards helping her maintain her duties as head of state, she has to pay for everything else herself and the only royals who get money from the government are the duke of edingurgh, the queen and anyone else who has any civil duties. Which means that if the royal family was abolished you would still have all the same expenditures just for a different person as head of state. Also the crown estates which is not controlled by either the government or the royal family provide about £130 million more than is given to the queen each year.

[♔Oggie♔]

Yes also in the Netherland the royal familiy earns us more money than we spend on them.
This is due to tourism (even the Netherlands, can't imagine how much the British royal family would make) and many foreign bussiness relationships they huild up over the years.
We pay like 114 million euro annually for the royal house and each year she earns us 4 to 5 billion euro's.

[Taxandrius]

The Belgian royal family is an expensive pain in the ass, if we could, we'd hang em high

[Godfrey I of Leuven]

The Belgian royal family is an expensive pain in the ass, if we could, we'd hang em high

Not only that I wonder how much the Belgian citizen pays for all those politicians..

[Treize]

Yes also in the Netherland the royal familiy earns us more money than we spend on them.
This is due to tourism (even the Netherlands, can't imagine how much the British royal family would make) and many foreign bussiness relationships they huild up over the years.
We pay like 114 million euro annually for the royal house and each year she earns us 4 to 5 billion euro's.

Republicans are short sighted populists.

[Aeneas Veneratio]

No, they are not.

What is a waste of money are the poor people!? Every country should seriously get rid of them by first cutting off any monetary aid they receive and then slaugther all of them with guns!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Robertclive]

I find the palace to be incredible. But a couple fat people sitting inside don't increase interest.

[Aeneas Veneratio]

I find the palace to be incredible. But a couple fat people sitting inside don't increase interest.

Why do you care? I doubt the tax money you pay in Tennessee ends up in the pockets of a foreign Head of State.

[Copperknickers II]

I find the palace to be incredible. But a couple fat people sitting inside don't increase interest.

Really? I don't like it that much, not the largest or most spectacular royal palace in the world. I prefer the palace of Westminster, and also the British and Natural History museums. In fact even the Shard will probably be a better piece of architecture, it's rather unimpressive for what was once the home of the empress/emperor of history's greatest Empire.

The royal family however is a very good idea, I think that without them to look up to we'd become like America, where the head of state is constantly subject to criticism, if not violent insults. Because the British royals have no real power, they cannot really be criticised. Plus it gives us a greater sense of national identity, since our head of state doesn't change every decade like presidents do.