'Should Pippa Middleton work for free?' blog discussion

Errata

Congratulations on the funniest blog you will ever write :rotfl:
Work and the Wisteria sisters are mutually exclusive.

robin_banks

pjcox2005 wrote: »

I'd be willing to argue it:

Perhaps on historical grounds, that the Royal Family are part of the history of Britain are should continue to be preserved.

Or on economical grounds, in the fact that the revenue they bring in from tourism (see royal wedding as an example) far outweighs the cost of keeping them.

Or on a personal side, that it's quite clear that both in the UK (the wedding, prince philip documentary) and overseas (Canada trip) many people feel it's a privelage to meet the Royal family.

You could argue they are a backdrop to a feudal system.

You could argue France has a large rtourist industry and have had since 1789.

Some no doubt see it as a privelage, as demonstrated by the flag waving, manay many more Canadians aren't prersent though.

purplegaily

If she works for free, all the negative publicity about the royalty bludging off the tax payer is going to rub off on her - even worse as she's not one of them, this would happen even if she uses her family money, not the Palace's....

Does this mean her parents now have to work for free, as their business was given great publicity from the royal wedding?

Pippa isn't rich - her family are well off because they worked hard to get their business off the ground. She has to get money from somewhere - rather than running to daddy for handouts, or queing up down the dole office.

She's also as much of a celeb as many of those who are famous for nothing in particular - I wouldn't quite group her with some of the D list celebs, but the reason she has her currently celebrity is not because of her acheivements, but by proxy to Catherine.

Anyway - even some royals such as Zara do not get anything from the civil list, and if I recall correctly, although she is in line to the throne (how far down is she now?) she's not even got a title, so why should someone with no royal blood get to go on the list if some of the royals don't.

Paulgonnabedebtfree

purplegaily wrote: »

If she works for free, all the negative publicity about the royalty bludging off the tax payer is going to rub off on her - even worse as she's not one of them, this would happen even if she uses her family money, not the Palace's....

Does this mean her parents now have to work for free, as their business was given great publicity from the royal wedding?

Pippa isn't rich - her family are well off because they worked hard to get their business off the ground. She has to get money from somewhere - rather than running to daddy for handouts, or queing up down the dole office.

She's also as much of a celeb as many of those who are famous for nothing in particular - I wouldn't quite group her with some of the D list celebs, but the reason she has her currently celebrity is not because of her acheivements, but by proxy to Catherine.

Anyway - even some royals such as Zara do not get anything from the civil list, and if I recall correctly, although she is in line to the throne (how far down is she now?) she's not even got a title, so why should someone with no royal blood get to go on the list if some of the royals don't.

I am 111,529th in line to the throne and I was on the civil list for a while. I think they called the dole though.