People moaning about the Royal Baby

19lottie82

de_g. wrote: »

Actually, they cost us anywhere between £50m and £200m when you take security etc into account.

That's a VERY vague figure? Where di you get it from?

de_g. wrote: »

The estimates of the tourism value are bogus as well - do we really think that foreign tourists would stop visiting if they were able to look round all of Buckingham Palace all year round rather than a few rooms for a few weeks a year for instance? I'll bet you the entrance fees for the Palace of Versailles would indicate otherwise.

Any links to prove that the figures are bogus?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/29/royal-wedding-tourism-boost

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ipTJkZ6eTDtjDV5853uoqhcRMM5w?docId=CNG.ba7c6d87d94b4cd739527754a2e4477b.251

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

19lottie82

geoffky wrote: »

You really think those tourists come just to see the royal family?
They would come without them just like they do in places like Paris and new york...
So saying they bring that money in is a lie...
And these parasites are enabled because the likes of you have been brainwashed into thinking that prince and princesses are real outside of fairy stories....I pity you and your poor brain..And the 22 idiots who thanked you but can not think for themselves..

I didn't say that they came just to see the royal family.

Just as I didn't say that the £500 mil is the revenue from ALL of the UK / London tourist spends.

But then I'm a liar and an idiot, so you must obviously be right (and very angry, it seems).

j.e.j.

geoffky wrote: »

You really think those tourists come just to see the royal family?
They would come without them just like they do in places like Paris and new york...
So saying they bring that money in is a lie...
And these parasites are enabled because the likes of you have been brainwashed into thinking that prince and princesses are real outside of fairy stories....I pity you and your poor brain..And the 22 idiots who thanked you but can not think for themselves..

You're in Chester. Perhaps you don't get to see the plethora of Japs and foreign tourists standing outside the gates of Buckingham Palace with their mobile phone cameras, or the UK tourists for that matter. Changing of the guard, stuff like that.

Calling the Royals parasites is a bit 'teenage anarchist' (right on, man.. smash the state.. we are living in a fascist regime..) but still, it's your opinion..

catkins

paulineb wrote: »

My view is, if this baby will grow up wanting for nothing, no child in the UK should be born into poverty.

Children don't have to be born into poverty. If you cannot afford children don't have them. It's perfectly possible to prevent a pregnancy by using contraception.

One of the reasons me and OH decided not to have children (and there were quite a few) was that we did not feel we could afford them.

I am pleased that a young couple have had a healthy baby. I don't envy the baby or any of the Royal family. Of course it would be wonderful never to have to worry about money - can you afford heating and lighting etc but I would never in a million years want to swap to their lives.

You can't just go out to a restaurant or the cinema or theatre. Your every move is scrutinised and comments made in newspapers etc about your clothes, your hair etc. You have to tour factories, schools, hospitals etc whether you want to or not, smile and make conversation with people you have never met before and will probably never meet again. You always have to look your best and always have to be happy and smiling when inside you may be wishing you could be sat at home with your cup of tea watching crap tv.

Kate couldn't even have a baby without hordes of photographers and members of the public camping outside the hospital. She will be expected to look immaculate when she takes the baby home. I'm glad they waited 4 hours to make the official announcement so they could have some precious time together with their little boy

geoffky

j.e.j. wrote: »

You're in Chester. Perhaps you don't get to see the plethora of Japs and foreign tourists standing outside the gates of Buckingham Palace with their mobile phone cameras, or the UK tourists for that matter. Changing of the guard, stuff like that.

Calling the Royals parasites is a bit 'teenage anarchist' (right on, man.. smash the state.. we are living in a fascist regime..) but still, it's your opinion..

You and other brainwashed fools always try to use this line...Those tourists come here for far more and to say they come because of the royal family is a lie...
I think you will find we are full of foreign tourists here in Chester and they are not here to see our royal family they are here for our roman history and Tudor buildings and very many other tourist attractions such as our natural beauty in Chester and north wales..

You can carry on believing in fairytales if you want..I am a bit more grown up to believe in them.
Of course they are parasites, They are one of the biggest landowners in this country and have assets in the billions,Yet still get the taxpayer to pay for their weddings and such...They are laughing at you.

geoffky

19lottie82 wrote: »

I didn't say that they came just to see the royal family.
.

Here is what you said...
The Royal Family costs the tax payer about £33 million a year (62p a person?), and generates £500milion from tourism

You know this is not true...it is a lie..

j.e.j.

geoffky wrote: »

You and other brainwashed fools always try to use this line...Those tourists come here for far more and to say they come because of the royal family is a lie...
I think you will find we are full of foreign tourists here in Chester and they are not here to see our royal family they are here for our roman history and Tudor buildings and very many other tourist attractions such as our natural beauty in Chester and north wales..

You can carry on beleieving in fairtales if you want..I am a bit more grown up to believe in them.

It is actually very well documented and accepted that the Royals do bring in a lot of revenue, it isn't just me saying it. Whatever you think of them, they do generate income for our economy.

You're showing how grown up you are by claiming that you know better

And other countries, too have royal families, it's not just us.

Chester sounds nice, though

de_g.

19lottie82 wrote: »

That's a VERY vague figure? Where di you get it from?

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-qa-does-the-monarchy-pay-for-itself

19lottie82 wrote: »

Any links to prove that the figures are bogus?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/29/royal-wedding-tourism-boost

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ipTJkZ6eTDtjDV5853uoqhcRMM5w?docId=CNG.ba7c6d87d94b4cd739527754a2e4477b.251

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

I haven't ever suggested that they don't bring in tourists. All I and others are saying us that we'd get *more* tourists if they were able to go and look round the royal palaces, rather than standing outside railings trying to get a glimpse of an old woman. Versailles gets around 5m visitors a year at around €6 to €18 a person, do I reckon around €50m from that one venue.

Oh, and that Telegraph piece is vacuous marketing guff of the word kind - a thinly disguised slice of advertising designed to get the consultancy's name associated with the Jubilee.

19lottie82

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-qa-does-the-monarchy-pay-for-itself

This "study" was put together , and the results published by a republican group.

I would take their word with a pinch of salt. Not likely to be non biased, are they?

geoffky

j.e.j. wrote: »

It is actually very well documented and accepted that the Royals do bring in a lot of revenue, it isn't just me saying it. Whatever you think of them, they do generate income for our economy.

You're showing how grown up you are by claiming that you know better

And other countries, too have royal families, it's not just us.

Chester sounds nice, though

Tourism brings the money in...If they took away the big council house do you think they would stop coming.
It really winds me up as this is part of the propaganda surrounding the royals..
I doubt that not one tourist comes here just to stand outside and gawp at the big house....
Chester city centre at this time of year is jam packed with tourists just like york..I have become a good photographer by helping tourists.:)