It isn’t. You and SB could research the many benefits of constitutional Monarchies, but then you would find out facts that you would really prefer not to know. :hmph:

Pray tell...

at the moment there are only 2 or 3 palaces that living royals actually inhabit. The remaining huge number are funded via trusts or public donations and they are doing perfectly fine. Venues like the tower of london and leeds castle get millions of visitors without a living royal in sight

Pray google....You could start here, just the tip of the iceberg.

https://www.princestrustglobal.org/home

One extract from the site:

The Princes Trust group Annual Report

During 2021/22, together with our partners, we supported almost 82,000 young people across 21 countries to gain the skills they need to access the jobs of tomorrow, including in the green economy.
This included 60,000 young people in the UK, and almost 22,000 across the following 20 countries: Australia, Barbados, Canada, Egypt, Ghana, Greece, India, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, Malta, New Zealand, Pakistan, Rwanda, St. Lucia, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago and Uganda. We also continued to build our presence in the USA.

We also supported hundreds of military veterans in Australia and Canada, helping them to set up their own business after leaving the armed forces; and we enabled the development of a range of exemplary built environmental projects in Australia.

Brand Finance finds the Monarchy will deliver a £958 million economic benefit to the UK
this year

David Haigh, Chairman of Brand Finance, said:

“As King Charles is crowned, he faces the challenging task of adapting the
Monarchy and making it relevant to a new and sceptical audience in a rapidly
changing social and political landscape. Fortunately, there is strong evidence
that the Monarchy continues to deliver a huge benefit to the UK economy.”

https://brandfinance.com/press-relea...ts%20declining.

People don't have to 'see' the Royals. It isn't unreasonable to suggest that a current, living Monarchy doesn't greatly boost visitor numbers.

They're not in decline though right jet? Right LT? ...right? They're not losing popularity since Elizabeth II died like ol' SB said are they fellas?

... are they? Are the year on year numbers available anywhere guys?

...guys?

The visitors the Monarchy attracted for The Queen’s Platinum jubilee and her funeral, both in 2022 accounted for the gross uplift in that period.

You really sound quite delirious SB. Check your temperature. :worry:

The Royals are doing just fine. :cool:

The Times 2023
Prince William was the most popular member of the British Royal Family, according to a survey conducted among adults in Great Britain in June 2023. Prince William's wife, Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge was the joint-second most popular Royal, along with Princess Anne, with 73 percent of respondents having a positive opinion of those two royals. By contrast, Prince Andrew was by far the least-popular member of the Royal Family with just seven percent having a positive opinion of him.

In the last years of her reign, the Queen was generally viewed in a positive light by the British public, despite some significant swings in opinion for other members of the Royal Family. In particular, Prince Harry, previously once one of the most popular Royals has seen the share of Britons who view him favorably fall from 71 percent in 2019, to just 26 percent by January 2023. The Duchess of Sussex stands at 21%.
The current monarch, King Charles III, has gradually become more popular during the same time period, with 62 percent viewing him positively in June 2023, compared with 58 percent in 2020.

Yes the queen's jubilee and funeral.

Charles' CORONATION was this year jet. Where was the uplift? Absent, because no one likes Charles, they liked The Queen. You're going to have to face reality at some point :joker:.

You're going to have to explain to me how an opinion survey of adults in the UK means anything at all in terms of what value the monarchy represents in attracting tourism.

Come on jet you usually at least somewhat engage your brain.

I like the Travel Lodge.

But funny post.:laugh:

I honestly don't get the appeal of William, he comes across unlikable imo.

And the 7% that have a positive opinion of Andrew need to be put on a watchlist.

Not uncommon after her kids have had their mates round

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/b...484_0001_5.jpg

Was the change of subject too taxing for you?
It's about their individial popularity, obviously, not value. Where did I say it was? Not everything is about money. :nono:

2 big events (involving the wonderful QUEEN) versus 1.
We don’t know if there was no uplift 2023 so far as we only have 2022 to compare it with. Maybe you can find the figures, do some research yourself. I’m not a Charles fan (though I like him well enough and admire the amazing ventures he has set up and been involved with over the years) and of course he isn't as liked as the Queen was, but to say NO - ONE likes him is just plain stupid.
That poll has him at 62% positivity rating. Time will tell if he blows it or not.

Regardless of public opinion or the rights and wrongs of the monarchy, they make more than they cost, so there's no real reason to remove them.

LT shared them above, they're right there, the projection is that they're not even close, i.e. declining which is literally all that I said.

Not that they are "wildly unpopular" - but that their popularity is declining. Global interest is declining. These are just facts, that LT helpfully backed up with some figures.

Declining doesn't mean "low", it doesn't mean "less than 50%", it just means less than before. And that trend is highly likely to continue.

Global interest in Charles will have been at its peak with his coronation - it's not going to suddenly increase next year. Interest in Wiliam was because of the allure of the "young, modern" prince with a young family. Who is swiftly becoming a bald, middle-aged prince with teenagers. You're just lying to yourself in not seeing that the monarchy is on a gradual, but steady, decline (with a major downwards bump when Liz died).

Massive over-simplification; there's no way to accurately quantify either.

So there's not a strong argument for abolishing :D

i would say there was a very strong argument for a democracy, where the voting public have the ability to choose who they want, but hey, democracy, who needs that eh? when we can have a guy that wants to be a tampon

There are many strong arguments for abolishing once you realise that a tiny pittance of tourist income doesn't constitute the entire debate.

abolished to be replaced by what, the GBP cant be trusted to put anyone half decent in as President, the tax payer will still be paying for a president and their staff, and probably the upkeep of all the various houses the royals inhabit ...no thanks

That's fair, but a lot of the debate seems to consist of people whining about the cost, or hand-wringing that laws need one extra signature at some point.

Replaced with literally nothing, you wouldn't have to change anything about how the government functions at all (except perhaps removing the Lords, which they want to do anyway). The Monarchy hasn't been a "real" part of the government for several decades.