Why does the UK still have a monarch?
 

As someone who lives outside of the UK, I would like to know why the UK still has a monarch. If I was to guess the answer to my own question I think it would be something like "the UK has always had a monarch. It's tradition and it would be strange if it didn't have one" or something like that. But this is the 21st century and especially with our economies suffering I wonder why the British people overwelmingly seem to put up with supporting the lavish lifestyles of this super-wealthy family through their taxes.

They don't :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarch...ngdom#Finances

The Royals do the business when it comes to Tourism, there's a lot of international interest in them. You've also got the whole tradition aspect although there's quite a lot of opposition to them, they're very divisive among the public.

I'm personally not that fussed either way.

I reckon most British people now see them more as some oddball entertainment institution more than anything else. Like Reality TV stars. Highly paid ones.

Well I think it's partly down to tradition, but also because it's economically beneficial with the money they bring in through tourism. I think most of the population are just indifferent towards them now, few are avidly opposed or in support of the Monarchy

So some people think the tourism helps but the people who go to Buckingham Palace don't get to see the Queen personally so that's not the reason they go there.

Where you from, America?

It's a big part of it, there are certain tourist attractions which only exist because of the Royal Family, the Changing of the Guard being the most obvious one

Are you an American? Isnt there a huge interest in the Royal Family over there? There certainly is in a lot of European countries, especially Germany

Alex is lost :wink:.

Don't forget Windsor Castle ..... ;)

Yeah was gonna ask if it was a relation :joker:

Why in the 21st century, with selective breeding, gene screening, easy abortions etc does America still produce so many wuckfits?

'$200m-a-day' cost of Barack Obama's trip to India to be picked up by U.S. taxpayers
 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...taxpayers.html

Sort of puts the Queen's "petty cash" into perspective, doesn't it ?

;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty..._United_States

Ironic, huh ..... :rolleyes:

I suppose there is a casual interest in the Queen to some people in the US but I don't think it's a lot. I'm pretty sure at least 95% of the people who visit the UK from the US do it for other reasons. Interesting that you said there's a lot of interest in the Royals from the Germans because the Royal Family have their roots in Germany.

Conversely, tourists visit Washington DC to 'go' to the Whitehouse, take the tour....... I wonder why they bother doing that? Hardly as if Obama is going to ask them to join him for a morning bagel? Yep, no reason for any person to go visit the Whitehouse either eh...but still they do.

Completely off topic, but can anyone confirm where the word 'dumb' originated?

http://www.mondofacto.com/facts/dictionary?dumb

lol. Thanks but not really needed!

I was being facetious. Since some appear to be more 'lost' than others. ;)

I have no issue with the Royal Family, they are part of our British traditional culture, and since we seem to be losing a lot of our identity in other areas, I'm actually glad we still have them here.

I don't know it's something they like to show off, I very rarely agree with you 'Liberty4Eva' when it comes to Big Brother.

But I agree here, it's Silly.
It's not as if The Queen does anything.

Pat Butcher is more useful to The United Kingdom.

And you would know that how?

http://www.royal.gov.uk/HMTheQueen/D...orkingday.aspx

Not everyones life revolves around BB, serial dramas and masturbation Patrick.

:laugh2:

:cheer2:

it's quite harmless I suppose. Noone really cares about them - just an excuse for the occasional national holiday and some extra (odd) tourists.

We have a monarch because we still want one. The royal family represent what's left of our traditions and heritage and they contribute as much financially to the economy of this country as they may take from it. It's a symbiotic relationship. Furthermore, the Queen is a taxpayer (since 1993) just like the rest of us. Being an American you can't be expected to understand a country like ours, steeped in history and tradition, seeing as you have so little of your own, most of which is nothing to be proud of as it happens.

Would we want a Presidential style autocracy, with the endemic corruption that entails? Err, no thanks. The British Monarchy is a constitutional monarchy in which the King or Queen reigns as Head of State but with limits to their power, and the day-to-day government is carried out by Parliament. All far more civilised than the unseemly bunfight Americans undertake, where the wealthiest contender with the best connections and most influential backing ends up as President.

I think it's absolutely mental how some people view the royal family as great people who must be respected no matter what, I know that's rare now but there's still a few.

I think it's nice that there is a royal family, it's quite cool, I just don't think they are any more special than any other celebrities

Its our History and while its true hoards of Tourists do flock to Buckingham Palace and other Royal residences but will never see a member of the Royal Family, they still hope they may just get a glimpse.

I would not like the UK to become a Republic and have a President,no thank you. Our Monarchy has survived when most others have fallen but the full power of the Monarch we have was taken away over history and I think that because the ruling Monarch does not make decisions of policy etc then that is why its still held in greater esteem in the UK.

Its a symbol of stability and continuity to the majority of the UKs population and long may it remain so.

I think its just something that's just there, no need to get rid of it. Anyway it does help tourism

For one the UK wouldn't be called the UK without a monarch.

I think you could still be called a "Kingdom" without actually being a Kingdom. If Greenland can call itself Green (when it's covered in ice) and the Democratic Republic of North Korea can call itself Democratic, I think the UK can call itself a Kingdom without fuss.

Not just "a" kingdom but "the" United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ..... ;)

Just like the ironically named "United States of America":laugh:

It's not just about going to Buckingham Palace. The Royal Family host lots of foreign heads of state and leaders of trade and industry. They bring in much more money than they cost us.

Greenland has been called Greenland since the 10th Century.

Legend has it it was named Greenland by Eric the Red so as to entice settlers to move there.

Incidentally the southern half of Greenland does have lots of green vegetation during the summer.

I don't know if I understand what you're getting at. Is the US not united?

I've been going back and forth on whether I should show the following video. I guess it may give some insight into how some American's perceive the queen and royalty in general (it's not pretty). Radio host hothead Alex Jones rips the queen a new one and I'm not sure how much of this he seriously believes. It's gonna offend some people but I personally think it's funny. :colour:

I think some of his comments are rather unnecessary regardless of his opinion on Monarchy. To say that the Queen is piece of trash is just stupid, disrespectul and silly.

It's just a bunch of "states" on the same sub-continent - sparsely inhabited, self-governing "kingdoms", for the most part, with vast natural resources, arbitrarily separated on a map, but bound together by self-interest, just like the (old) USSR ..... if "self-determination" takes hold in the U.S, the states will not be so "united" ..... ;)

Thought it might go over your head:rolleyes:

We should get rid of both parliament and monarchy. The whole system we have currently is pathetic.

Instead we should have system where there is a democratically elected king.

They serve for one year.

Each year any member of the public can put themselves forward, write manifesto and campaign. Then the public vote.

This system much more democratic and the country will be in a much better state of affairs.

The people will have complete control.

Oh dear, I doubt anyone could be offended by such childish and immature attempts at satire and humour, particularly from Americans from who we routinely expect such vulgarity and blatant envy (yes, Envy). I just felt embarrassed for Alex Jones as he cringingly displays his total ignorance about our monarchy and constitution. Aww, but YOU think he's funny! Bless:pat: Can't begrudge you that at all since Americans have been a laughing stock to us Brits for decades:hugesmile:

Mr Jones could use some lessons on how to be funny without making himself look like a complete tool. I suggest he watch Spitting Image and Jeanette Charles, effortless hilarity, without the need to be gratuitously vulgar and rude under the guise of "humour".