Poll: Will you be putting up the Bunting next month?

Will you be putting up the Bunting next month?

  • Yes

    Votes: 35 8.5%

  • No

    Votes: 330 79.7%

  • Pancake

    Votes: 49 11.8%
  • Total voters
    414
  • Poll closed .
BowdonUK said:
We need some old battle royals, like the old days, to keep them young :D

I agree with others about the age issue. The Monarch is too old. Charles should do (like the Queen should have) and abdicate after a few years, like royal families in Europe did about 5 years ago.

The Monarchy won't survive if people can't relate to it.
Click to expand...
The monarchy's survived over 1200 years its not going anywhere just because the king is old
 
The_One said:
The bulk of the money the royals bring in isnt from the estates

What happens to a town when royals are doing a visit….. influx of tourists and people spending money in the local economy that doesnt happen without them

What happens to a charitys pot when royals back it or do a visit….it goes up. That doesnt happen without them
Click to expand...
And what stops them from continuing to do that after abolishment exactly?
 
This must be the only time perfectly sane people will refuse a party/bbq/drinks, and a day off. The sun’s come out guys, I’m heading down to my street party now for some burnt meat and cold beers. Cheers to Charlie boy for a day off tomorrow too :p
 
StriderX said:
I highly doubt they'd just give up all their charities or stop visiting places merely because it's no longer 'official'.
Click to expand...

Well, no but there is a certain "weight" to charities and tourism when "royal family" is attached to it, whether you agree with that or not.

Also, some businesses likely attract more custom when they have the "by royal appointment" attached to their products.... "Used by Big Charlie Boy" doesn't really have the same gravitas TBH
 
well yes Heinz or Tate&Lyle wouldn't have been the worldwide success they were without royal warrant, pity no one noticed they didn't bless coke or McD (if they bless foreign 'foods')

Maybe Harry's psych/Meghan told him to own his redundancy by attending wedding in full knowledge absence of pledge would consolidate his alienation
 
sigma said:
We're hardly a top nation any more, never mind in the distant future.

I'm sure the patriots will be along soon enough to claim we still rule the world etc.
Click to expand...
TBF the lyric "Britannia rules the waves" isn't all that impressive. There's **** all in the sea. All the good stuff is on land :p
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure it’s “Britannia ruins the waves” thanks to Coffey & Co.

This joke comes with the Royal seal of approval.


41yzw17euy_Harbor_Seal_on_Ice_close_0357_6_11_07.jpg
 
sigma said:
We're hardly a top nation any more, never mind in the distant future.

I'm sure the patriots will be along soon enough to claim we still rule the world etc.
Click to expand...

Per Capita we are still one of the largest when you look at big countries. We are still the 6th largest economy in the world and 2nd in Europe. BAE is the biggest defence contractor in Europe and largest outside of America. We are also one of a handful of nations with nuclear capability. That is all despite of everything we have done in recent history. Obviously we are on a downward trajectory though.
 
Last edited:
LeeUK said:
Do you think the Tories would spend the money on doctors, nurses, teachers, train drivers, and postal/airport workers instead? No, they choose not to. It's political ideology. Nothing to do with having to keep £100m back for a Coronation.
Click to expand...

No. It was just an observation really. Of course, I know that the Conservative Party has no interest in helping the poor or keeping public services running optimally.
Tory-controlled Bromley Council vetoed spending on food banks but was happy to spend £50,000 on the Coronation celebrations.

One More Solo said:
It was notable that the succession was clearly planned to happen as quickly as possible while emotions were heightened to ensure no one had the opportunity to raise that prospect. That was aided by censorship all around (in the name of “decorum“)
Click to expand...

The Met certainly took some liberties with those anti-Monarchy peaceful protestors yesterday:

"Yesterday, as we prepared for a peaceful and lawful protest, a number of Republic's team were arrested and detained for the rest of the day.

These arrests are a direct attack on our democracy and the fundamental rights of every person in the country. Each and every police officer involved on the ground should hang their heads in shame. They showed no judgement, no common sense and no basic decency. This was a heavy handed action which had the appearance of a pre-determined arrest that would have occurred regardless of the evidence or our actions.

The right to protest peacefully in the UK no longer exists. Instead we have a freedom to protest that is contingent on political decisions made by ministers and senior police officers.

...

These arrests have also destroyed whatever trust might have existed between peaceful protesters and the Metropolitan police. What is the point in being open and candid with the police, working with their liaison officers and meeting senior commanders, if all their promises and undertakings turn out to be a lie?

...

These arrests were not about protecting people from harm, but about protecting the King from embarrassment. It was the state wanting to stamp down dissent in order to present an image of a grateful and consenting public at the time of the coronation... Source
Click to expand...

They had discussed with the Police everything they were planning to do weeks in advance, (a full timetable of events was agreed, as is required for all peaceful protests in central London). They received the go-ahead from them, but when their activists were bringing the placards to the rendezvous before the protest began they were all arrested (without even being given a charge). Their placards were confiscated and they were held all day. Plenty of people on here were amused by that, but imagine if you needed to protest against something which is popular with the establishment.
 
I do wonder what £ value on the monarchy will be without the Queen.

I can't see Charles being as big a draw for some on the Royal tourism trek as the Queen was.

Edit: Not that tourists come to see them most of the time, I've never seen one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom