3 ms·

christ alive buddy. the royal family costs the UK tax payer ~100m a year[0], which is about the cost of the three nuclear bombs in the US or less than one of t

christ alive buddy. the royal family costs the UK tax payer ~100m a year[0], which is about the cost of the three nuclear bombs in the US or less than one of the ill-advised F-32 purchases Australia is making. it's also maybe a 1/10th of the amount of money stolen by Tory mates for their various PPE crimes during the early pandemic. every country has very very dumb shit they piss money up the wall over, but it's not a game changing amount of money. 0: dodgy source: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/how-much-royal-family-costs-king-charles-b1009296.html https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/how-much-royal-family-cos...

PrimeMcFly 3y ago
That's ~100m that could be put towards things that actually help people and improve peoples lives.
- BookhouseGames 3y ago
  India could put a craft on the moon for that.
- bananapub 3y ago
  if the UK government had an extra £100m, rest assured they would not use it to help anyone or improve anyone's lives
- OJFord 3y ago
  They are net contributors even before tourism. (Massively so after it, but I suppose it'd be hard to say how much of that would remain, especially in the short term, if we had no current monarchy but still the history, buildings, military, etc.)
  - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
    > They are net contributors even before tourism. Explain your reasoning, please.
- tcldr 3y ago
  You can argue that even greater than the tourism revenue they generate (which is significant) it's the soft power they yield; all the heads of state want to grab a selfie with Lizzie, less so with Rishi. (Time will tell with Charles.) I don't doubt you're well intentioned, but there's probably more useful things to be fighting over. Especially as what you're fighting for will generate negligible incomes at best and negative incomes at worst. The last thing the UK needs after Brexit is a referendum on becoming a republic.
  - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
    > I don't doubt you're well intentioned, but there's probably more useful things to be fighting over. Especially as what you're fighting for will generate negligible incomes at best and negative incomes at worst. The last thing the UK needs after Brexit is a referendum on becoming a republic. I disagree. The UK is still backwards in many ways, hell, they still have an unelected upper house. Getting rid of the monarchy sends a strong message and allows other reforms to follow in its wake. I'm also skeptical the monarchy generate any tourism. People come to see the palace that would remain regardless, and the funny guards that trample over children. They don't come to the UK for that stuff, they see it while they are there, and they certainly don't come hoping to see a member of the royal family.

PrimeMcFly 3y ago

That's ~100m that could be put towards things that actually help people and improve peoples lives.

BookhouseGames 3y ago
India could put a craft on the moon for that.
bananapub 3y ago
if the UK government had an extra £100m, rest assured they would not use it to help anyone or improve anyone's lives
OJFord 3y ago
They are net contributors even before tourism. (Massively so after it, but I suppose it'd be hard to say how much of that would remain, especially in the short term, if we had no current monarchy but still the history, buildings, military, etc.)
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago
  > They are net contributors even before tourism. Explain your reasoning, please.
tcldr 3y ago
You can argue that even greater than the tourism revenue they generate (which is significant) it's the soft power they yield; all the heads of state want to grab a selfie with Lizzie, less so with Rishi. (Time will tell with Charles.) I don't doubt you're well intentioned, but there's probably more useful things to be fighting over. Especially as what you're fighting for will generate negligible incomes at best and negative incomes at worst. The last thing the UK needs after Brexit is a referendum on becoming a republic.
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago
  > I don't doubt you're well intentioned, but there's probably more useful things to be fighting over. Especially as what you're fighting for will generate negligible incomes at best and negative incomes at worst. The last thing the UK needs after Brexit is a referendum on becoming a republic. I disagree. The UK is still backwards in many ways, hell, they still have an unelected upper house. Getting rid of the monarchy sends a strong message and allows other reforms to follow in its wake. I'm also skeptical the monarchy generate any tourism. People come to see the palace that would remain regardless, and the funny guards that trample over children. They don't come to the UK for that stuff, they see it while they are there, and they certainly don't come hoping to see a member of the royal family.