5 ms·
The "monarchy" in GB today, I think, can be compared to the German "Bundespraesident" -- who is on paper the "head of the state" but has nothing to say, but has
by PythonicAlpha 11y ago
The "monarchy" in GB today, I think, can be compared to the German "Bundespraesident" -- who is on paper the "head of the state" but has nothing to say, but has to sign the laws, others made. He can only delay the signing or call the judges, if he things that the law is against constitution.
The worst thing about the monarchy in GB is, that it costs a huge stack of money -- whereas the Bundespraesident in Germany is relatively affordable.
- jmkni 11y agoThere's a popular CGP Grey video which claims the opposite, ie that the monarchy is a money spinner for the UK, and not just because of tourism Are you saying this is incorrect? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw
- PythonicAlpha 11y agoI don't know. It was just a side note on my side and to be frank, I don't care to much, since I am not British and when the British think they can afford it ....
- arethuza 11y agoThe Royals received something like £36 million public funds last year - which I think is pretty small compared to the cost of things like the US presidency (£1 billion) and not really that much more than the German presidency (£26 million). They have no real political influence and, to be honest, I'd far rather have the current crowd than an overtly political head of state - the fact that they choose to serve in the Armed Forces earns them a lot of credit in my book.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago>not really that much more than the German presidency (£26 million) // Germany has about ~50% more GDP than the UK. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nom...
- cronin101 11y agoIMF 2014: 4 Germany 3,859,547 5 United Kingdom 3,056,499 That's about 25% Besides, tens of millions aren't really a huge amount at a national level. Roughly £1 per working-person. I'll happily testify that Her Maj. has provided at least 1GBP of entertainment value each year of my life so far -- so it's still a net gain in my eyes ;)
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- vixen99 11y agoThe British Monarch cannot in practice, delay laws or call judges. Presidents are not necessarily the ideal solution as to what to do about having a symbolic head of state. Moreover they don't come for free or without controversy (and that, every X number of years - whatever the term of the presidency).
- PythonicAlpha 11y agoI don't wanted to make a point for the German model. I just wanted to say, how it is and not defend it. There is also sometimes discussion in Germany, if we really need a "President" -- our "chancellor", it seems, better compares to the US president in role.
- pbhjpbhj 11y ago>The British Monarch cannot in practice, delay laws or call judges. // Can not or does not?
- desas 11y agoDoes not. Has not in such a long time that we don't know if they can until they try. That would be an interesting time to live in.
- dragonwriter 11y ago> The British Monarch cannot in practice, delay laws or call judges. It is very difficult in the British system to clearly determine what is, while theoretically a personal prerogative of the monarch, practically impossible from those personal prerogatives that have simply not been exercised recently, perhaps in part because the possibility of them being invoked constrains the government to work with the monarch in a way which will not result in them being used.