Royal reading
I just read an interesting article, on the Daily Mail website of all places (shudder), that breaks down the cost of the Royal Family to 62p per taxpayer. Naturally, the Mailites are up in arms in the comments section, demanding that the Royals be abolished immediately.
What rubbish. 62p is fantastic value for money! I'd gladly give 62p per year to the Queen.
I bet I give a hell of a lot more to state benefit spongers via my taxes. I bet the Queen brings in hundreds of millions in tourism alone. They more than pay for themselves in this respect. How much did the stupid Dome cost? And how much will the Olympics cost? £10 billion. If we get back £10 billion from visitors I'd be very suprised. I can tell you that my contribution (as a "Londoner") to the Olympics is a lot more than 62p per year.
Almost everybody moans that Britain is losing it's traditions and values. Nobody epitomises these values and traditions more than Royal family. Last of a dying breed? Anachronistic? Out-moded? Perhaps, but that's all the more reason to keep them.
I'm not exactly a huge Royalist, by the way. But given the choice of meeting her, or meeting Blair/Brown, I know who I'd choose. Brown, actually. So I could punch him in the face and steal his money, because that's basically what he does to me, but realistically I'd prefer to meet the Queen.
I think that the Queen has the interests of the country at heart. Politicians have their own interests at heart. This is because they have a far shorter shelf-life. Take Tony Blair, for example. After ten years in the top job, he has stood down. During that time he has wanted to make a name for himself, so he can enjoy his future earnings. This is not in the countries best interest, but his own. The monarchy do not have to do this. They just endure regardless. Interesting point: the Queen, when she was a teenager, actually served during WWII. Her grandsons are perpared to goto Iraq and Afghanistan and her own children faught in the Falklands. This is putting your country first. Can you imagine Blair or Brown serving, or allowing their children to?
Many people forget that the Queen actually still is Head of State, and head of the Armed Forces. She allows a government to be formed. I'd love it one day if she said "Actually, no. You can't form a government. You're all fired and we'll run the country again." That would be quite funny. She could also pick her own Prime Minister, should she so desire. Indeed, she has done so, back in the 1960s.
Obviously someday reasonably soon, Charles will become King. He may appear to be a bit of a buffoon, but he isn't stupid. And he probably has the whole "British" thing closer to heart than anybody.
Long live the Queen!
What rubbish. 62p is fantastic value for money! I'd gladly give 62p per year to the Queen.
I bet I give a hell of a lot more to state benefit spongers via my taxes. I bet the Queen brings in hundreds of millions in tourism alone. They more than pay for themselves in this respect. How much did the stupid Dome cost? And how much will the Olympics cost? £10 billion. If we get back £10 billion from visitors I'd be very suprised. I can tell you that my contribution (as a "Londoner") to the Olympics is a lot more than 62p per year.
Almost everybody moans that Britain is losing it's traditions and values. Nobody epitomises these values and traditions more than Royal family. Last of a dying breed? Anachronistic? Out-moded? Perhaps, but that's all the more reason to keep them.
I'm not exactly a huge Royalist, by the way. But given the choice of meeting her, or meeting Blair/Brown, I know who I'd choose. Brown, actually. So I could punch him in the face and steal his money, because that's basically what he does to me, but realistically I'd prefer to meet the Queen.
I think that the Queen has the interests of the country at heart. Politicians have their own interests at heart. This is because they have a far shorter shelf-life. Take Tony Blair, for example. After ten years in the top job, he has stood down. During that time he has wanted to make a name for himself, so he can enjoy his future earnings. This is not in the countries best interest, but his own. The monarchy do not have to do this. They just endure regardless. Interesting point: the Queen, when she was a teenager, actually served during WWII. Her grandsons are perpared to goto Iraq and Afghanistan and her own children faught in the Falklands. This is putting your country first. Can you imagine Blair or Brown serving, or allowing their children to?
Many people forget that the Queen actually still is Head of State, and head of the Armed Forces. She allows a government to be formed. I'd love it one day if she said "Actually, no. You can't form a government. You're all fired and we'll run the country again." That would be quite funny. She could also pick her own Prime Minister, should she so desire. Indeed, she has done so, back in the 1960s.
Obviously someday reasonably soon, Charles will become King. He may appear to be a bit of a buffoon, but he isn't stupid. And he probably has the whole "British" thing closer to heart than anybody.
Long live the Queen!
posted by Nej at
12:06 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home