Westminster is a public building - who pays for that? We do...
Who paid for the security? I think you'll find that came out of the public purse...
I wonder how much the Duchy of Cornwall contributed?
Yep technically it wasn't a State occasion, but given that it proceeded with a hefty subsidy from the State it was at best a semi-public State occasion and we all enjoyed a free bank holiday, except for the employers who had to pay their staff for being idle that day.
On the other hand there'll be profit to be made from all the royal wedding souvenir tat that was was sold, although most of that was made in Asia.
Westminster is a public building - who pays for that? We do...
Well Westminster is a city council but I assume you mean the Abbey? Its a Church and if you are getting rid of the Royal family you might as well turf the religious mob out of churches so tourists can enter at any time they please without pesky services getting in the way. Sorry to say you dont pay for the Abbey BFR
Who paid for the security? I think you'll find that came out of the public purse...
As does the security for all politicians, as would the cost of securing your president
I wonder how much the Duchy of Cornwall contributed?
So do I, which is why I asked you to let me know your source for saying it was the public who paid (I took it as read that you were wrong about it being a state occaision).
The FT estimates increased tourism conservatively brought in 650 million, lets not even think about the money made by media outlets, the press. Sales of the wedding DVD are all going to charity too.
Have you checked the charity payment total yet? A few who will benefit, according to The Guardian are Peace Players, which promotes cross-community cohesion by teaching children basketball in Northern Ireland; Oily Cart, a children's theatre group working specially with disabled groups; Into University, which encourages teenagers to apply for higher education; Beat Bullying; Combat Stress and Cruse Bereavement Care for the children of military casualties.
What harm are they doing you? What harm do they do to anyone? All I saw was people enjoying themselves and being happy for the day. Except for a few miserable small-minded moaners.
didnt buy any tat - wherever it was made, but did make a small donation. How about you BFR - its for charity - you know, a good thing? FYI the link is here to make it easy for you www.royalweddingcharityfund.org
I don't buy into the theory that the royal family bring in tourists any more than if he royals were not there at all. Italy doesn't have a royal family and has more tourists than the UK. Tourists come to look at the historical sites of Rome and the numbers are not diminished by the fact that there is now no emporer. big Ben, Tower Bridge and the other attractions still pull in visitors. The idea of a " premier" family seems ludicrous to me. And I doubt we would all be living in slums if the were to be done away with.
Nobody is suggesting your last wild statement are they SHG? The revenure the FT quoted was the EXTRA sepnt specifically for the one event of the Royal wedding.
Floyd..just because some charities benefitted doesn't mean that it automatically becomes a good thing, IMO there was more than a faint hint there of the traditional few bones being thrown back to keep the plebs appeased. The whole panem et circenses thing has been used by many regimes good and bad over the millennia for exactly this purpose. This nation also raised a hell of a lot more with things like comic relief and the money for Haiti and Japan in recent times. And it's good that tourism benefitted, but so there will be some tax revenue from that, but the benefit/debit column is stacked against us. And do I contribute to charities - yes. But I choose the ones that I want to donate too - mostly local things who tend to need the money more than national charities and ones that I have a closer feel and empathy with, in that I can see directly what they are doing in the community and attempts to make me feel guilty about not giving to this cause when my tax revenue funds the Royal family simply do not cut any ice with me.
I grant you the senior royals work hard, but undoubtedly there are quite a few hangers on in that crowd (Sarah Ferguson - why?) and as a nation I think it's time we moved on. I hope the happy pair have a great life and I wish them all the happiness in the world - but despite the charity donations and the tax revenue, the public purse still subsidised this occasion by paying for the secirity and the day off meant that many employers had to pay staff an extra free day's holiday, so I see the charity thing as a bit of a cynical attempt to sugar the pill.
Anyone who thinks tourists only come to the UK to see the Royal Family must really hate this country. You think there is nothing else of value here, nothing else to be proud of, nothing that people would want to travel to see. Stonehenge, Hadrians Wall, the Tower of London, Tower Bridge, Big Ben, Buckingham Palace, Bath, all the great castles and cathedrals, the shops, the museums, the clubs, the live music venues and all the great British bands that play them... no, none of this could possibly interest anyone from abroad. They only visit the country in the hope of catching a glimpse of Zara Phillips putting her bins out? Ffs, England/UK-haters like you make me sick.
floyd. My wild last statement was indeed suggested by a previous poster higher up the thread. Can't quote it or tell you whom because I can't go back a page.
Comments
Westminster is a public building - who pays for that? We do...
Who paid for the security? I think you'll find that came out of the public purse...
I wonder how much the Duchy of Cornwall contributed?
Yep technically it wasn't a State occasion, but given that it proceeded with a hefty subsidy from the State it was at best a semi-public State occasion and we all enjoyed a free bank holiday, except for the employers who had to pay their staff for being idle that day.
On the other hand there'll be profit to be made from all the royal wedding souvenir tat that was was sold, although most of that was made in Asia.
I presume you have your tea-towel?
Westminster is a public building - who pays for that? We do...
Well Westminster is a city council but I assume you mean the Abbey? Its a Church and if you are getting rid of the Royal family you might as well turf the religious mob out of churches so tourists can enter at any time they please without pesky services getting in the way. Sorry to say you dont pay for the Abbey BFR
Who paid for the security? I think you'll find that came out of the public purse...
As does the security for all politicians, as would the cost of securing your president
I wonder how much the Duchy of Cornwall contributed?
So do I, which is why I asked you to let me know your source for saying it was the public who paid (I took it as read that you were wrong about it being a state occaision).
The FT estimates increased tourism conservatively brought in 650 million, lets not even think about the money made by media outlets, the press. Sales of the wedding DVD are all going to charity too.Have you checked the charity payment total yet?
A few who will benefit, according to The Guardian are Peace Players, which promotes cross-community
cohesion by teaching children basketball in Northern Ireland; Oily Cart,
a children's theatre group working specially with disabled groups; Into
University, which encourages teenagers to apply for higher education;
Beat Bullying; Combat Stress and Cruse Bereavement Care for the children
of military casualties.
What harm are they doing you? What harm do they do to anyone? All I saw was people enjoying themselves and being happy for the day. Except for a few miserable small-minded moaners.
didnt buy any tat - wherever it was made, but did make a small donation.
How about you BFR - its for charity - you know, a good thing?
FYI the link is here to make it easy for you www.royalweddingcharityfund.org
The revenure the FT quoted was the EXTRA sepnt specifically for the one event of the Royal wedding.
Floyd..just because some charities benefitted doesn't mean that it automatically becomes a good thing, IMO there was more than a faint hint there of the traditional few bones being thrown back to keep the plebs appeased. The whole panem et circenses thing has been used by many regimes good and bad over the millennia for exactly this purpose. This nation also raised a hell of a lot more with things like comic relief and the money for Haiti and Japan in recent times. And it's good that tourism benefitted, but so there will be some tax revenue from that, but the benefit/debit column is stacked against us. And do I contribute to charities - yes. But I choose the ones that I want to donate too - mostly local things who tend to need the money more than national charities and ones that I have a closer feel and empathy with, in that I can see directly what they are doing in the community and attempts to make me feel guilty about not giving to this cause when my tax revenue funds the Royal family simply do not cut any ice with me.
I grant you the senior royals work hard, but undoubtedly there are quite a few hangers on in that crowd (Sarah Ferguson - why?) and as a nation I think it's time we moved on. I hope the happy pair have a great life and I wish them all the happiness in the world - but despite the charity donations and the tax revenue, the public purse still subsidised this occasion by paying for the secirity and the day off meant that many employers had to pay staff an extra free day's holiday, so I see the charity thing as a bit of a cynical attempt to sugar the pill.
We laugh at the socialists.
Trade Unions fight for a reduced working week etc ye ha right on bruvvers !! We get a day off re the Royal Wedding and "its hurting the country".
They hate it yet cry into their red flag when poor Tony and Gordon dont get an invite !
Just got back from Cornwall and surprisingly they were aware of a wedding going on in that northern country named England.
JT can we havwe a new thread please "New bird on the the red carpet " or similar.
Philppia M, I bet Harry had a go
This. She's a babe. A BABE!