not according to the bloke above. Its all connected (i realize MT is parliamentary and perhaps separate)
What good is your monarchy though?
Well for one thing, Thatcher would've sold off everything connected to the monarchy, and Gasprom would own Buckingham palace by now.
The current Queen is like an expensive pet that sits on a very large pile of gold. As mentioned, people from all over the world come to marvel at the pet and her pile, spending more money here than we'd get in a one-time sale. The current pet is well behaved and doesn't bite visitors.
Pets don't need a functional value, it's intrinsic.
no, I'm not mistaking the government/parliment for the monarchy.
I just wanted to interject and question the legitimacy of your country's program.
Apparently, the monarchy has fed the people a sedative and a straightjacket that leaves them
powerless, only to watch football matches and pub drinking.
no, I'm not mistaking the government/parliment for the monarchy.
Are you sure?
Apparently, the monarchy has fed the people a sedative and a straightjacket that leaves them
powerless, only to watch football matches and pub drinking.
According to who?
But let's say this is an accurate assessment. It's the government's doing, and many commentators specifically lay the blame at Thatcher's door. Nothing to do with the monarchy. The Queen has no involvement with policy or government. Where are you getting these ideas from?
Personally, some days I think I would prefer a Monarchy. I get kinda tired every few years having to change who my displeasure sits with. Thinking there is hope voting for a new politician or even a different party. Nope... At least with a King or Queen I can hold my discontent for a lifetime! lol
And I'm now starting to think the reasons they give leaders terms has more to do with keeping the public at bay with their hate. Thinking they are getting change or hope for things to get better every cycle a new leader comes.
Maybe my displeasure really lies with the fact that our government holds a majority with less than 40% of the popular vote. That gaining 3% of popular vote gives you 42 more seats out of a possible 308 available in our House of Commons.
But I digress.
Yeah, just on the idea of how much money the Monarchy creates (Not just in the Commonwealth, but around the world) it's worth keeping the whole thing going. When I was living in London, I knew a guy who put his 3 daughters though University just selling various Royal family memorabilia to tourist on the streets. I can't imagine how much that brand creates worldwide...
Comments
Is it that difficult to understand?
FFS
not according to the bloke above. Its all connected (i realize MT is parliamentary and perhaps separate)
What good is your monarchy though?
Well for one thing, Thatcher would've sold off everything connected to the monarchy, and Gasprom would own Buckingham palace by now.
The current Queen is like an expensive pet that sits on a very large pile of gold. As mentioned, people from all over the world come to marvel at the pet and her pile, spending more money here than we'd get in a one-time sale. The current pet is well behaved and doesn't bite visitors.
Pets don't need a functional value, it's intrinsic.
You're catching on.
Prince Charles is a bad dog, not suitable at all.
William looks like he wants to go feral though, and Harry is illegitimate anyway, so the whole thing might peter out.
Who in this thread exactly was conflating monarchy with government? Or are you mistaking Thatcher for the Queen?
I just wanted to interject and question the legitimacy of your country's program.
Apparently, the monarchy has fed the people a sedative and a straightjacket that leaves them
powerless, only to watch football matches and pub drinking.
Are you sure?
According to who?
But let's say this is an accurate assessment. It's the government's doing, and many commentators specifically lay the blame at Thatcher's door.
Nothing to do with the monarchy. The Queen has no involvement with policy or government. Where are you getting these ideas from?
And to repeat: Nothing to do with the monarchy.
You're wandering into facepalm territory.
The ceremony is a joke that the people haven't gotten.
Enjoy your tea and crumpets.
And Marmite. Don't forget the Marmite. Love it.
And I'm now starting to think the reasons they give leaders terms has more to do with keeping the public at bay with their hate. Thinking they are getting change or hope for things to get better every cycle a new leader comes.
Maybe my displeasure really lies with the fact that our government holds a majority with less than 40% of the popular vote. That gaining 3% of popular vote gives you 42 more seats out of a possible 308 available in our House of Commons.
But I digress.
Yeah, just on the idea of how much money the Monarchy creates (Not just in the Commonwealth, but around the world) it's worth keeping the whole thing going. When I was living in London, I knew a guy who put his 3 daughters though University just selling various Royal family memorabilia to tourist on the streets. I can't imagine how much that brand creates worldwide...
Nobody will overthrow the government because no one wants to take responsibility for what comes after that.
These days they're called elections. :-)
generally a shit show but really well done this! ^^^