90
91

Royalty. (i.imgur.com)

submitted ago by Unwashed_Vagina

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on
all 12 comments
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Don't British taxes go toward keeping them rich?

[–]AnEnglishGentleman 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The average citizen pays about 20p a year towards the Royal family. The amount of money generated by the existence of the Royal family (primarily through tourism) is a lot more than that. Places like Buckingham Palace, the Tower of London (where the Crown Jewels are kept) and Windsor Castle receive millions of visitors each year, primarily because of their connection to the Royal family.

I don't agree with everything about the monarchy in the UK, but the argument that they are a net loss in terms of money for the country is downright absurd.

[–]nestea69 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

more like " haha, i made you poor"

[–]thumper242 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Do they have the power to do that any more?

[–]W3bbo 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Not since the Magna Carter and subsequent limits on the power of the monarchy, especially following the revolutions in mainland Europe. The British Royal Family pays for itself anyway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw

Charles, the Prince of Wales, runs several charities that work to improve the lives of disadvantaged youngsters too, so they're actually making people richer.

[–]Lucky_Striker -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You fell for the propaganda. You still pay more in taxes to support them than they will ever return to your income. Paying for themselves? The biggest load of crap ever, that money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is your pocket.

[–]Louchebag 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Just think of the wars we could start with the money we'd save if we got rid of them!

[–]constant_semi 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

what does that even mean?

[–]jsims281 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

He's probably making a point that the cost of having the Royal family is nothing compared to constantly being at war.

[–]constant_semi 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

i don't think it is. it's like his? point is that should the uk government have more money from having no royal family, it's first priority would be to start another war in the middle east which would be an even bigger waste of money than spending it on the royals. hence my confusion.

[–]jsims281 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well I think you have to account for a touch of sarcasm, but even then I dunno. The armed forces are taking massive funding cuts at the moment, so any sudden windfall would probably be used (at least partly) to help prop up the military.

[–]nestea69 -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

yes,... yes they do