Post # 31
socalgirl1689 : where did I say that the public shouldn’t be interested? I said it’s nobody’s business about what she spends her money on. There’s a populary phrase here on the ‘bee: “no pay, no say.” Needs to be applied to Meghan Markle’s baby shower, too.
Post # 32
No, my reply to you is regarding what you said about “who cares”. If you’re a celebrity, people talking about your life comes with the territory. If celebrities wanna spend x amount of dollars on a baby shower, so be it if that’s truly their money (but expect criticism and being talked about). What are you talking about no pay, no say? Where did that come from? Horseradish :
Post # 33
What do you mean they can spend X if they want if is “truly their money”?
Post # 34
Meaning if it’s their real money and not stolen. I’m talking about in general terms for example those ceo’s who got in trouble years ago for throwing lavish parties which turned out to be from other people’s retirement funds, etc. It was heavily featured in US news. Why?
Post # 35
Did you think I was implying something else? See my reply above zzar45 :
Post # 36
kittycatcat : Interesting. Buckingham Palace can still exist and attract tourists without the monarchy ruling. Is there other support for the monarchy aside from that? Not being snarky, just genuinely curious 🙂
Post # 37
socalgirl1689 : From what I heard, Kate DID have a baby shower- thrown by her sister.
Also, the comments on Meghan’s jewelry are very interesting because people comment like Megham didn’t have a job and earn her own money for years before marrying Harry. Many of the pieces she wears are small and likely purchased on her own. Kate, on the other hand, did fuckall for 10 years while being William’s girlfriend and waiting on a ring.
I also saw something that pointed out that Kate gets more of her items “bespoke” where a certain design house will make something for her or customize something but it can’t be purchased retail so it’s more challenging to gauge the prices.
I’m really interested in the behind the scenes money and logistics of a lot of what they do.
Post # 38
I’m Australian and so part of the commonwealth. There seems to be alot of misunderstanding on here about how the royals are funded. This is a really good site to get an understanding and explains the royals funding streams (which is not solely tax payer funded). https://www.royal.uk/royal-finances-0
They are funded by the soveign grant which equates roughly to £0.69 per capita (as per 2018 rates).
Most important to remember is that the Queen actually does a job. Do you think she wants to haul her 90 year old arse out of bed on a cold rainy day to greet some asshat president? No she has to do it because it’s her job. And while she is supposed to remain impartial in regards to politics, her job is about diplomacy. Sometimes a royal audience can be the difference between a trade deal getting signed and not.
Tax payers also do not pay to upkeep her personal properties (like Balmoral) but yes tax payers pay for security whilst she is there just like how any other state dignitry has that covered. She makes personal income from these properties and pays taxes on them just like any other law abiding citizen. Infact the money that supports the rest of the royal family comes mostly from this pool.
A lot of royals also have real life jobs. And a lot of the senior royals (like Harry and Megan) had real life jobs before being tapped for more public roles. And unfortunately Kate and Megan as gross as it is have a job to create heirs. Imagine the pressure that is with the whole world watching you and criticising your every move. Sure they signed up for it but that doesn’t make it any easier.
I am sure that when the Royals visit commonwealth countries (Like Australia, Canada or New Zealand) thos countries are happy to benefit from the boost in economy. My friend owns a cafe in Sydney and the last royal visit saw their best days revenue since the last royal visit. Even during the olympics they didn’t do as much in a day. So the Royals reach also spreads beyong London and England in general.
Post # 39
- Wedding: February 2018 - UK
sweetsweetdee : No worries, didn’t sound snarky at all! 🙂 The royal properties would still be tourist attractions, but for some people it’s more exciting to go to a palace where a royal family is actually living/working. Things like the changing of the guard are always popular. The crowds throughout London whenever there’s a major royal event are astounding – surrounding the roads to watch the carriages for royal weddings, for example. We get lots of American tourists in particular who come to the UK because they are massive fans of the royals, and lots who travel specifically for these events.
As I said, personally I don’t really care about the royals either way, and most people in my circle feel the same way, but there are certainly lots of die hard royal fans in the UK. There’s lots of support for them, though I can’t personally tell you the appeal!
Post # 40
Yes, they aren’t just liked because they bring in money, I would say that’s one of the lesser reasons tbh. They are seen as national treasures, in that they represent the nation’s culture and heritage, they’re what makes our country different from many others and there’s hundreds if not thousands of years of tradition there. The Queen still works tirelessly for the country and takes her job very seriously, despite being in her 90’s, so that commands a lot of respect. William worked as a pilot for the Air Ambulance and Harry had a stint in the Army, so that helped to maintain their popularity, as well as all the charity work they do.
They’re super celebrities here, the nation has watched William and Harry grow up and people feel protective over them in a way, especially because of Diana dying. We have watched (not literally, but through the media) almost every monumental event in their lives from their parent’s wedding and their births to their own weddings and the birth of their own children. A lot of people feel invested in them because of that. It’s hard to explain to someone who isn’t from the UK, but they are popular for a variety of reasons which imo have very little to do with money and more national identity, tradition and the work they do for the country, as well as their celeb status and the way they present themselves (very classy, dignified, respectful, professional etc).
Post # 41
I like having a royal family. I think it’s such a long and amazing part of our history and the Queen does her job with great dignity. And I think it’s a very hard job. I certainly don’t envy them – I wouldn’t want their privileges given all the restrictions that come with it. I also think that the newspapers (especially the tabloids) like to say that The People are saying all sorts of things that aren’t true (or only believed by a minority). But people believe what they read. I don’t think I know anyone who gave their renovation of Frogmore any thought before reading the article in question. I’m certainly not upset – I thought, like others, that most of the funding for stuff like that came from the Crown Estates or private income and very little from the taxpayer.
I’m not personally a fan of baby-showers (although three of my friends have had one, so they seem to be gaining popularity). I didn’t think much about Megan having one though, as she is American and it’s part of her own culture. I think it was better that she had it in America though. It does seem from the media that she and Harry are trying to break away from Royal protocol quite a lot, but it’s hard to know what’s true and not true in the tabloids. I mostly avoid reading them.
Post # 42
I feel pretty indifferent, the whole taxpayers money/ monarchy bringing in income seems to balance itself out – but then I don’t really know the facts, it might not. I try to avoid dramatic newspaper headlines. Also, I try to remember that Meghan had her own damn money before she married Harry so as far as I am concerned she can wear as many bloody jewels as she wants ha ha