About 50 countries have monarchs of some form or other (some by the same monarch admittedly) so facts do not support this statement.
They would vote to keep it because they've been told it's good since they were born and all views to the contrary are dismissed. Windsor indoctrination pervades all branches of society.
Today hasn't all been great for the royals. I've just found out one direction will be singing for them later tonight.
So on here we have people who want a republic, and also dislike Cameron. Which do you want then, Queen Elizabeth or President Cameron?
As for the cost, its been proven that a president costs more than a monarch.
President Nathen Cameron sounds betterSo on here we have people who want a republic, and also dislike Cameron. Which do you want then, Queen Elizabeth or President Cameron?
As for the cost, its been proven that a president costs more than a monarch.
So on here we have people who want a republic, and also dislike Cameron. Which do you want then, Queen Elizabeth or President Cameron?
As for the cost, its been proven that a president costs more than a monarch.
The 'proof' depends on the nations you wish to compare. If Dave were the man elected leader (unlikely that he'd get it but still), I'd have no problem with it. Why? Because at least he'd be there by popular vote rather than surname.
Well Cameron, Brown, Blair, Thatcher all saw themselves as these great world leaders, swanning around the world, using Britains declining power to feed their own egos. Do you really think any of those politicians are going to be a small time president? They would want to be treated like Barrack Obarma (who certainly costs a lot more than the Queen).
Now I'm not an out & out monarchist, but I think we need to look at practicality rather than principle.
Do I think its right that I, or any of us can never be the head of state of the UK? No, in a democracy anyone should be able to become head of state.
If I was setting up a new country of course there would be no monarchy. But our monarchy brings in millions in revenue through tourism, the Queen and Duke are easily the hardest working members of the establishment, and it gives our country and identitiy.
In principle a country should be a republic. In practice however a monarchy in Britain works very well.
I disagree with you so strongly I'm not meriting this a response.
Apart from that one
It's President Milliband that scares me
50p a year to keep nasel Ed away from head of state seems like good value for money to me!
I wonder how many of those who moan about the undemocraticness (is that a word?) of the monarchy bother to vote in local & national elections?
Out of 210+ countries? So about 1/4 of the world's countries... So the majority do not have monarchs, their epoch is over.
No many countries have military led dictatorships.
I don't low why people are saying 'President 'X'' sounds bad? At the end of the day whether David Cameron is PM or President, he still exercises power... President is just a title.
50p a year to keep nasel Ed away from head of state seems like good value for money to me!
I wonder how many of those who moan about the undemocraticness (is that a word?) of the monarchy bother to vote in local & national elections?
So on here we have people who want a republic, and also dislike Cameron. Which do you want then, Queen Elizabeth or President Cameron?
As for the cost, its been proven that a president costs more than a monarch.
See im a great believer in you only change something if its going to make it better. How will getting rid of the queen & replacing her with a politician make my life better?
Yeah - like we have so much ability to effect things now - who voted for a coalition ?
We give up our freedom for the right to mark a cross on a piece of paper once every 5 years. In reality government is decided by the few constituencies that actually can change. I've had Robinson for years as my MP ~ can anyone explain how that is a choice.
Economically speaking a lot more money would be going the public's way in a large part due to the duchies and Crown Estates being handed back to the state. Furthermore with places like the Palace being free to visit all year round, tourism would likely benefit and bring more money in to the UK. Why are you so in favour of having a hereditary leader? The idea that a Windsor is 'better' than 60 million people just because they are Windsors should have everyone's blood boiling-on the contrary, few here have a problem with it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?