Why do the English people need a Royal family .???

Question

There are a few arguments as to why,but i think they are flawed,argument 1.English people in general want to keep their disappearing identity .by hanging on to a Royal family.but the Royals are all German descendants.nothing English about them,argument 2.It is said Royals bring in the tourists
thats is nonsence,people come to UK because,Historically it is a god sent .architecture,historic buildings and great places to visit, meet the Brittish people,to see a nation who boast of wealth harmony in their multi culture society,Americans come for the reasons above also they get a confort of being near their descendants,
they visit Buckingham palice .we all do and we will continue to visit it ,who ever occupies it ,it's the buldings that count ,the architecture,not the people who live in it,cost of keeping a royal family ,out weighs the benefit contributed ,just my thinking , i am all for republic
but thats me,I will not worship a humanbeing no mater how rich we make them..

To Pedigree..what do you mean ..we have a monarch and a prime minister ..elected government principal minister o a souvereign state
But the laws of the land must be obeyed .behavein accordance with a general principle..
if you dont like the European laws applied to us in UK..you have a vote.. then use your vote wisley..

To Pedigree..what do you mean ..we have a monarch and a prime minister ..elected government principal minister o a souvereign state
But the laws of the land must be obeyed .behavein accordance with a general principle..
if you dont like the European laws applied to us in UK..you have a vote.. then use your vote wisley..

to my brain hurta..how often do you get to see any royals on your visits to UK probably none ..just like us residents ..
The buildings and all the structures will still be here.. if the royals decide to go..

Answer 1

Being british myself i totally back you, i have no idea what the so called royals do and to be honest i can't even name them all. I am also ver dis-interested when they show up in the news with petty little stories. Republic sounds good, however left to blair it would be a dictatorship. Thou can not smoke in public places, thou shall go bomb iraq and afghanistan with america as they want their oil security. thou shall have ID cards and not drive cars on a tuesday.

Answer 2

Okay first I am going to correct you. She is not the English Queen but the Queen of the United Kingdom and her other Commonwealth Realms. The Queen does not have to pay taxes under law however she has done voluntarily since the early 90s on all private property. The Queen only gets money from the tax payer to fulfil her official duties and to maintain the properties which are owned by the monarch but in the trust of the nation. She gets this money by surrendering all profits from the Crown Estates. The Profits from the Crown Estates were last year about £220 million ($343million) and the total cost of maintaining the monarchy stands at about £40 million ($62 million) which means the British tax payer get a profit from the Monarchy of about £180 million ($280 million). So as you can see we gain from having the Monarchy. Even if you did not take into account the Crown Estates the Monarch only costs about 66p ($1) per person which would buy me one can of coca cola a year. Or if I lived to be 100: £66 better off. I call that a bargain for such an amazing Head of State.

Answer 3

Americans always make the mistake of assuming that a democracy modelled in the style of the USA is the only form of good government. However, their government is based entirely on the UK model, and they have simply replaced the Queen, with a President, as head of state.

Furthermore, the American system is corrupt, in that only millionaires can run for office, or corrupt politicians in the pockets of millionaire corporations. Since the 1950 McCarthy Witch Hunts it is also impossible for any Left wing politics to get established - thus it is a far cry from any true democracy.

The majority of votes are held by a few institutions, not the people, and it’s a good old-fashioned race to the post. The Electoral College system is not a Democracy, and it puts a head of state in the seat for four years.

The UK system is expensive, and I would favour the reduction of our large royal family down to something similar to Belgium. However, it is a far more consistent method of government. The Queen as head of state is keep out of the majority of debate, and has a veto, to chair any issues that cannot be sorted out in the upper house, the Lords.

Thus we have an elected group of politicians, who fight the policy out. A group of Lords who are from all parts of the political spectrum, and are constant, so do not spin with political whims - they amend the policies, and protect us from a government rushing through unpopular policies without debate.

Finally we have a head of state, divorced from the policy making, which is a constant, stable figure which represents and mediates with the international representatives of the world. It may not be the best system in the world, it is the most copied however, and it works - Just because it is different.

Answer 4

We don't need a lot of things but we love having them. You can wear your pyjamas every where that's very comfortable; you can survive on eating the same food everyday etc so why would you need anything else?

I understand that many people worship the American way thinking that the whole world should live it. I'm not saying that it's not a great country but imagine how boring the world would be if we would all like the same things. All we see everywhere were exactly the same, the only advantage would be that you'd never have to travel again because every country would look just like America if the President had his way.

The Royal Family is a very valuable asset to Britain, not to mention the charity work they have been doing for so long. I think it's foolish for anyone to rubbish the good things in the world.

If we appreciate all the fine things in life instead of being so mean, righteous and critical, the world would be a more peaceful place.

.............................................

Answer 5

Maybe because so many of their rich traditions have disappeared. Perhaps because the Church is almost non-existent now. There are so many different religions, ethnic groups and so on in UK now that perhaps it's the one thing that still unites most of us?? It's the pomp and circumstance - the connection with the past. Personally I dont feel I need them! but every nation needs a focal point, something to unite them - perhaps the royal family is ours?

Answer 6

If only for historical reasons, the Royal Family should stay. I am an American of Italian, German and Dutch decent, so it has nothing to do with my personal heritage. What woudl take the place of the Royals if they were to go away? They woudl still be extensively wealthy. Who woudl own Buckinham Palace? The Crown Jewels? Their is a great deal of tradition with the British Royal Family. They are an institution of worldly renown which woudl be a lost to everyone if the British were to see fit to disguard. It is their choice to make though.

Answer 7

I totally agree for the many reasons stated by you and the others answering your question. Also, the royal family is merely a figurehead government. The Prime Minister and Parliament hold most of the power.

HOWEVER, Here in the USA, we have a sort of royal family; the Kennedy's. Most Americans, except for me, thrive on every aspect of the Kennedys' lives. For many Americans, its like the end of the world when one of them dies.

Answer 8

the only problem with being a republic is that you end up with a politician as head of state. the only example of a good president i can think of is Mary Robinson. after all England is now basically a historic theme park and financial centre. what would Disney world be like without Mikey mouse. the royals are basically harmless and reasonably cheap and they don' kick up to much of a fuss as long as you let them mess around with their horses and play toy soldiers. i used to think that the royals played a pivotal role in underpinning the class system, but that position is now occupied by brain dead celebrities and conspicuous consumption.

Answer 9

Lose the Royal Family then you will lose millions in tourist money. Having visited their twice, I know that the country has more to offer, but I think most people go to see Buckingham Palace, the Tower, and so forth.

Answer 10

We don't need a Royal Family, we don't need Presidents either. We have a Royal family because we are a democracy and we have decided to keep our Royal Family. The Queen serves us and our nation, the Royal Family bring in more money through tourism then what we spend on them (You need to check your facts). As for your argument about where they descended from, who cares? All the Royal Families in Europe descend from the Germanic empire.

You have your republic, go live in one! if you do, you don't have to live in England!

Can you think of anything else that signifies a nation in a single icon? See the Royal Family you think, British, Englishness, warm sunny days, cream teas, leather against willow, politeness and doing whats right. Thats why we roll them out at every state occassion, visits from other nations etc

Think of a president, what do you think of? Idiot, moron, buffoon, corruption, McDonald's, Enron, poor services and high taxes. When I think of G W Bush I think of a mumbling idiot, who's family have traded with terrorist to make themselves rich.

No I'll have my Royal Family thanks, there not perfect, but there far better then any President.

Answer 11

We don`t need one, we want one. Being a sovereign nation has many advantages over a republic. Countries with a royal family are far less likely to have civil war or disturbance. They are a good morale booster for the country and are of great interest to foreigners. Anyway, without them who would we have to complain about!!