News2 mins ago
Prince Philip
141 Answers
admitted to hospital, bbc1 news.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anneasquith. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//come the revolution...//
but there doesn't seem to be much sign of it yet. for all the noise that the royal naysayers make about privileged spongers, waste of money, etc etc, there doesn't seem to be much evidence of them taking up their democratic rights to actually do anything about it.
it's no good wasting energy whinging about the royals in forums like this, that isn't going to change anything. if a monarchy is so abhorrently poisonous, why aren't the armchair republicans out there lobbying, campaigning, and actually voting for change?
but there doesn't seem to be much sign of it yet. for all the noise that the royal naysayers make about privileged spongers, waste of money, etc etc, there doesn't seem to be much evidence of them taking up their democratic rights to actually do anything about it.
it's no good wasting energy whinging about the royals in forums like this, that isn't going to change anything. if a monarchy is so abhorrently poisonous, why aren't the armchair republicans out there lobbying, campaigning, and actually voting for change?
We shall all miss him when he is gone, that's for sure.
http://
http://
Not sure where the 58p comes from but its hardly the point. We are stuck with a Monarchy. We had our chance to get rid of it in the past, just like other places around the globe but we choose to stay with an unelected head of state.
Lets get these other members of the extended Royal family to do their bit and help their Mum and Dad in their old age. Princess Ann was down in Cornwall yesterday :::
http://
Lets get these other members of the extended Royal family to do their bit and help their Mum and Dad in their old age. Princess Ann was down in Cornwall yesterday :::
http://
The thing that gets me about, "Republicans" is, do they really think that doing away with the Monarchy would be a great[i thing and would stop this heinous waste of taxpayers money?
A President would cost us much, much more and bring not a penny into the country, as the Monarchy does every year.
Our system is [i]the[i] most stable in the world, [i]because] of the Monarchy.
A President would cost us much, much more and bring not a penny into the country, as the Monarchy does every year.
Our system is [i]the[i] most stable in the world, [i]because] of the Monarchy.
other countries pay for their presidents, so I don't see how sacking the queen would save a lot of money. And while electing her might satisfy republican principles, in practice it would be fairly pointless. We don't have a strong executive presidency like France or the US; our head of state is largely a ceremonial figure like Germany's, and as far as I can see ours provides a lot more entertainment than theirs (who even knows who the German president is?)
We could I suppose change the whole system to make it more like the French (the French presidency has a secret budget) or the Americans, where squabbles in Congress routinely threaten to close down government funds.
But I say if ours works, don't fix it.
We could I suppose change the whole system to make it more like the French (the French presidency has a secret budget) or the Americans, where squabbles in Congress routinely threaten to close down government funds.
But I say if ours works, don't fix it.
jno...I find myself reluctantly agreeing with you. Liz has been a good Queen and has given us some stability at least. I'm not sure if the British character would suit us as a Republic, much as the undemocratic nature of an unelected head of state offends the rationalist inner me.
Perhaps in a few more generations things will change, long after I am gone !
Perhaps in a few more generations things will change, long after I am gone !
