Any comments on the statement that the queen only cost us 65p each last year "all 65 million of us"?

Question

Any comments on the statement that the queen only cost us 65p each last year "all 65 million of us"?

Answer 1

Considering the collection of criminals and lunatics that get themselves made heads of state around the world, our royal family look good by comparison. At 66p they are excellent value for money, much more so than anything the government does

Answer 2

i thought it was 66p aswell, but anyhow, wouldnt the total amount of money be better spent on something that we actually need rather than a bunch of scroungers who are no better, (just better off) than someone on income support...that £40 million  per year could go into creating more jobs or education, or just replace a small amount of tax of the fuel

Answer 3

Alt designs by British citizens to  reflect citizen trades.

Computer graphics or  animation programs help. Art Graphics as well. Corporations new Aristocracy though and they have more power than The Queen. Same thing like guillotines in French Revolution could happen to them .

Those who fail to remember history doomed to repeat. Perhaps Corp types see themselves as different but is anyone.

Answer 4

Each government dept. has to contribute towards the upkeep of the monarchy there various palaces, castles and other private residences there travel, security and other expenses come out of the budgets of these various depts the total that is spent on the monarchy is never revealed, it is very cleverly hidden in the outgoings of these depts.  You would have to be a mathematical genius to find it

Answer 5

It's not actually true though, is it? Because, of course, the Royal Family also generates money for the economy. The government figures show that the profit the country makes from having the Royal Family is several orders of magnitude greater than the cost.

Answer 6

yes i have a comment - i thought it was 66p? and then its the royal family not just the queen

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7477222.st...

second paragraph "The total is equivalent to 66p per person in the UK "

edit : as you say yourself there are 65 million of us , therefore a penny difference in the total make a h**l of a lot of difference.

did you not check your facts?

Answer 7

people, time to get over this king/queen sh*i*t.why are you supporting these historical twits that simply suck out your money.maybe time to grow up !

Answer 8

Personally, I think there is a lot of hoo-hah over nothing in this statement.  We expect HMQ, as Head of State, to perform many duties, and accordingly, she has many obligations and expenses.  So why moan at having to fork out a few pennies each?

Most of the moans and groans about the cost of the Monarchy, come from the anti-monarchists, who would like to pack HMQ and all the Windsors off to some other place, and have a republic here.  

And if you had that, precisely how much do you think a president- say someone like Blair!- would cost you?  I mean, come on- imagine how much such a president's wife might then cost you, too!

But, now in the 21st century, perhaps we do need to review matters with HMQ.  For instance, she could ask for the return of the Crown estates, and so enjoy their revenues, and then she could charge the nation properly for the duties she performs on our behalf.  Of course, we would pay more, and I have no doubt that she would be much better off.  

Of course, she would need a good agent to negotiate a proper deal, but I am sure that Jonathan Ross could recommend someone suitable from amongst his connexion!

Then all the moans could stop, at last; we would properly pay for what we get, and get what we pay for!  A win-win situation, and much cheaper than Blair as president!

Answer 9

Oh come on spare a thought for the pauper.....she only has £320 million now and apparently has to make do and mend.

PS

A comment for the honourable gentleman who posted just after me namely mr rosenkrantz. If you believe that c**p about the royal family generating loads of cash towards our economy you are really being naive. They take way way way more than they give. Ask any economist this is fact. They are quite litereally a waste of money.