Republican in the "don't want a royal family" sense?
I like the Queen. Not only are her family a significant tourist attraction, but it's nice to think that someone has the power to wade in and put a stop to parliament. Would be nice if, once in a while, she'd look at an election result and declare that she will not be asking [insert party leader here] to form a government on her behalf.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 16:23, 3 replies)

I always had a fantasy of her bitch-slapping Margaret Thatcher

Unfortunately, if she ever did refuse to invite the party leader to be PM, or in any other way interfere with the political process, it would trigger a constitutional crisis. Not going to happen.
(moon monkey is busy making memories worth repressing, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 16:37, closed)

If I were in her position
and her age, I'd do it for shits and giggles.
(Nicklock, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 17:01, closed)

^
This.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Wed 5 Dec 2012, 10:27, closed)

This is one significant reason that I am a republican
How on earth does she get to have that power just because of who her mum and dad were? - The only justifiable place to that lot is the history books.
( P-MONKE We're all fucked, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 17:02, closed)

(Shimrod, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 17:54, closed)

On the other hand, it's quite appropriate that a royal family is in charge of a country where power, assets, education etc. are generally inherited rather than earned.

( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 18:18, closed)

I'm not convinced that career politicians
are any sort of improvement.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Wed 5 Dec 2012, 10:15, closed)

Tourist attraction
How many tourists actually come to Britain to see the Royal Family? They all bugger off to Balmoral for the tourist season anyway.
(ubergeekian, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 18:22, closed)

It wouldn't make any difference if not one tourist showed up.
The country is still quids in from the agreement that the government gets the rent from the royal lands in return for an annual royal salary. If you got rid of the royal family tomorrow, they'd be about £160,000,000 a year richer over night, and that money would no longer be going to the treasury.
( The Awful Puppy Bakery is still bored, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 19:57, closed)

So the royal family all get paid by the tax payers.
That's a bit feudal.
(Misery McUglywife an attention seeking sociopathic fuckstain., Tue 4 Dec 2012, 20:51, closed)

That'd be a convincing argument if it wasn't wrong.
The crown estate belongs to the crown as an entity, not the monarch or the royal family. Get rid of the royals and it'd most likely revert to the state
(cs1ca, Tue 4 Dec 2012, 23:53, closed)