Jump to content
IGNORED

Matchday thread; Harry vs Meghan

myol'man

By myol'man
in General Chat

Recommended Posts

ChippenhamRed

ChippenhamRed

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, mozo said:

The old 'tourism' myth again! The French get more tourism than us and people go to chateaus in their droves despite the lack of royals. Don't believe the hype!

If we removed the royal family, we would NOT lose tourism revenue. In fact we could open more of the palace and castle to the public.

Maybe the French would have even more tourism if they still had a royal family. Actually, in their case the revolution - Les Miserables, etc - is actually part of the attraction.

But we’re not France, and I think part of the unique tourist appeal of our country is its Royal Family. The rights and wrongs of that are a different debate, but this debate started with a purely financially-driven statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stortz

Stortz

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, phantom said:

I guess it could be worse - it could come down to being the biggest tyrant or having the biggest army?

Anyway apologies, this isn't the thread for political debate

It also has no place on the football board, please get it moved  @phantom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Admin
Maesknoll Red

Maesknoll Red

Posted
  • Admin
Posted

Whilst I have no interest in this match, it will bring in the crowds, especially from America, for years to come, wait until they start a junior academy and that will get the yanks continuing to come in their droves.  I blame BS (Buckingham Sport) they have ruined the family team feel of the Royals and make them a commercial, corporate, soulless entity, but their popularity is rising.  The introduction of an American into the team is a clever, if not cynical move to keep the fans flocking in, even if she won’t have the same class as those around her.  

I think the knocking of the Royal family is a bit unfair, after all they could have cast the ginger bastard child out and covered it up, but they elected to keep him and raise him as their own, whilst his mother paid the price....... She was either naive and stupid or very brave, either way she couldn’t rub their noses in it twice, a ginger was bad enough, but if the next one was a Muslim........

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mozo

mozo

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Maybe the French would have even more tourism if they still had a royal family. Actually, in their case the revolution - Les Miserables, etc - is actually part of the attraction.

But we’re not France, and I think part of the unique tourist appeal of our country is its Royal Family. The rights and wrongs of that are a different debate, but this debate started with a purely financially-driven statement.

What evidence is there that tourism would be impacted by lack of monarchy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChippenhamRed

ChippenhamRed

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, mozo said:

What evidence is there that tourism would be impacted by lack of monarchy?

Well you can't really evidence something that hasn't happened, but judging by the amount of royal-related tat sold in London, and the vast numbers of world - particularly American - media currently descended on Windsor, I don't think it's much of a stretch to suggest that the royal family has a positive impact on the number of people visiting this country.

A theory only, but it can only ever be a theory until the revolution happens!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mozo

mozo

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Well you can't really evidence something that hasn't happened, but judging by the amount of royal-related tat sold in London, and the vast numbers of world - particularly American - media currently descended on Windsor, I don't think it's much of a stretch to suggest that the royal family has a positive impact on the number of people visiting this country.

A theory only, but it can only ever be a theory until the revolution happens!

It won't happen. The English are a strangely submissive people and tamely accept inequality.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ivorguy

Ivorguy

Posted
Posted

What a sad bitter little thread

The institution of a Parliamentary Monarchy has served us well since 1688.

Of all major European countries we are the only one not to have suffered one or more revolutions and been forced to live under Fascism or Marxism : Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Russia.

The Monarchy, with no political power, has been the glue that has kept our society and political institutions stable to the benefit of us all

To lose the Monarchy for a Presidential system with some superannuated politician elected would be a horribly backward step.  When we tried a Republic it ended with Oliver Cromwell being given the title, His Highness The Lord Protector, a king by any other name.  The regime he established lasted less than two years, when his Army begged the king to return to a rapturous welcome from ordinary people from Dover, where Charles landed, to London itself.  No His Highness The President Tony Blair, thank you very much

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anglo-Welsh

Anglo-Welsh

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Ivorguy said:

What a sad bitter little thread

The institution of a Parliamentary Monarchy has served us well since 1688.

Of all major European countries we are the only one not to have suffered one or more revolutions and been forced to live under Fascism or Marxism : Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Russia.

The Monarchy, with no political power, has been the glue that has kept our society and political institutions stable to the benefit of us all

To lose the Monarchy for a Presidential system with some superannuated politician elected would be a horribly backward step.  When we tried a Republic it ended with Oliver Cromwell being given the title, His Highness The Lord Protector, a king by any other name.  The regime he established lasted less than two years, when his Army begged the king to return to a rapturous welcome from ordinary people from Dover, where Charles landed, to London itself.  No His Highness The President Tony Blair, thank you very much

 

 

 

Well said. Reading comments on here and on other sites makes me extremely sad.

The Royal Family, the history and all of the associated institutions and good causes they champion are something that should be highly celebrated by our nation, not mocked.

Yes there is a history of privilege and perhaps 'white' tradition, mixed with religion, that isn't to everyone's taste, but I for one am grateful we have the monarchy.

The argument that they are 'parasites' who live off tax payer money is a joke - tourism argument aside, they are working almost 7 days a week all year round doing things to help boost our country's profile, economy, trade etc. When a visiting foreign dignitary comes over, it's all down to the Queen for the pomp and circumstance and ceremony to impress these people and encourage links and finance with Britain. I think last year the Colombian President and his wife came over. The Palace hosted a luncheon, decked The Mall out in Colombian flags, full grand procession with horses and carriage, all undertaken by the Queen which resulted in a new multi-million pound trade agreement with the South Americans. 

Likewise they inspire many ordinary people and generate such good vibes when they visit anything from Churches and Community Projects to Factories.

They also help boost the profile of anything they touch, be it the small grime radio station Harry visited last year (who's listeners trebled overnight) to the small Welsh jeans factory that Meghan, by wearing their brand, has helped make millions, and in the process employ loads of local people, overnight.

I think the buzz surrounding the wedding and the crowds who turned out clearly show that the trolls are a minority. The royals are loved by the majority of this nation and there is nothing wrong in celebrating and showcasing our country to the world on such a happy occasion.

The need for people to be so vocal and negative about the Royal Family/The Wedding, namely online without fear of reprisal is sickening. Seems it's trendy to be openly anti anything British, Christian and Royal these days. Very sad times, but that's the way it's always been in this country, and thankfully most of us aren't like that. The royals are still here centuries on and long may that continue. God Save The Queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Gasbuster

The Gasbuster

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

What a sad bitter little thread

The institution of a Parliamentary Monarchy has served us well since 1688.

Of all major European countries we are the only one not to have suffered one or more revolutions and been forced to live under Fascism or Marxism : Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Russia.

The Monarchy, with no political power, has been the glue that has kept our society and political institutions stable to the benefit of us all

To lose the Monarchy for a Presidential system with some superannuated politician elected would be a horribly backward step.  When we tried a Republic it ended with Oliver Cromwell being given the title, His Highness The Lord Protector, a king by any other name.  The regime he established lasted less than two years, when his Army begged the king to return to a rapturous welcome from ordinary people from Dover, where Charles landed, to London itself.  No His Highness The President Tony Blair, thank you very much

 

 

 

Can't like this post enough.

Well said, Ivor !! :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Gasbuster

The Gasbuster

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Anglo-Welsh said:

Well said. Reading comments on here and on other sites makes me extremely sad.

The Royal Family, the history and all of the associated institutions and good causes they champion are something that should be highly celebrated by our nation, not mocked.

Yes there is a history of privilege and perhaps 'white' tradition, mixed with religion, that isn't to everyone's taste, but I for one am grateful we have the monarchy.

The argument that they are 'parasites' who live off tax payer money is a joke - tourism argument aside, they are working almost 7 days a week all year round doing things to help boost our country's profile, economy, trade etc. When a visiting foreign dignitary comes over, it's all down to the Queen for the pomp and circumstance and ceremony to impress these people and encourage links and finance with Britain. I think last year the Colombian President and his wife came over. The Palace hosted a luncheon, decked The Mall out in Colombian flags, full grand procession with horses and carriage, all undertaken by the Queen which resulted in a new multi-million pound trade agreement with the South Americans. 

Likewise they inspire many ordinary people and generate such good vibes when they visit anything from Churches and Community Projects to Factories.

They also help boost the profile of anything they touch, be it the small grime radio station Harry visited last year (who's listeners trebled overnight) to the small Welsh jeans factory that Meghan, by wearing their brand, has helped make millions, and in the process employ loads of local people, overnight.

I think the buzz surrounding the wedding and the crowds who turned out clearly show that the trolls are a minority. The royals are loved by the majority of this nation and there is nothing wrong in celebrating and showcasing our country to the world on such a happy occasion.

The need for people to be so vocal and negative about the Royal Family/The Wedding, namely online without fear of reprisal is sickening. Seems it's trendy to be openly anti anything British, Christian and Royal these days. Very sad times, but that's the way it's always been in this country, and thankfully most of us aren't like that. The royals are still here centuries on and long may that continue. God Save The Queen.

Top man, well said !! :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Septic Peg

Septic Peg

Posted
Posted
On 18/05/2018 at 21:02, Harry said:

Well, I certainly ain’t no never bin called posh before mind. 

Or are you suggesting I’m a ginger? 

Oi. There's F all wrong with gingers. 

Harry just bagged himself a 10, Ed Sheeran has women throwing themselves at him daily and Ron Weasley ain't doing too bad for himself either.

Do not be gingerist. #LoveTheOrange #GingerLove

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harry

Harry

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Septic Peg said:

Oi. There's F all wrong with gingers. 

Harry just bagged himself a 10, Ed Sheeran has women throwing themselves at him daily and Ron Weasley ain't doing too bad for himself either.

Do not be gingerist. #LoveTheOrange #GingerLove

I’m not gingerist. Some of my best friends are ginger 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Admin
phantom

phantom

Posted
  • Admin
Posted
4 hours ago, Septic Peg said:

Harry just bagged himself a 10, Ed Sheeran has women throwing themselves at him daily and Ron Weasley ain't doing too bad for himself either.

and I'd bet money that not one of those mentioned would have their current partner if they had a "normal" job 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Septic Peg

Septic Peg

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, phantom said:

and I'd bet money that not one of those mentioned would have their current partner if they had a "normal" job 

Well, if Harry wants to bin off Meghan and give up his royal titles and be a commoner like the rest of us, he can defo hit me up. Call me if you see this Hazza. Mr Peg is a ginge too but he could be traded in if necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...