Quicksilvera
Well-known member
So you did make them up?
The republicanism thread.
- Thread starter Scrug
- Start date
El Guapo
Well-known member
This thread could have waited until tomorrow really couldn’t it?
Some are monarchist; some are republican. Each should be intelligent enough to respect the others viewpoint and discuss the subject in a reasonable manner. This intelligence and respect should lead to an understanding of time and place. For me, this past 9-10 days is not the time to have the discussion.
With the greatest of respect to the OP, and the other republicans, today is not the day.
Some are monarchist; some are republican. Each should be intelligent enough to respect the others viewpoint and discuss the subject in a reasonable manner. This intelligence and respect should lead to an understanding of time and place. For me, this past 9-10 days is not the time to have the discussion.
With the greatest of respect to the OP, and the other republicans, today is not the day.
Last edited:
JM14
Well-known member
Have a look yourself, from 20 seconds looking on Google
3 billion have never used the internet
1 billion don’t have access to a phone
Under 2 billion have a tv
Also worth noting that it started through the night for anyone living in north/South America and was a working day for the majority of the world.
But it’s reported that 4/5 billion watched the funeral?
Very believable
Last edited:
RedAsABeetroot
Well-known member
To be fair people have complained about disrespectful posts on other threads so I'm not posting on this one.
Randy
Well-known member
Don't forget the fruit content
BaronSmoggie
Well-known member
If you watched and heard the comment in context, it more was about the feeling of comfort people around the world got from thinking of her as 'their Queen'. Not a reference to empire building.
BaronSmoggie
Well-known member
I envy those people. Imagine not once ever having Murdoch's poison reverberate around your ears.
Randy
Well-known member
Have a look yourself, from 20 seconds looking on Google
3 billion have never used the internet
1 billion don’t have access to a phone
Under 2 billion have a tv
Also worth noting that it started through the night for anyone living in north/South America and was a working day for the majority of the world.
But it’s reported that 4/5 billion watched the funeral?
Very believable
Internet and social media users in the world 2023 | Statista
How many people use the internet in 2023? Several billion individuals who have access to the internet are social media users too.
www.statista.com
As of April 2022, there were more than five billion internet users worldwide, which is 63.1 percent of the global population. Of this total, 4.7 billion or 59 percent of the world's population were social media users.
Stands to reason if you have internet access you have access to live video feeds in this day and age.
From the same website,
In 2021, 5.36 billion people worldwide will be TV users, according to the Advertising & Media Outlook. The number of global TV viewers is set to steadily increase, and reach approximately 5.68 billion people by 2026.
83.40% of the world's population has a smartphone ( apps, access to the internet etc), that figure increases to 91.08% when you include ALL mobile phones.
4.02 Billion More Phones Than People In The World!
In 2024, the number of smartphone users worldwide is 6.93 Billion, which translates to 85% of the world’s population owning a smartphone.
www.bankmycell.com
Also you forgot to mention that the current population figure for the planet is nearly 8 billion people, so 1 billion not having access to a phone doesn't stack up.
Even if you only clicked on footage for a brief few minutes it'll more than likely count as a 'view'.
swordtrombonefish
Well-known member
Oh wow statistical oneupmanship.
If we are going to have this discussion, keep it civil please. Abusive posts have already been dealt with and someone who should know better is having a day or two on the naughty step.
HarryVegas
Well-known member
I didn't watch today, or listen to it. Why would I? She was just someone else's grandma to me and I don't attend funerals of people I didn't know.
parmoboy
Well-known member
I can see why many regard having a Royal family as archaic, particularly when you consider how we've progressed as a society, but I also see the good in having a head of state, particularly one that is not political.
It's all well and good replacing them, but what with. A president? Someone political, so it becomes another post for politicians to aim for?
One thing the monarchy has is history which no replacement would have. They also have international respect and recognition, that isn't automatically replaceable in an elected or appointed post.
But they need a serious shakeup. Phase out the majority of titles and payouts till we have a small royal family with a more modest estate. Tax them so that gradually over a period of many years the vast wealth is in the hands of the state, not the family. Allow them to keep enough to maintain a royal lifestyle, but their land and money should work for the people they claim to be "proud to serve".
In short, a streamlined royal family for ceremonial duties and international relations is something which I could just about accept.
Or Nationalise them. Put their estate in the hands of the public, put them on a fair wage. I would have no problem with a constitutional monarchy under those circumstances.
Long live the King
Chaps it's the republicanism thread! Not the time or place for these kind of comments, show a bit of respect!
Uwefuchs
Well-known member
I've noticed on these discussions that when people ask why the royals are loved in this country no one can really explain why, when its asked what good they've done for the country no one really knows.
I think people have never known anything different and just accept them as a part of British culture, regardless of whether they are good or bad for the country.
The only real tangible defence or positive I hear about the royals is the tourism factor but without a royal family would we see an end to tourism in this country? Even without them we'd have the history of the royals which would be a tourist attraction in itself.
I'm not saying get rid but as others have suggested I'd love to see a real unbiased piece of analysis about their cost to us as taxpayers vs what they bring into the country.
I think people have never known anything different and just accept them as a part of British culture, regardless of whether they are good or bad for the country.
The only real tangible defence or positive I hear about the royals is the tourism factor but without a royal family would we see an end to tourism in this country? Even without them we'd have the history of the royals which would be a tourist attraction in itself.
I'm not saying get rid but as others have suggested I'd love to see a real unbiased piece of analysis about their cost to us as taxpayers vs what they bring into the country.
With a lot of people it’s not the monarchy itself. It is the fact that it acts as the glue that holds constitutional arrangements in place which fail the people and allows no brake on the executive, and a voting system which not democratic, in fact, we don’t actually live in a modern democracy.
Glover_elbow
Well-known member
If we could strip then of 95% of the assets they acquired then I would be happy for them to them stay as head of state.