Good for Harry and Meghan.
Why does the UK still have a royal family at all? What’s the point? What happens to them when/if Scotland and Northern Ireland (or Wales?) separate from England post-Brexit?
Plenty of European countries still have a monarchy (generally those that haven’t had a successful revolution, eg Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain). So does Japan. And the queen is still the queen of Canada and Australia (and various other places). So Brexit is not really a relevant consideration.
Hi @doschicos, I don’t mind your question at all. I do feel guilty when I click on Daily Mail articles, yet I haven’t stopped doing so for two reasons. One is that coverage of the royals is far more extensive in the tabloids than elsewhere and I enjoy knowing about them. The other is that by reading the articles I can spot the genesis of the rumors that become ‘facts’, and that helps me to identify the BS when it works its way into more mainstream sources.
I do think about giving up reading them so as not to aid and abet their nefarious ways, but as of yet haven’t managed to do so.
Links to Twitter (or any social media) are not allowed.
£2.4 million. And you misspelled “British Taxpayer.” 
I suppose I wonder why they do anymore, either. What’s the benefit to the public?
Brexit is relevant only in that it may push Scotland and Northern Ireland out (and maybe Wales too, I hear there are nationalists there as well), which share that same royal family. When the Prince of Wales is head of a country that no longer includes Wales, it gets interesting to me.
Until then, I don’t care about them at all. I only made it through one season of The Crown and I slept through Diana and Charles’ wedding on TV 
I do like Meghan, though I hope her relationship with Harry is enough to make up for what was, IMO, a terrible life choice. Who wants to live under that microscope? Especially as much as the tabloids seem to hate her. And she had a career and a life. True love? I hope so.
My British in-laws steadfastly assert that the amount the Royals bring in from tourism vastly exceeds the amount they cost the taxpayers. I smile and nod, but can’t help but think of all the municipalities who claimed that about their $500 million stadiums and how that turned out for them. As someone with a financial background I have my doubts in both cases.
Best guess is that it has much more to do with tradition than financial considerations. Judging from the admittedly small sample size that our British relatives represent, tradition is much more important in Britain than here in the US. Very little consideration over whether something should be done, the matter is settled simply with the statement that this is how things are done. Period.
I don’t think it cost the Queen anything; it is my understanding the British taxpayer (through Sovereign Grant) funded the renovations, to the tune of about $3m
Frogmore is not private property; it is an official royal residence and part of the Crown Estate
Typically the only economic studies that show publicly funded sports facilities are worth the investment are those sponsored by the applicable teams/sports leagues/sports commissions. Presumably much of the tourist benefit of royalty would continue to exist without it (such as facilities which would still draw visitors based on historical significance and beauty).
“My British in-laws steadfastly assert that the amount the Royals bring in from tourism vastly exceeds the amount they cost the taxpayers”
This is absolutely believable.
I thought this was a good summary of how the British people expect the Royal Family to behave (from a paywalled article in the Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/be-careful-what-you-wish-for-meghan-and-harry-jkx82r0fc). Doesn’t seem like it would be a fit for most Hollywood stars:
“Yes, insults hurt: but Kate Middleton was insulted far longer than Meghan (“Waity Katie”, “doors to manual” etc) and had her pregnancy sickness mocked. She shut up, took her time, smiled, burnt off resentments on rollerskates and regattas, uses Easyjet and cheerfully talks up midwifery, sport, baking and toddlers romping on tree trunks. Doesn’t set the world on fire. Won’t make the Cambridges “bigger than the Queen” or excite Oprah. But it’s durable and British, and it works.”
I think it’s unfair to compare Kate to Meghan. One will be Queen, is the mother to the future King, and is married to the heir. The other is wife to the- no- longer-needed spare whose professional and financial future is an unknown. Very different paths. One is well defined, the other is one big question mark.
Add to that a toxic press and unparalleled racist hostility on social media (remember, the Palace actually started going after some of the biggest posters) – and is it any wonder these two decided to balk at the status quo?
After Harry was born, I read an article. The author was “writing” a letter to Princess Diana and it was humorous. It was about having the 2nd boy. The author had 2 boys and it spoke about all sorts of things and then got around to sibling rivalry. How to keep things fair, how kids compare.
It said something like “and just wait until Harry figures out he gets a new toy and William gets…England”.
Any article that compares mean-ness to Kate (which is awful as is all meanness) to the sickening racist garbage Meghan has endured is totally tone deaf.
1 Like
The big summit at Sandringham is today. I’ve read that Harry will be shown the tax consequences of his choices which he may not have considered.
My view is that anyone marrying into the royal family should appreciate royal history and traditions and not try to do a radical change.
I agree at some level on this, but racist attacks are out of bounds…no one should be expected to ignore that, or learn to live with it, or raise their kid in that environment. When marrying into a very different culture, or a Royal family, you don’t know what you don’t know.
Meghan said something to the effect that she expected to be under the microscope, but also thought that things would be fair. Racist attacks aren’t fair, and do not seem to have abated.
Someone from Hollywood expects things to be fair? Please. She should have read the script before she accepted the role. She didn’t last very long-maybe she could have perseved to see if things improved. I guess she is settled in Canada now and even had her dogs shipped over.
^^ Why so much hate?
2 Likes
No hate at all. Just stating the obvious. This isn’t some starry eyed naive teen on her first crush (see, Diana). This is a sophisticated and experienced woman in an often rough and sometimes tawdry industry who made an adult decision she appears to regret, after spending millions of taxpayer dollars. She can leave at any time, as she knows. There were plenty of other applicants for the job, I expect.
I feel bad for the Queen. Here she is 93 years old likely hoping for a peaceful old age and has to deal with Andrew and now this. She herself has always held duty above her personal wishes and her children and grandchildren have disappointed her. Maybe she was a ‘bad’ mother, I don’t know. But I still feel sorry for her.