Australia gives Knighthood to Prince Philip - er, ... A Prince Philip appreciation thread

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

The monarchy are a brand which has huge appeal internationally, which sells papers by the millions and attracts interest from citizens of countries around the world, with an inevitable result in tourism. Most of it is fairytale fantasism, but thats by the by. The brand makes money, as successful brand always do.

Then the brand does not need the massive subsidies it currently receives from the state. QED and thanks for playing.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Now that we've done the money, let's look at corruption.

Sarah Ferguson in 2010-

In May 2010, Sarah was filmed by News of the World offering access to Prince Andrew for £500,000 by Mazher Mahmood, an undercover reporter posing as an Indian businessman.[31] On the video made as a documentary source for the story, which is publicly available, Sarah is heard to say that "£500,000 when you can, to me, open doors".[32] She is seen taking away a briefcase containing US$40,000 in cash.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah,_Duchess_of_York

Now, in the regular everyday world of peasants, we call that "bribery" and you go to prison. Oddly enough, that failed to occur in this case. Instead, good old Prince Andrew arranges for his paedophile sex-trafficking best buddy Jeffrey Epstein to throw money at her. So, a crime apparently covered up and smoothed over with (quite possibly) the proceeds of other crimes.

And, of course, the Countess of Wessex (yet another heavily subsidised mare I'd pass in the street without recognising in spite of the devastating appeal of the Royal Brand) got implicated in the same thing in 2002, in YET ANOTHER ROYAL-ENDORSED BUSINESS VENTURE THAT FAILED.

Y'see?

[Alexander's Horse]

Bugs/Laz if I am not mistaken is from the north of England - flat cap country.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Nope. South-West. Cider, tractors and mining country.

[kentonio]

Then the brand does not need the massive subsidies it currently receives from the state. QED and thanks for playing.

Well that's some pretty ****ing stupid logic. Something makes money so you should never need to invest in maintaining it? Well, well done.

[kentonio]

We manage to find plenty of people to gossip about without the government helping us out

Europe is so socialist the government even appoints people to be the target of gossip. We freedom-loving individualists in the United States managed to find a free-market solution in the form of hollywood at tmz.com.

Gossip which enriches private business rather than the country at large. Like most things in poverty and inequality loving America.

Kentonio, you should just come out and straight up admit that you're kinda fond of the cutesy aspect of having ~a monarchy~ and that it swells your national pride, kinda like the space shuttle or mars rover or B-2 do here. Except wait a minute. Those actually do things.

Setting aside the stupidity of the second bit (yes every country has something they're proud of which 'do things'), I am fond of what you call the cutesy aspect of the monarchy. Unlike many of my progressive brethren, I enjoy the links to the countries past and have absolutely no problem with feeling patriotism (despite the fact I'll never let that stand in the way of judging my countries actions). If however I thought people would genuinely be better off without the monarchy I'd support abolishing it, but I don't see the benefit of doing so. It adds to the countries rich culture.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Well that's some pretty ****ing stupid logic. Something makes money so you should never need to invest in maintaining it? Well, well done.

How do genuinely successful brands cover their maintenance cost?

A- They treat it as a normal and pretty predictable operating cost, to be covered by their sales proceeds.

They don't go to the taxpayer for handouts.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

I'm loving the irony of a supposed conservative arguing in favour of state subsidisation of an inefficient public body, by the way.

[kentonio]

How do genuinely successful brands cover their maintenance cost?

A- They treat it as a normal and pretty predictable operating cost, to be covered by their sales proceeds.

They don't go to the taxpayer for handouts.

The taxpayers are the ones chiefly gaining from the brand in terms of that massive tourism boost. Or do you just want something for nothing like Americans usually accuse socialists of?

[kentonio]

I'm loving the irony of a supposed conservative arguing in favour of state subsidisation of an inefficient public body, by the way.

Oh a supposed conservative? I am slain.

[Aeson]

They don't go to the taxpayer for handouts.

Sadly, not always true.

[Aeson]

You know what would draw more tourists than having royals in Buckingham Palace? Having furries pretending to be giant rats living in a palace. (also #12, #14, #28, and a few others ...)

Perhaps more importantly, look at all the palaces that aren't occupied by living royalty on the list. Then find try to find a British Palace. If anything, the royals being there is keeping people away

[kentonio]

Visitor numbers for Buckingham Palace are hard to calculate because vast numbers of people go there just to look at it from the outside, and watch the Changing of the Guard. You don't need to buy a ticket, you can just walk up on the street.

[Hauldren Collider]

I'm loving the irony of a supposed conservative arguing in favour of state subsidisation of an inefficient public body, by the way.

As has been observed many times, Kentonio is not an actual conservative.

[Hauldren Collider]

Now that we've done the money, let's look at corruption.

Sarah Ferguson in 2010-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah,_Duchess_of_York

Now, in the regular everyday world of peasants, we call that "bribery" and you go to prison. Oddly enough, that failed to occur in this case. Instead, good old Prince Andrew arranges for his paedophile sex-trafficking best buddy Jeffrey Epstein to throw money at her. So, a crime apparently covered up and smoothed over with (quite possibly) the proceeds of other crimes.

And, of course, the Countess of Wessex (yet another heavily subsidised mare I'd pass in the street without recognising in spite of the devastating appeal of the Royal Brand) got implicated in the same thing in 2002, in YET ANOTHER ROYAL-ENDORSED BUSINESS VENTURE THAT FAILED.

Y'see?

No but you don't understand, Bugs. It's important that the Royals be held to a different standard than everyone else because the Royal Family is a symbol of unity for the British people.