So what does everything think of "The Engagement"?

That was very funny Thanks for sharing it!

I love the father of the bride. You know he's loving that he got that father-daughter dance after he thought he never would get the chance.

I'm quite sure you'd be wrong about that.

I'm interested in the finances. This wedding will bring more money into the British economy than it will cost. That is to the benefit of the taxpayer.

Bring on the giant tourist attraction - the Royal Family. It is Britain's version of Disneyland. It's one of the only moneymakers left for the country.

But my amounts are not entirely hypothetical msolga.

However, unless one can specifically address in monetary amounts how specific services would be impacted, we have no idea how to decide if it's worth it.

For me, it falls into the catagory of "somebody should do something"

One must address this in terms of asking what could be done by the government with this amount of money to improve health, education, housing for those in need.
From where I'm figuring, it doesn't seem like a helleva lot.

If I could automatically assume having the government take this money and use it toward the welfare of citizens would produce better results then letting the market take its course, I'd be saying the money was a waste too.

But I can't with any certainty say that. Especially when I know that a large percentage of it would be going toward administrative costs, probably some amount to line peoples pockets, waste, duplicated efforts etc. I'm making an educated guess that very little money will go to very few of proposed causes.

I do know that if 1 person starts a successful business venture out of this event, once that can be kept going afterwards, it's one more business in the community, that hires and pays more people, who don't have to rely on the government.
People who are working give back to their community, they give to charities and donate their time. They feed their kids better, so their kids do better in school.

Providing jobs is key. My question would be, what creates more jobs? Is it the government giving people in need a few pounds/dollars/euros? Is it through people that become gainfully employed because there is a need for goods and services surrounding the event. Some employed temporarily, some remained employed permanently. Were the people who had temporary employment able to get another job now because they had gained a job history and experience?

I don't believe one can make a blanket statement that the people's needs would best be served by having the government utilize this money, especially if some of it is being used on programs that are not encouraging independance.
I believe most people would gain more esteem being provided with opportunities to make money through their own efforts, than to have a few dollars extra of dole.

It's not as simple as saying "somebody" meaning the government, should do something. Especially if it's expressed in terms of more programs, entitlements, maybe a few flu shots.

I don't believe in "trickle down", but I do believe in the "butterfly effect"

thumb thumb double thumbs up!

I'm mixed on the monarchy in question. I can see reasons for liking it, from my city far away. I was interested enough about the announcement to read an article or two, but I'm likely to only follow the wedding slightly. I agree with those commenting on the potential financial benefit to the economy, but I'm no financial whiz; Chai, engineer, saab, ehBeth, are making sense to me.

OK, Old Goat - you seem to know alot about the royal family. We have a disagreement here in "New England" about the future title of Kate. When William becomes King, does Kate get the title Queen? Some people are saying no she will be princess. However, the news around these parts keeps referring to Kate as the future Queen.

We were talking about this at work the other night - one person even said that they plan on getting up at 2:00 am (or whatever hour it would be) to view the wedding. I said I'd watch - but not get up to see it live. I love my sleep way to much to give up for anything on TV.

GET YOUR WEDDING MUGS !



within a couple of years we'll be able to buy them at goodwill/value village for a buck .

( the mugs , i mean )

She will be the Queen then, if ever there is a William V.

Yeah, but in the meantime, you could buy a blank mug for 50 cents, slap on a transparency for a couple of pennies, and sell it for 4 or 5 dollars.

Awesome idea Chai - but I'd up the price - initially you could sell this crap for $20.

I like the way you think.....big.

I swear, people get caught up in all the excitement and ****, and will buy damn near anything.

I'm going to start marketing William and Kate blender covers.

One word .... ebay .... people buy so much crap on that website.

Oh and I believe Kate will be (when Willie becomes King) Queen Consort. This is different than Queen Regnant which the current Queen Elizabeth II is called. Queen Consort is basically some one married to a King so I guess that fits the bill.

Man - they are beating us to it...the mug on ebay is $14.99; there is a Kate and William Mouse pad will a starting bid of $5 another buy it now at $14.99; domain name buy it now at $3,198.20

No joke sperm babies of Kate and William

for $6.40

And would you buy and wear this T shirt?

ha.
On a woman, the portraits would be right over her dirty pillows.

I think we've missed the boat on this one.

Let's start thinking ahead for **** to sell for 2012, when the world's gonna end.

When it doesn't end, we'll be rich.

I’m sorry, chai. You’re going to think I’m deliberately being a wet blanket in the face of all your enthusiasm. And it is not simply that I’m not a great fan of the monarchy.

You’re probably right. There most likely will be income generated by tourism, sale of wedding paraphernalia, creation of temporary jobs during the “wedding period”, but ... as you say these will be temporary benefits. However these recent budgetary measures will have considerably more impact, over a much longer period, on the British economy. And I’m with those economic commentators who say that they are way too harsh, too fast and that £80bn of spending cuts could lead to recession.
Cuts to 'cost 1.6m jobs', MPs warned:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/nov/02/one-point-six-million-jobs-cuts.
Of course, there are other economic commentators who fully support the UK government's attempts to "balance the books" in the shortest possible time,by these stringent measures.

The anticipated loss of thousands of public & private sector jobs, over years, will mean, of course, that that the wages of those thousands who have lost their jobs will not be available to spend. Say nothing of the cuts in public services, which impact most severely on the poorest in the community. That’s why I said earlier, in response to your question, my emphasis (if I had the power) would be to focus on retaining as many existing jobs and services as possible, rather than invest limited available public funds in events like this forthcoming wedding. In other words, if I was the UK treasurer & had the power, my budget measures to "balance the books" would be considerably less harsh (as many are arguing). And yes,I would endeavour to"cushion the impact" on those who will inevitably be the most to be severely affected.



I'm certain that most unemployed people in the UK (just like anywhere else) would much prefer to be less dependent on government programs for their support. It isn't much fun trying to exist on the dole, I know that from experience. But if these new austerity measures do in fact lead to further job losses, as anticipated, then the the opportunities for less dependence will simply not be there for many until the economy improves, years down the track.

Finally, in regard to public financial support of the royals, I think it is quite correct that Prince Charles has bowed to public sentiment & offered to pay for the cost of this wedding. (though £20 of public funds will still be required for security). His personal fortune was reported to be “in the region of £1 billion” (see link I posted earlier). He can certainly afford it.

Neither I, nor anyone I know, has the slightest interest in the so-called Royal Wedding. Folks abroad seem to take more of an interest in such things than the ordinary rank and file. We just pay for them. They are all a bunch of privileged, in-bred free-loaders. GB is in a mess, austerity measures will bite deep, the poor and the vulnerable will suffer first, yet we're expected fund one family's 'doo'. Rickets and TB are on the rise in the UK and we're still maintaining castles. Nothing's changed - I feel like a Serf.

x