So what does everything think of "The Engagement"?

@smorgs,

Even without a royal familiy you would have to maintain castles.
The only difference is that now those castles would be museums with noone living in them. The costs to maintain would still be there.
That is the way it is in republics.
Old historical buildings - no matter their size - belongs to cultural inherentence.

1 Reply

@saab,

While it is true that places of historical interest are maintained in republics, it is not axiomatic that anyone has to maintain them, nor that they will be maintained at the expense of the state. In many cases in the United States, building are maintained by private means because they were not accepted for the national historical register.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

That is the same in a monarchy. Many places - especially smaller - are maintained by private persons. Some castles are taken over and made into hotels, mental hospitals, museums or being used in other ways. Unesco also pays money for national historical buildings. Lottery money goes to buildings and other historical things.

0 Replies

Well, here we go again. I know of no instance in the United States in which lottery money goes to the support of buildings. That may be the case in Sweden, or other places in Europe, but it hardly qualifies as a universal truth. In the United States, for example, lottery money allegedly goes to fund education, or its disbursement is simply not accounted for.

0 Replies

By the way, my initial objection is to the claim that without a royal family one would have to maintain castles. No government is under any obligation to maintain any building. Since governments are staffed by politicians, the only consideration is going to be what politicians perceive as the weight of public opinion. If those politicians come to the conclusion that the public doesn't care about a castle, they'll let it rot.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

How Cúchulainn got his name
(Version 1)
When Cúchulainn was a boy his name was not Cúchulainn but Setanta. By the time he was five years old he was skilled at playing hurling with his stick and sliotar and at fighting with his toy shield and spear. He loved to hear stories of his uncle King Conor Mac Neasa and his warriors the Red Branch Knights which made him long to go to a special school in Armagh in Ulster called the Macra for young boys who would one day join the brave warriors.

Not long after his fifth birthday he asked his mother where Armagh was, as he wanted to go there. His mother told him he was too young. He asked his father, the King of Dundalk: “Where is Armagh?” “It is in the north,” replied his father.Setanta took his hurley stick and sliotar and walked towards the north playing as he went. As soon as he arrived in Ulster he saw the hundred and fifty boys of the Macra playing hurling before Conor’s castle to his delight. He hurried over to join them and almost immediately scored a brilliant goal. The boys were furious that he had joined their game uninvited and they attacked him. He fought bravely.

The noise disturbed the king who was playing chess. He sent a servant outside to see what was happening and so Setanta was brought before the king.” I am Setanta, son of the King of Dundalk, your brother. I have come here to join the Macra as I want to become one of the Red Branch Knights”. The king liked his words and allowed him to join. Time passed quickly for Setanta at the Macra School. One day Culann the blacksmith who made spears for the king invited Setanta to a feast. When Setanta arrived at Culann’s house his wolfhound leapt out of the dark to attack. Culann had the hound unchained as he thought the entire guests had arrived.

Setanta hurled his sliotar down the hound’s throat and killed him. The feast party heard the hound growling and ran out. Conor was amazed to find his nephew alive and proud of his great strength. Culann was relieved but also sad his hound was dead. “Let me take the place of your hound until I have trained one of its puppies” said Setanta to Culann. Culann agreed. From that day on Setanta was called Cúchulainn, which means hound of Culann.

1 Reply

@smorgs,

smorgs, where ya been?

0 Replies

@eurocelticyankee,

Quote:

From that day on Setanta was called Cúchulainn, which means hound of Culann.

Well the hound part sure fits.

0 Replies

@CalamityJane,

I can't understand why any woman would want any ring. Talk about getting gypped.

0 Replies

@msolga,

Quote:

Apparently security will be the biggest cost factor.

Yes, everyone in Gt Britain will have to pass thru a full body scanner. The government will sell the shots to pervs the world over and England will be on the road to financial recovery.

0 Replies

@msolga,

Thanks for being more specific msolga, now I can see where you are coming from.

What about the income taxes that will be collected from people who are making money over this?

Wouldn't (couldn't) that go back to repaying that money?

If the gov't is only paying for the security, 20 million, I think income tax would be at least equal to that amount will be collected.

Below is a cut and paste of income tax rates in England...

Income tax: taxable bands and rates 2010/2011

Taxable income rate of tax
0 - £2,440 10 per cent (starting rate for savings only)
0 - £37,400 20 per cent (basic rate)
£37,401 - £150,000 40 per cent (higher rate)
Over £150,000 50 per cent (additional rate)

For no good reason, I'm going to say it will average out to 25% income tax.

At that, if 75 million was spent via increased tourism, intra-country increased spending, the taxes collected would be slightly over 18 million. Pretty close to 20 million.

If 250,000 people showed up for that other royal wedding, I'm sure at least that many would be around for this one.
That equals only 300 spent by each tourist or local visitor.

Sure, there will be a lot of under the table earnings, but income will be declared by hotels, restaurants, shops, hospitals, services, etc. etc.

I'm thinking a lot more than 250K people will at some time during the next year will plan a trip there, either because of interest in the event, or because interest in general was aroused.

The gov't would get their money back via taxes.
Plus the people would have an increase in income.

The gov't spending the money on security isn't being done in a vacuum. The ripples will go out, and then when the border of income is hit, will travel back to them.
In fact there will be multiple ripples.

A tourist gives me 100, I pay tax of 20 and spend 80 at a business.
The business who gets my 80, pays tax of 16 and spends 64, which is someone elses income.
The gov't then makes 13 off of that 3rd person who makes that income, and 51 is spent.

Now, whether the gov't decides to pay themselves back is another story.

1 Reply

@chai2,

Quote:

Thanks for being more specific msolga, now I can see where you are coming from.

The context in which the "royal wedding" will be taking place required considerably more background information than I'd actually expected, chai. And I did my level best to provide that. Though, of course, UK A2Kers' insights would be far more relevant that any that I could make.

Quote:

What about the income taxes that will be collected from people who are making money over this?

Wouldn't (couldn't) that go back to repaying that money?

If the gov't is only paying for the security, 20 million, I think income tax would be at least equal to that amount will be collected.

And you may be quite right about that. (Assuming all the temporarily employed do, in fact, cough up the required level of taxes.)
But, as I said, in my response to your request for more information, my over-riding concern was about the long-term impact of the government's budgetary strategies & spending priorities, in the light of the impact on ordinary people's circumstances. And I see any financial gain to the taxpayer from the "royal wedding" as a mere blip in the big picture.
If taxes do, in fact, recoup the cost of this event, then well & good.
In my humble opinion it shouldn't cost beleaguered citizens one penny.
But that's just my opinion. I don't live there.

0 Replies

@Linkat,

Now why the heck did some one vote this down? I thought the Tshirt was a thing of beauty!

0 Replies

There is no excuse - and I do not seek one - much like this onerous Rolling Stone irritation.

Diana, Princess of Wales was one day younger than me. Her son, William, is a year or so older than my son; they look alike; and their marriages are within a year.

That kid lost his mom. I adore him.

I like this royal kid. I'm teary- happy that he's a daddy. I'm sorry his mom isn't here to make him feel special.

0 Replies

So what does everything think of "The Engagement"?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know