Need good arguments for dunking on royalists. Help pls.
What do I say when they say:
Royal family costs taxpayers 50p per year, and bring in more money than that in tourism. They're harmless - no proper influence on state affairs. Just a money making machine.
The tourism to the likes of Buckingham palace is easily rivaled or beaten by similar locations in Europe that lack a royal family. Versailles, for example, attracts more tourism than Buckingham palace. If the royal family had all privileges and titles revoked tomorrow, it wouldn't have the effect on tourism the people making that argument believe, all the historical buildings would still be there, the history would still exist.
The figure most royalists use for the cost of the royal family also only counts the money given directly to the royal family annually for their personal use. When security costs, renovations on royal accommodations and the like are considered, the figure rises drastically.
Is the queen acting like some sort of greeter? Just take the buildings and cut out the middle man for the line to go up more. People don’t care about the Royals, they care about the aesthetics and history.
I'll admit to being a cynical asshole but just dunk on them. Don't even bother to engage with this sort of shit without an audience, you're not gonna change anyone's mind who thinks there is an economic benefit to this horseshit, shit's all just made up numbers to paint your arguement as scientific.
Just call them willful serfs or peasants or something. Really appeal to the individualism, maybe you'll change someone elses mind when they can't square the difference between being a rational totally selfmade individual in favor of supporting a fucking monarchy.
Need good arguments for dunking on royalists. Help pls.
What do I say when they say:
Royal family costs taxpayers 50p per year, and bring in more money than that in tourism. They're harmless - no proper influence on state affairs. Just a money making machine.
deleted by creator
The tourism to the likes of Buckingham palace is easily rivaled or beaten by similar locations in Europe that lack a royal family. Versailles, for example, attracts more tourism than Buckingham palace. If the royal family had all privileges and titles revoked tomorrow, it wouldn't have the effect on tourism the people making that argument believe, all the historical buildings would still be there, the history would still exist.
The figure most royalists use for the cost of the royal family also only counts the money given directly to the royal family annually for their personal use. When security costs, renovations on royal accommodations and the like are considered, the figure rises drastically.
It would probably increase because there wouldn't be disgusting parasites living in the place and it could be more opened up.
Good point, families could take tours through the grounds and they wouldn't have to keep tracking beacons on their kids
This Shaun vid might help if you haven't seen it already
Is the queen acting like some sort of greeter? Just take the buildings and cut out the middle man for the line to go up more. People don’t care about the Royals, they care about the aesthetics and history.
I'll admit to being a cynical asshole but just dunk on them. Don't even bother to engage with this sort of shit without an audience, you're not gonna change anyone's mind who thinks there is an economic benefit to this horseshit, shit's all just made up numbers to paint your arguement as scientific.
Just call them willful serfs or peasants or something. Really appeal to the individualism, maybe you'll change someone elses mind when they can't square the difference between being a rational totally selfmade individual in favor of supporting a fucking monarchy.