Main > Everything Else

7 dead 16 wounded at attack on Dutch queensday.

<< < (18/25) > >>

patrickl:
Yeah, it's outdated and other countries do fine without it. Yet there are lots of countries that do fine with it. I say even better, but that's not really the point. A royal family is a resonably cheap way to get an ambassador that foreign countries actually notice. The US wastes a lot more money on your president to give him some sort of royal appearance.

The royal family:
- "opens doors"
- helps sell our old military crap
- helps Dutch businesses sell their stuff
- helps the Dutch foreign minister to actually accomplish things
- creates good relationships with the countries she vists
- draws tourists
- inspires the nation
- gives us a free day every year
- provides a stable political climate
- and much more

She's easily worth the cost. If she didn't have the palaces and some political powers she would have her status and then she would stop being effective. Especially for a country that's basically a city, there is no other way we could achieve her level of influence and power from a mundane civil servant that needs to be brushed up to look cool. We don't have the money to give him a fleet of aircraft and let him hand out iPods and DVD collections.

I'd say just the stable political climate is worth it to me. I really wouldn't like presidential elections and their polarizing effects. I can only imagine the horror of living in a society where almost everybody is either "red" or "blue" and news items are purposefully twisted to fit the agenda of one of these colors. Overhere we're all "orange".

Of course if the royal family was a bunch of morons this wouldn't work. That's where the "she's technically elected" comes in. If enough people want to get rid of them we can "vote them out". So far the queen does a great job and her son seems like an intelligent and dedicated guy too. As long as they serve their purpose they stay.

shmokes:
I agree with you about the two-party system.  Of course, having a president doesn't imply a two-party system.  See Germany or France, for example.

As for getting things done, it's just nonsense (they do get things done, but it doesn't change much).  Do you really think doors are opened more when Obama meets with the Queen of England than when he meets with the prime minister of England?  I'm not saying that nothing is accomplished by these visits, but nothing is accomplished that wouldn't be accomplished by sending the head of state regardless of whether the person is Royal.  Other countries aren't deciding to make bad trade deals with you because they were enamored with your Queen.  They make the deals cos it's in their best interest and they will deal with whomever has the authority to make the deal.

I think there's truth to the "inspires the nation" stuff, but I think there are probably lots of people in your country who find them decidedly not inspriring, just like me.  And I doubt that your country is any more inspired on the whole than countries without royalty, ya know what I mean?

But whatever.  It's seriously not that big a deal.  I think they're useless, you think they're useful.  I think they're a waste of money, you think they're worth it. 

BTW, you must be in a tight spot if your country doesn't have the money for the Royals to give out a 25-disc DVD collection or an iPod.  Those are things that even regular individuals can afford in my country.   :P

patrickl:

--- Quote from: shmokes on May 09, 2009, 01:54:27 pm ---Other countries aren't deciding to make bad trade deals with you because they were enamored with your Queen.  They make the deals cos it's in their best interest and they will deal with whomever has the authority to make the deal.
--- End quote ---
The queen coming over creates an atmosphere where business is conducted. High ranking people become available and getting in touch with the right people is like 80% of the sale.

Sure this could be done with a president too. Like I said, Sarkozy went to China and during that visit they sold 30 billion worth of planes and nuclear plants. On the other hand, a Queen carries a lot more clout than the president (or prime minister) of a "city".

What baffles me is that you go off your rocker about the relatively modest investment that we put in our royal families, but you seem completely unperturbed about the cost of maintaining Obama which are probably 10 times as high. Why wouldn't that be equally (if not more) ridiculous? Is that ok because he has a "real" job? Why does Obama even travel to other countries if it's so useless and some minion (or an e-mail) could do the same? Presentation doesn't matter after all.

Grasshopper:
I'm not in favour of the Royal Family by any stretch. However, Patrick does have a valid point. The British Queen spends a lot of her time visiting obscure countries around the world purely for the purposes of generating goodwill.

All she basically does on her visits is watch ethnic dancing, wave to a lot of people, shake a lot of hands etc. (i.e. no actual decisions have to be made). If she weren't available to fulfill that role then presumably we'd have to send a real politician instead. But real politicians shouldn't be wasting their time on such fluff. They should be attending to the far more important business of running the country.

Anyway, I'm sort of acting as devil's advocate here because, on balance, I'm not really in favour of the Royal Family (although I don't feel very strongly about it).

shmokes:
So you have somone who travels to the country to watch this stuff and generate goodwill.  Why does this person have palaces and 1000 acre estates and fly on private jets and live in the lap of luxury?  I mean, the fact that they serve some kind of purpose is no answer to that question.  The local postman serves a governmental purpose. 

The US very much has people who serve this purpose.  The secretary of state.  The secretary of commerce.  The Vice President.  The first lady.  But none of these people are in this bizarre situation where you're like, "Okay, for no articulable reason, from now until eternity you and all of your decendants (and ONLY you and your decendents) get to do this job and we will give you obscene amounts of riches for it -- far far more then we give even to the leader of our country."

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version