The United Kingdom actually MAKES money by keeping the royal family. Billions every year just off of tourism alone.
Not only that, but (sorry, I don't have an exact date or name) but one of the previous kings, during the 1700s, I think, went bankrupt. So that he wouldn't be thrown on the street, he made an agreement with the British government. In exchange for LOANING all the lands to the government, the royal family would be given a set salary and the government would be able to keep the rent on the loaned lands. They make 160 million pounds JUST OFF OF THIS! If they got rid of the royal family, they would have to hand back the lands and tourism would decrease
In conclusion, keeping the royal family is a PROFIT AND the royal family doesn't have as much power anymore. It's the Prime Minister (currently David Cameron) that holds all the true power.
I'd be very surprised if there was a single person in the world who had ever said "We have to go on holiday to England, they have a queen!" but I admit I formed my opinion on the matter from what I was told by people who I've come to learn know less about the world than I do.
Surprising for industrial societies maybe, but many places in the world aren't that big; societies like tribes or bands might only be made of a handful of families anyway so it makes sense for power to be passed on hereditarily. Most are even egalitarian so theoretically no one really has more power than anyone else.
The United Kingdom actually MAKES money by keeping the royal family. Billions every year just off of tourism alone.
Not only that, but (sorry, I don't have an exact date or name) but one of the previous kings, during the 1700s, I think, went bankrupt. So that he wouldn't be thrown on the street, he made an agreement with the British government. In exchange for LOANING all the lands to the government, the royal family would be given a set salary and the government would be able to keep the rent on the loaned lands. They make 160 million pounds JUST OFF OF THIS! If they got rid of the royal family, they would have to hand back the lands and tourism would decrease
In conclusion, keeping the royal family is a PROFIT AND the royal family doesn't have as much power anymore. It's the Prime Minister (currently David Cameron) that holds all the true power.
Wow..
I don't mean England, I said power.
Yeah, like those stupid Brits.
Anthony, don't take it personally.
The royal family has very little power though.
Yeah, but they still get given millions of pounds of taxpayers money every year just for existing.
The majority of us detest the fact that we have a royal family.
Purple_Cow... yes, they have a prime minister. I was kidding, the royal family purely are figure heads.
I'd be very surprised if there was a single person in the world who had ever said "We have to go on holiday to England, they have a queen!" but I admit I formed my opinion on the matter from what I was told by people who I've come to learn know less about the world than I do.
Everywhere, nepotism
Westeros
Surprising for industrial societies maybe, but many places in the world aren't that big; societies like tribes or bands might only be made of a handful of families anyway so it makes sense for power to be passed on hereditarily. Most are even egalitarian so theoretically no one really has more power than anyone else.