William and Harry - I'm puzzled.

I am a member of Republic and I certainly don't hate anyone, and neither does the organisation espouse hatred. I very much dislike the monarchical system of hereditary public office, which is a different thing.

This is supposed to be a free country where people can voice opinions that are different from the mainstream. As a supporter of Republic, I don't like being referred to as if I am part of some sinister clandestine movement - "there are a lot of them out there".

Mishap, millions are bored with their jobs and they have to stick at them every day .

I thought we were mentioning hate on this thread- not in general.

Odd how people can have such different experiences. My uncle joined RN in 1936 aged 16 yrs as a stoker went all through the war and went up through the ranks and when he retired he had another job with them running ship trials.

Maybe it means that you can just rise on your merits and not just based on background and qualifications.
Great that you can get a comprehensive pupil as head of the Air Force.

I think Kensington Palace needed renovating- do you want our old buildings to crumble to decay? I went around it some years ago and it wasn't in a good state.

Why would someone with a personal fortune stay in a job that bored them?

Unless of course you are the future king and have duties.

Leticia, Which comprehensive pupil are you referring to?

Marshal of the Royal Air Force is Prince Philip

Air Chief Marshall - the one in charge.

Sir Andrew Pulford went to Magnus Grammar School which became a comprehensive in 1977 the same year he joined the RAF so he was not a comprehensive school pupil.

I'm almost sure he would! That of course the problem with privilege especially theirs, is that it does have a downside. However much you might want to go to, belong to, or have as a career, you simply can't! You can only do things that are mapped out for you, bit like being in a guilded cage which must be frustrating particularly for modern young people. Money and position for certain is a two edged sword. That's why William and Katherine so enjoyed living in Wales, for a short time they could be a bit more normal.
It's been interesting reading the posts of people's military relatives as they reflect my own. My OH was in the Fleet Air Arm, joining as a boy sailor, in search and rescue, leaving the Navy some twelve years later with the rank of Sub Lieutenant, not a particularly high rank, but respectable for an 11+ failure! My own father joined the RAFVR in 1940 as an Aircraftsman, before losing his life in Dec 1942 with the rank of Flying Officer. Coming from a working class background, he did go to Grammar School, so no doubt that helped. Other family members were also in the forces during both world wars. I can't see that a President would have the same interest world wide as the immediate members of the royal family, and certainly wouldn't draw the crowds or the money those crowds generate.

I said the last one! He retired in 2010 I think. Sir Stephen Dalton. He went to Bath University to do Aeronatical Engineering. The present one was a grammar school pupil and joined from school. He did not go to university.

I feel a bit sorry for Prince Harry actually.
I think he might have married Chelsy Davy, if he wasnt a royal, as she reportedly didnt want to be married to his job of meet and greet for the rest of her life.

Good for Chelsy. A well educated young lady with an eye to her future.

I haven't read one post which speaks of hatred on this thread

And I did not refer to posters on this thread! Did I? Please point me in that direction if I did say that.

Just because some Republicans do not hate the monarchy does not mean that there are not those out there - meaning out there in the wider world - (here and abroad) who have a real hatred of the monarchial system and all those who are members of it.

Personally I am in favour of a very much slimmed down monarchy and I am willing to pay my few pence a year towards it. I would prefer to have the Queen as Head of State, above politics, than some ex-politician who would cost me more in tax in the long run.
I do think that there are certain members who would be best left to make their own way in life and who are no asset to the Royal Family.

But I realise that there are those who would see it as an out-moded system.
However, I cannot think of one worldwide which is better.

I am in favour of a slimmed down monarchy, which is why I think that 2 working princes are a good idea. Just sad that charity work is so undervalued that is assumed it boils down to a few photos and gala dinners and not a 'proper job'.

Having been at the wrong end of the Princess Royal's gun barrel on a couple of occasions I can say that she is a very formidable charity patron! Being Royals doesn't stop some of them doing a good job

grumpa Literally?

No, but I had to fight my corner!

A shoot-out with the Princess Royal? How exciting, grumppa!

As we now have a third member of the Bush family talking about running for President it seems that a Hereditary system is alive and well in the Land of the Free as well.

An honourable draw, I like to think.

Deeda America has always had political dynasties since the days of the Adams family [sic]. Not all of them became president, although had Bobby Kennedy not walked through that kitchen modern history might have been very different.

You might mean the 'Beast of Bolsover', who always has a snide comment.

Sorry, my random message there was in response to someone asking who was the MP who made republican comments. That message was on a previous page I think. Just ignore me, it's late and I think I have 'brain fade'!

Does it actually matter what these two do?

No!!