The police has apologised over the arrest of the republican group

My new book a good read.

Well that's right, I wasn't enthusiastic.

But still today, I have to accept that this is the way our country is run. That the Disney Princes and Princesses get to decide on things that the government might do.

So not being enthusiastic about some chap being given a Sword of Invisibility (or whatever it was) doesn't matter, that's how our country works.

The government, or whoever, have decided that this is a good use of money. I don't think it is. Many others don't think it is. Boasting that its good for the economy is a way of justifying something that is completely unnecessary. £250bn? I'd have rather spent £10bn and had a battery factory with the rest of the money, if it comes to that.

I wasn't 'boasting' that the coronation or the concert were good for the economy. I was just pointing out the fact that they enabled economic activity. Which, whatever your opinion of the reasons they were held, is not a bad thing. It was not a 'waste' of money; we are not talking about household finances, we're talking about national finances which are not constrained by a finite amount of money.

I did agree that it didn't look good.

volver3

Oh goodness, yes!

I'm watching Question Time while I type this, so not really concentrating!

Thanks Callistemon.

Cheap at the price!!

I don't have to be enthusiastic about it though.
You didn’t have to be enthusiastic about the Coronation. Lots of people weren’t.

Oh goodness, yes!

I'm watching Question Time while I type this, so not really concentrating!

Thanks Callistemon.

£250bn?

£250 million.

No, I think you are missing the point. I don't know whether Glasto is better for the economy than a Coronation. Many people like Glastonbury, many people like coronations. I don't like coronations so I'd rather we didn't spend quarter of trillion pounds on one.

I don't like football either, but if we want to spend obscene amounts of money on festivals of football, not my problem...I don't have to be enthusiastic about it though.

Miniscule poll done in my family of all people younger than myself. I am 77 so the age range was from 18 to 70

Not a single one watched or were interested in the coronation. They all seem to think that a monarchy is entirely anachronistic and has nothing to say to their generation. They simply shrug when asked, and seem pretty certain that it will cease to exist within a very short time.

You like concerts- so concerts being good for the economy is OK but if you don’t like something, you apply different rules?

All kinds of things support the economy.

And they don't divert money from elsewhere because even without a coronation and a massive concert the money would still not have been spent on nurses' pay or lifting people out of poverty so that they don't need food banks.
That is EXACTLY what I said. But that's not the point.

It's a political and ideological choice on the part of the government.
This is the point.

The government, or whoever, have decided that this is a good use of money. I don't think it is. Many others don't think it is. Boasting that its good for the economy is a way of justifying something that is completely unnecessary. £250bn? I'd have rather spent £10bn and had a battery factory with the rest of the money, if it comes to that.

I like concerts, Glastonbury will put money into the economy. I'm not suggesting we ban all concerts.

Just that we recognise that claiming that Coronations are good for the economy isn't good enough.

Like it or not, these things all support the economy because they all require the purchase of goods and services and put money into the economy.

And they don't divert money from elsewhere because even without a coronation and a massive concert the money would still not have been spent on nurses' pay or lifting people out of poverty so that they don't need food banks.

There is absolutely no economic reason why we can't have both. It's a political and ideological choice on the part of the government.

I agree that the optics aren't good.

Or spend millions on a pop concert to encourage people including tourists to visit and spend money the same way the Coronation did.
Do either of those support the economy?

I'm not particularly worried about the absolute cost of any of this.

I do find myself puzzled by the people who say, if we didn't spend this money, do you think it would go directly to food banks instead?, or people who say that it supports the economy.

If we were looking for a way of supporting the economy I don't believe the ROI% we get from a coronation would make it worthwhile. Also we are telling the people of this country that they may be trying to cope with foodbanks, and we can't pay the nurses properly but we think its a good use of money to have a big procession so that a favoured few can dress up like Disney Princesses and have their jewelled metal hats screwed on their heads.

If you're all so worried about the costs of these events can you tell me any of the money spent which doesn't go back to the Treasury by way of taxation?

If something has a cost you can be sure that it will be a) providing people with work and b) subject to taxation at some point, probably at more than one point as it flows through the economy. It's not all disappearing down a big black hole never to be seen again.

I've become indifferent to these big ceremonial displays, but I'm not in the least concerned about the expenditure because it puts money into the economy.

I agree. This seems low to me, considering that estimates for the coronation were up to £250m - and given that the queen’s funeral comprised several events over the course of a week or so. The official government figures suggest a contraction in the economy so into billion

RepublicStaff
It didn’t have to be on that scale, and Charles could easily pay for a significant part of the cost. We also think this misses some other costs that have been reported earlier, covered by other agencies.

Fleurpepper
My GCs and friends think it is all nonsense, and so do all other young people in my life, and none of them are active on FB, which is for grannies as far as they are concerned, and some of their parents. I am of course talking about the UK, as this is what we are discussing here.
Yet another who thinks they are omniscient.
Are you now claiming that your grandchildren and friends are representative of the whole of the UK?
How very pretentious . . . and amusing.
If your grandchildren and friends aren’t on Facebook, they will have no idea who is using Facebook.
Do they think as you do, that if they don’t do something nobody else does? 🤣🤣🤣

UK stats in 2021 showed 30% of 18-25 years old think the Monarchy should stay. I imagine that current stats would be lower, due to the enormous expense of the two last major events, the cost of living crisis, and the change in Police repression of protests.

My GCs and friends think it is all nonsense, and so do all other young people in my life, and none of them are active on FB, which is for grannies as far as they are concerned, and some of their parents. I am of course talking about the UK, as this is what we are discussing here.

Come on fp. A huge number of young people are on FB. A few? Are you in the UK now or not? Something you don’t answer. My experience of young people in the UK is very different to yours.

I am sure there are a few - but I am also confident to say that most of them are not.

Well some of them are Fleurpepper.

Oh dear, how very condescending and nonsense..

Yes, I do mix with a lot of young people- and they are not at all enthusiastic at all. FB? Really? Come on! Young people are not on FB.

Fleurpepper
If you mixed with/worked with Young people in this country ( particularly on coronation day) you would have seen and heard how enthusiastic they are at the whole royal family.
It’s far more real than FB where you seem to get all your information.

🤔