[Grizzly]

It's quite interesting. It will also be bloody obvious if you did not watch the vid and still reply.

[FireSpawn]

Well ****. I've lived here my whole 19 years of life, and have never been schooled about the monarchy in such a way. It's always been "She lives in that massive house in the middle of London and has her face on currency and stamps."

The thing that concerns me is that I can't tell if I was educated about my royals by a septic tank, or my delightful syrup making cousins.

[Cyborg17]

Pretty cool. Being a "yank", this is something I've hardly even heard about before.

[Black Wolf]

The royals are good for up in Australia as well. We get a head of state for essentially no money whatsoever (well, other than through the governor general), who is powerless to interfere with the goings on in parliament and, given that she's non-elected, can never claim a mandate to change that. That's a good system.

[karajorma]

I can't watch the vid at the moment so can someone give me the gist of what it claims.

[LHN91]

Basic gist: the royals, despite using 40 million pounds a year, bring in a significantly larger number from rental of crown lands, from which the profits are turned over to the state, and offer a healthy boost to British tourism due to various reasons.

Some quick calculations he ran through essentially claimed that taxes and such would likely go UP, not down, if the monarchy was removed. Some things were somewhat glossed over, some assumptions made, but still an interesting piece

[Bobboau]

DEATH TO NORWAY!

[Veers]

Education..., cool

I rather like the royals (Australian here).

[Iss Mneur]

The video links the full transcript here: http://blog.cgpgrey.com/the-true-cost-of-the-royal-family/

I have to say, I didn't know most of that.