Lorna
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
- Posts
- 1,183
I agree Daisy.
Royal baby watch
- Thread starter Tom
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
Interesting thought Daisy, but IMO that would be highly unlikely. There's no way they would or could conceal the birth of an heir to the throne for a month.
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
Latest report: She's in labor at St. Mary's hospital.
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
It's a boy! Born 4:24pm local time, 8lbs 6oz.
Tin man
Well-known member
Tom
Never been to England, one of our future trips. Like the rest of Europe; great people, and it's there politics. I can live with it it has served them well, as well as ours has served us.
It might cost the country pounds, but it is tradition, a great tradition.....
I like it.
Jim
Never been to England, one of our future trips. Like the rest of Europe; great people, and it's there politics. I can live with it it has served them well, as well as ours has served us.
It might cost the country pounds, but it is tradition, a great tradition.....
I like it.
Jim
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
Thanks Jim. As you might have gathered from some of my posts, I'm not a big royal supporter; I find it somewhat obscene that the once-richest woman in the world and all her many hangers-on suck so much money from the high taxes paid by "her loyal subjects". The fact that she didn't pay taxes until a large groundswell put pressure on her merely added insult to injury. Meanwhile, the subject of back taxes has been conveniently forgotten/swept under the rug.
Princess Dianna broke the "stiff royals" mold, much to the consternation of "the palace". Prince William is a great compromise between the two. Like his mother, William and his bride Kate enjoy a well-deserved popularity with the British public. I sincerely wish them both and their offspring the very best.
Too bad that we have to see Prince Charles on the throne before William. He's a carbon copy of his stuffy father, the Duke of Edinburgh.
Princess Dianna broke the "stiff royals" mold, much to the consternation of "the palace". Prince William is a great compromise between the two. Like his mother, William and his bride Kate enjoy a well-deserved popularity with the British public. I sincerely wish them both and their offspring the very best.
Too bad that we have to see Prince Charles on the throne before William. He's a carbon copy of his stuffy father, the Duke of Edinburgh.
Tin man
Well-known member
I was going to mention the LOG JAMB. I believe Diane and Charles were married in 80 or 81.
We were camping in Canada in 81 and all you could find we're souvenirs of the wedding. I agree Charles is like a minster of Funny Walks (Monty Piton), and his bride is a well I wont go there. I see a future with Harry and William.
We were camping in Canada in 81 and all you could find we're souvenirs of the wedding. I agree Charles is like a minster of Funny Walks (Monty Piton), and his bride is a well I wont go there. I see a future with Harry and William.
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
LOL Jim, I won't comment on Charles and Camila Parker-Bowles either. What the heck did he see in this woman over Dianna? Maybe the Royal optometrist needs to be tested :-[
;D He is certainly cut from the same cloth as his great uncle, the notorious Duke of Windsor. I suspect too much inbreeding among the royal families, his parents are both direct descendents of queen Victoria. I certainly wish William and Kate well but feel the British monarchy has outlived it's usefulness. Other European nations have maintained theirs but nowhere near this scale. The country never could afford their royalty.
RoyM said:
I don't know about that. The Spanish Duchess of Alba has (had?) an estimated worth of $4.9 billion. This is her photo, btw: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article3181007.ece
I'm not sure Spain, particularly nowadays can afford their royals, but, for better or for worse, they're not going anywhere. :-\
Hi Tom and all,
I am certainly no expert what so ever on the royal family, but find some aspects of their lives interesting.
I read somewhere (perhaps propaganda) that the royal family actually generates more money than they use in a years time. I believe the article I read mentioned that the excess goes back into the public trust and benefits the people in England. Don't know if that is true or not but what I read at one point a couple of years back.
Good luck to the royal couple and their new baby!
I am certainly no expert what so ever on the royal family, but find some aspects of their lives interesting.
I read somewhere (perhaps propaganda) that the royal family actually generates more money than they use in a years time. I believe the article I read mentioned that the excess goes back into the public trust and benefits the people in England. Don't know if that is true or not but what I read at one point a couple of years back.
Good luck to the royal couple and their new baby!
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
Here's a synopsis of the role of the British Royal Family. Some years ago, the Queen allowed a TV camera crew to follow her around for a week or so, both in her public and private lives. They subsequently aired a documentary, which was quite enlightening; Certainly a job I couldn't or wouldn't do.
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
I suspect that the article was not talking about their direct income, but the tourism revenue that's generated by their presence. It's thought that many people from around the world visit London largely because of their intrigue with the Royal family. I have no idea how they measure it, but this "fact" is always touted by supporters of the Royals, especially when the need for the monarchy is challenged.
Tin man
Well-known member
Tom
Don't know much about the politics, but I compare the love of the queen and family as the people in the Midwest. First time in the Midwest in a long time, and now I remember why I love it here. The people in the Midwest are real people (generalizing) they have old and true value's like the people in England who love the Queen. Sounds simplistic, but they want to hold on to the old ways (which is not a bad thing).
Question, can they jump over Charles? And make William king? I just cannot picture Charles King. Does His butler put a broom stick in his coat every morning? Still like the Queen. And I'm Irish.....
Jim
Don't know much about the politics, but I compare the love of the queen and family as the people in the Midwest. First time in the Midwest in a long time, and now I remember why I love it here. The people in the Midwest are real people (generalizing) they have old and true value's like the people in England who love the Queen. Sounds simplistic, but they want to hold on to the old ways (which is not a bad thing).
Question, can they jump over Charles? And make William king? I just cannot picture Charles King. Does His butler put a broom stick in his coat every morning? Still like the Queen. And I'm Irish.....
Jim
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
Jim, I believe the only way to bypass Charles would be if he abdicated. I'd be very surprised if he did that, since he's been "waiting" for so long. Although I don't look forward to Charles' reign, I think that if William became King too early, he'd lose some of his current 'earthly' charm.
LOL. You don't hear his father (Prince Philip) say much in public, especially in the presence of the Queen, but Charles is definitely a chip off the old block.
LOL. You don't hear his father (Prince Philip) say much in public, especially in the presence of the Queen, but Charles is definitely a chip off the old block.
Carl L
Moderator Emeritus
Charles is more or less in the position that Edward VII was waiting out the end of the reign of Queen Victoria. He finally acceded to the throne at the age of 60. Famously resented by his mother Victoria, she excluded him from any participation in government. Forced into idleness by the Queen, Prince Eddie became the archetype of the idle English aristocrat for some 30-40 years. His reputation was that of a titled wastrel. Nevertheless, when he did come to the throne in 1901, he acquitted himself quite well giving his name to an age. He is given a great deal of credit for the WW I alliance with France -- theretofore England's traditional enemy.
Charles is 65. In terms of reputation, he is doing better than Edward in an age where royalty is given no privacy whatsoever. His moms is 87 and seemingly healthy as a filly. Her great-great granny, Victoria lived to 82 in an age that was tough on people -- even royalty.
As an interested foreigner, I kinda hope that Chuck makes it to Charles III. The lad has done his apprenticeship.
Charles is 65. In terms of reputation, he is doing better than Edward in an age where royalty is given no privacy whatsoever. His moms is 87 and seemingly healthy as a filly. Her great-great granny, Victoria lived to 82 in an age that was tough on people -- even royalty.
As an interested foreigner, I kinda hope that Chuck makes it to Charles III. The lad has done his apprenticeship.
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,907
