Andy Hall wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:46:32 +0000, Richard Conway
wrote:

John Rumm wrote:
Tim S wrote:

Besides, the royals surrendered a great deal of land in exchange for the
civil list, so it's not like they are total spongers.
What was the estimated cost published recently? 64p/year per person
IIRC. Sounds like very good value to me!
Is that figure derived simply by dividing the cost of their upkeep by
the number of people? Don't forget that there are a great many people
in this country who don't pay tax - and not only are us taxpayers paying
for their upkeep we are also paying the 64p for the upkeep of the royal
family too.


There are also people who pay a great deal of tax - even more now that
the sleazebag in No. 11 has progressively ripped off the public
through stealth taxes to fund his extravagances.

I would rather fund the Windsors any time - even Phil the Greek.

I wasn't really being anti-royal, I was just making a point TBH.