OT: Why does the media think I give a rat's @ss about the royal wedding?

[Louis]

Talk about a useless institution (the monarchy, not marriage).

I guess over here we have Paris Hilton, J LO, and Charlie Sheen, and over there they have the royals. Perhaps they are both intended to serve the same purpose - to distract us from our everyday humdrum lives - but talk about a waste of money.

OK, rant over.

[zap]

Dream TV.

[Joachim]

I think it's all relative. What might be a waste of money to you is not a waste to someone else (not saying I'm for it). The only people who can judge whether it's a waste is the British taxpayers.

Whether the monarchy of any country is a valuable institution is a debate on it's own.

[1happygirl]

It's a Girl Thing.

My old, old, old Mother got up at 3am to see. She's an anglophile, not a monarchist though.

Even I was surprised.

Hey Louis, can you remember where you were in 1981? when Charles and Di got married?

[Bob Ross]

A friend of mine who's lived in London for the past 6 or 7 years wrote me yesterday to ask why we American's gave a rat's ass about the royal wedding. He said if it weren't for the fact that they get a couple days holiday, the English wouldn't even give this event a passing notice.

[Louis]

Hey Louis, can you remember where you were in 1981? when Charles and Di got married?

I was in college (assuming it didn't happen over the summer) but that's as close as I can get.

[AngryScientist]

i'm with ya brother, in the dont give a damn camp.

[gone]

can you remember where you were in 1981? when Charles and Di got married?
I can't remember exactly where I was but I do remember I didn't give a rats @ss then either.

[RPS]

Talk about a useless institution (the monarchy, not marriage).

I guess over here we have Paris Hilton, J LO, and Charlie Sheen, and over there they have the royals. Perhaps they are both intended to serve the same purpose - to distract us from our everyday humdrum lives - but talk about a waste of money.

OK, rant over.
Are you miffed you were not invited? :no:

Actually, as to the cost, it was probably a great investment for British taxpayers. Not only did they get a lot of tourism for the event, but the wedding coverage was probably priceless to promote future travel as well.

[Tom]

Why do you think I give a rat's ass about what you don't give a rat's ass about?

[uno-speedo]

Actually, as to the cost, it was probably a great investment for British taxpayers. Not only did they get a lot of tourism for the event, but the wedding coverage was probably priceless to promote future travel as well.

Not when the entire country was given the day off, paid.

[ThasFACE]

I cannot stand all of this royal nonsense. I try to ignore it but it's everywhere. And it doesn't help that my GF was up at 5:00 to watch.

Now I'm annoyed at myself for spending time complaining about it.

[1happygirl]

I was in college (assuming it didn't happen over the summer) but that's as close as I can get.


Hahahahaha. It's the Y Chromosome.

[1happygirl]

I cannot stand all of this royal nonsense. I try to ignore it but it's everywhere. And it doesn't help that my GF was up at 5:00 to watch.

Now I'm annoyed at myself for spending time complaining about it.


See. I tested my theory. I still stand by it.

Time for you to jump in......


So she's a participant

[RPS]

Not when the entire country was given the day off, paid.
I'm confused. Exactly how is it a bad investment to give yourself a paid day off? ;)

[1happygirl]

Not when the entire country was given the day off, paid.


Hey Uno-Speedo:

Okay I have wondered this for years. How, exactly, do you quantify tourism economics? For example, like the economics in making a push for the Olympics? (kind of a different point than you were making but related)

If I say I want to have X in my city because it will bring in X dollars, isn't that just a guess and after it's over, isn't it just a guess about how much money the city brought in vs not having the event? Like Uno-Speedo said do they ignore, like with the Olympics the 'start-up' costs in the buildings, etc. so the statistics look in their favor?

This is something that has come up in conversation multiple times to no satisfactory understanding in my mind. The forum will set me straight, I hope.

[goonster]

Not really a monarchist at all here, but I'll say this:

We live in a world of pop culture that is so relentlessly hype-driven, so full of "celebrities" that are famous for being famous, that we don't recognize the real thing when we see it.

The royals, for all their vapidity, lack of purpose, personal strife, lack of relevance, etc., are actually something authentic, for what it's worth. This kind of stuff has captured imaginations from the Grimm brothers to the ongoing efforts of the Disney Corporation. You don't have to watch it, or buy into it, but it is what it is, and for once there is at least a shred of reality beneath it all. They are future heads-of-state, and most Britons like it that way.

Plus, they are a cute young couple getting hitched. Good luck to 'em. :beer:

[William]

I'm confused. Exactly how is it a bad investment to give yourself a paid day off? ;)

It was estimated that over 100 million pints would be drunk (drank, drinken, swilled, swallowed) today. Someone is making money! :beer:





William

[ergott]

It was estimated that over 100 million pints would be drunk (drank, drinken, swilled, swallowed) today. Someone is making money! :beer:





William

Make that 100,000,001 after I get home from work.

:beer:

[fiamme red]

Actually, as to the cost, it was probably a great investment for British taxpayers. Not only did they get a lot of tourism for the event, but the wedding coverage was probably priceless to promote future travel as well.I entirely agree.

Want to talk about a waste of money for the British? The 2012 Olympics. They'll end up taking a big loss for the games, just as every host country has in recent years.

[goonster]

If I say I want to have X in my city because it will bring in X dollars, isn't that just a guess and after it's over, isn't it just a guess about how much money the city brought in vs not having the event?
There are metrics for this, just like there are for other economic sectors like durable goods and employment. Mostly it's based on hotel occupancy rates and restaurant receipts, which are used to identify visitors and then correlate retail, transportation and other revenue.

[Ahneida Ride]

Our rulers are always just plain superior to us common fokes.

[1happygirl]

Thnks. Still just a best guesstimate. Inexact and difficult though to quantify. I know whatever project people support will get the statistics tweak to justify it.


Grlz just like weddings. It's like even if you don't give a boy a gun, he'll use a finger. It's in the DNA.

[William]

Make that 100,000,001 after I get home from work.

:beer:

+2, Seriously! :beer:



William

[oldpotatoe]

Talk about a useless institution (the monarchy, not marriage).

I guess over here we have Paris Hilton, J LO, and Charlie Sheen, and over there they have the royals. Perhaps they are both intended to serve the same purpose - to distract us from our everyday humdrum lives - but talk about a waste of money.

OK, rant over.

Why do you think the 'media' gives a rat's @ss about you?

Change channels.

[Idris Icabod]

I give a rat's ass, I got up and watched. I am still a card carrying Brit although have lived in the US for about 15 years.

Regarding the cost, I believe most of it was picked up by the Queen and the taxpayer stumped up for security. I would think the tourist income generated by our Royals far off sets the cost to the tax-payer.

I still have my house in the UK and pay residential tax in the hope at least one of my kids will attend University there and I get the home cost. So I probably paid for a little of it.

I am amazed at the interest in the US as well. Our local news had a roving reporter at a house full of tubby old wimmin' who all claimed to be British, although it was the usual my great-great-great-great-great grandfather had a beer with a British bloke once so I'm practically blue blooded type of thing.

[Idris Icabod]

Why do you think the 'media' gives a rat's @ss about you?

Change channels.

That's what I wanted to say but I don't have Peter's stones.

[TMB]

Why do you think the 'media' gives a rat's @ss about you?

Change channels.


^ This.

I was going to write something about how tired I am of people "having to be be bitter", "Having to have something to complain about, etc"

There seems to be no capacity left in the world for happieness, pleasure or joy.

Maybe it is just these damned internet forums where people try to outdo each other on the "I'm more cycnical about the world than you"

I was going to write all that but then decided not to.

Instead I am simply going to start stalking OldPotatoe and quoting him.

But first I'm just going to take a mental health break from internet forums.

[1happygirl]

I like the db6 mkII that the couple drove away in. Okay, up the street a block really. I like it a lot.

The Duke is driving an Aston Martin DB6. The convertible Aston Martin Volante DB6 MKII in Seychelles blue is owned by his father HRH The Prince of Wales. The Prince has owned the car since 1969.

In June 2008, at the specific request of The Prince of Wales, who is keen that his cars should be run on sustainable fuel, the Aston Martin was converted to run on E85 bioethanol, made from English wine wastage.

Awesome, awesome car. The maintenance costs are a killer, I'm sure.

I also like the way the Sunbeam Alpine Convertibles look. Had the opportunity, but the upkeep, the upkeep.

[SamIAm]

I heard a commentator make the following statement which did bring on a dry heave.

"Look at how her wave has evolved from the beginning of the procession until now. It started as more of a frenetic wave, but now it is much more subdued and royal. She is becoming more royal by the moment."

[Louis]

Change channels.

I'm not sure what this means.

[bironi]

Just looked at a photo gallery online with my morning coffee. What amazed me was the silly gawky medal covered outfits the royal men wear, and the prince appeared to be wearing spurs when kneeling at the altar?. The women were almost all tastefully dressed. Strange role reversal from this side of the pond.

Just glad it's behind us. :beer:

[Idris Icabod]

can you remember where you were in 1981? when Charles and Di got married?

I do, we had a street party. Like most streets in England.

I told my wife this morning that I would probably be dead before the next Royal wedding if we have to wait 30 years.

She called me a miserable b@stard!

[Ralph]

I think it's kinda nice....the tradition and all. Best of luck to the young couple.

And what's covered over here is any better?

[victoryfactory]

For someone who doesn't give a "Rat's Ass"
you sure started a ***** storm.

I guess it's the same phenomenon as Hollywood. People are attracted to
fame, wealth, stardom and power. Throw in a little quasi spiritual rigamarole
and I'm there!

Ha Ha HA Ha

[mgm777]

Why do you think I give a rat's ass about what you don't give a rat's ass about?

Exactly!

[djg]

Why do (some -- enough to justify the bandwidth) Americans care or why do (many) Brits?

On our side, I think there's a bit of fondness for England and English customs, plus a certain nostalgia/romanticism a la the Disney princess thing, plus the celebrity thing, even for folks who think the idea of a Ruling monarchy is nuts or morally wrong or both. Entertainment wise, as a nation, we daily do far worse than indulging this sort of anachronism.

On their side, well, they don't let these people actually rule the country any more. I think it's sort of like flying the flag -- these people (the royals) are walking, talking symbols of Britain and things around which fellow-feeling, parades, celebration, etc. can congeal. Cheaper than aircraft carriers and way less ugly than beating up foreigners at football (soccer) matches.

Maybe there's social utility to it. You know, we don't just defend and enforce the constitution (however well we do), we sing songs before baseball games.

[Mr. Squirrel]

Why do (some -- enough to justify the bandwidth) Americans care or why do (many) Brits?

On our side, I think there's a bit of fondness for England and English customs, plus a certain nostalgia/romanticism a la the Disney princess thing, plus the celebrity thing, even for folks who think the idea of a Ruling monarchy is nuts or morally wrong or both. Entertainment wise, as a nation, we daily do far worse than indulging this sort of anachronism.

On their side, well, they don't let these people actually rule the country any more. I think it's sort of like flying the flag -- these people (the royals) are walking, talking symbols of Britain and things around which fellow-feeling, parades, celebration, etc. can congeal. Cheaper than aircraft carriers and way less ugly than beating up foreigners at football (soccer) matches.

Maybe there's social utility to it. You know, we don't just defend and enforce the constitution (however well we do), we sing songs before baseball games.


the ruling monarchy has nuts? do they ride bikes too?

mr. squirrel

[Ray]

When you consider what the US media has been fixated on for the past couple of days (which I won't mention directly because its obviously political and even partisan, amazingly enough), I'll take the Royal Wedding. Its all very pretty. The stuff that it may knock out of the headlines for a short period of time is the ugliest of ugly. And Kate's sister (I think it was her sister) is quite the babe.

-Ray

[Fixed]

what wedding ?
i only have apple t.v.
cheers

[norcalbiker]

"Why does the media think I give a rat's @ss about the royal wedding"

Talk about a useless institution (the monarchy, not marriage).

I guess over here we have Paris Hilton, J LO, and Charlie Sheen, and over there they have the royals. Perhaps they are both intended to serve the same purpose - to distract us from our everyday humdrum lives - but talk about a waste of money.

OK, rant over.

Because you do!!! Otherwise you would not start this thread. :hello:

[thegunner]

Thnks. Still just a best guesstimate. Inexact and difficult though to quantify. I know whatever project people support will get the statistics tweak to justify it.

not so much a guesstimate, the predictions churned out by consultants/economists usually come out pretty close. if you were expecting an exact formulaic calculation, that's foresight ;) haha

[1centaur]

I think a lot of people are less cynical than assumed. This type of ceremony and pomp are made for them.

[flydhest]

So, my wife was born and raised in England and my mom was raised in Canada. They had a "Commonwealth" morning watching the wedding. I left to go meet my riding buddies at quarter to 6.

[RPS]

I heard a commentator make the following statement which did bring on a dry heave.

"Look at how her wave has evolved from the beginning of the procession until now. It started as more of a frenetic wave, but now it is much more subdued and royal. She is becoming more royal by the moment."
Quite funny, but not all that unlike much in cycling ….. people see what they want to see and can’t see what they don’t think can be real.

[avalonracing]

Long live the Princess!

[tuxbailey]

Why Americans should care about the Royal wedding:


http://www.whyamericansshouldcareabouttheroyalwedding.com/

[johnnymossville]

It's a real life fairytale.

I think it has something to do with the weird fascination with how royalty always seems to marry up. Billy and Harry look like banjo pick'n in-bred rednecks and somehow you just know they'll end up with knockouts for wives, just like their banjo pick'n dad chucky did. The one he's with now looks like far more of a match made in heaven. (OK that could just be my take on it)

I was in the Doctor's office this morning for my broken collarbone (Don't even wanna go there) and all the office girls had crowns on, the big screen tv in the waiting room was on, and everyone was watching it.

Strange indeed.

[fiamme red]

I think it has something to do with the weird fascination with how royalty always seems to marry up. Billy and Harry look like banjo pick'n in-bred rednecks and somehow you just know they'll end up with knockouts for wives, just like their banjo pick'n dad chucky did. The one he's with now looks like far more of a match made in heaven. (OK that could just be my take on it)I suppose that if looks are everything, then Prince William and Prince Charles (with Diana, not Camilla) married up.

But as far as status in society is concerned, Kate Middleton is a nobody (except as a celebrity through her relation with William), the daughter of parvenus who became rich through a mail-order company.

[Pete Serotta]

It is their country and passion,,,,, :beer:


Feel free to open another thread ''''


PETE