Markt85 said:Dubai Blue said:Those places wouldn't suddenly all be demolished. Tourists would still visit them without the monarchy.Markt85 said:<a class="postlink" href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/apr/29/royal-wedding-tourism-boost" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/apr/ ... rism-boost</a>
''The British tourism agency has reported that the royal family generates close to 500 million pounds, or about $767 million, every year in tourism revenue, drawing visitors to historic royal sites like the Tower of London, Windsor Castle, and Buckingham Palace. The country's tourism agency says that of the 30 million foreign visitors who came to Britain in 2010, 5.8 million visited a castle .
Tourism is the third-biggest industry in the U.K., the tourism board claims, and supports about 2.6 million jobs -- or about one in 12. ''
Now, im not a monarchist and not a big fan of them to be honest, but when its blatantly obvious that we as a country benefit from the Royal Family its pretty logical to assume there worth keeping.
How about when a Royal Wedding brings in 2 billion to our economy ?
And how much did the royal wedding cost?