Oink

It's called goodwill advertising, for himself.

dbd33

Allow me to signal my virtue, it is that I am untroubled by charitable endeavors by the rich and famous (except Bono, of course).

Oink

I find all private charity and philanthropy to be problematic. It perversely concentrates power and it lets society/government off the for hook for caring, supporting and investing in other humans.

dbd33

Keep your pennies then, let society be to blame. The rest of us will do what we can and take pleasure in the fact that this couple both seem charitably minded.

JamesM

With Oink on this one.

You could switch the Monarchy out with a President. All the palaces and castles aren't going anywhere. The revenue needles would probably increase.

Harry was a penis. After military school, combat and losing several friends from military school (who died in combat) he seems to have become a better example to people.

Best of luck to Megs and Haz.

However the monarchy has no place in the 21st century. It's more ludicrous than any religion.

dbd33

But less ludicrous than the President.

Jerseygirl

Yeah but she looks just like Pippa during the engagement interview...who looks very much like her sister Kate.

Oink

That thought brightens things up a bit.

BEVS

& less problematic & even less expensive than some elected Heads of State Republics who seem to have no head or sense.

BEVS

Yes. I have been tussling with this a little bit. She seems a bit awkward, Diana style , though I am loathe to write that.

A part of me feels that Chelsy Davy was likely 'the one' but she did not wish to have the 24/7 365days intrusions where your life is actually not your own to live .

I believe they remain good friends.

Jingsamichty

Financially, it's all a bit of a wash, at least to the likes of you and me, that is. A few pennies a week each up or down. But it's a lot better on their side of the equation, that's for sure.

Harry likes to play the 'ordinary chap' schtick, and I'm sure he probably believes it himself, but the truth is that the Royal Family are an anachronism which ought to be sidelined at every opportunity. Getting the country to go all gooey over a wedding is going in the wrong direction.

christmasoompa

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. The Queen may be a heck of a lot richer than I, have no money worries and have several homes to choose from.

But she's also still working in her 90's, has her every move scrutinised, can't ever be free to do what she actually want to do ('I think I'd like to be a teacher/hairdresser/road sweeper'.....oh, but I get no choice in my life), has to be 'public' all the time, has to spend hours making small talk with pointless people (over 16,000 public engagements in her lifetime ), etc. Even last year she had 332 royal engagements, so a grand total of 33 days off in a year at 90 years old? No thanks.

I guess it depends on whether you value financial security or happiness more, and I know which I'd choose. As I said above, I wouldn't swap places with them for anything. I'll take my life with my pathetic one house and money worries, but the freedom to do what I want thanks.

Shard

Indeed.

Shard

I agree. They were lovely.

Jingsamichty

Agree entirely from a personal point of view. But Harry here is currently 5th in line to the throne, he will never be monarch. Why do we need such a bloated Royal family?

The Queen is on the throne, we've been paying for her son for 70 years to be understudy, paying for HIS son for 30-odd years, and now paying for HIS son... how many other jobs do you hire the person doing the job and the next 4 people who will do it? Think about it, it's ridiculous.

I'm not a monarchist but I'm not strongly in favour of abolition or republicanism. I do think the monarchy should be severely trimmed down and made less ostentatious.