Responding to SomeBloke on the armed forces and monarchy. The armed forces would prevail just fine without the monarchy. It's rather silly to just say, " Oh no! We have no queen. Time to burry our heads in the sand!" It's about catching up to the times. Just look at what other countries are like and what their armed forces are like. I understand the tradition of the Queen and the monarch, but I think it needs to be toned down a bit. The Queen is getting money for just being a Queen. It's not quite what people in this world want to see.
My point was, the Armed forces were set up by the Monarchy.
I disagree with the the catching up, look at the Japanese. They have an Emperor and are one of, if not the, most technologically advanced nation in the world.
I think having the constitutional monarchy in Britain has been a much better blessing than absolute monarchy.
More on the financial point, the Monarchy also pay taxes. The Queen earns about 37 Million pounds a year so as to pay the Royal family, maintain the palaces, and deal with expenses etc The Queen pays back into the Treasury.
37 Million pounds, to us that may seem a lot. But if you put that into perspective:
The London eye, cost 70 Million pounds to build, and earns 25 Million a year.
The Millennium Dome cost 789 Million to build.
Man Utd earnt 175 Million in 6 months last year.
New Wembley Stadium cost 757 Million to build