Guarding the Queen

[The Choosey begger]

[Kyngofpop]

Originally Posted by anglo

Not A fan monarchy but this process is awesome

Guarding the Queen takes viewers behind the scenes to see what life is really like for these celebrated soldiers. Major Thorold Youngman Sullivan and right hand man Sgt Major Steve Munro have their work cut out to maintain the impeccable Grenadier standards.
The Guards on ceremonial duty are in London practising for Trooping the Colour alongside their regimental rivals, the Coldstream Guards.

[Fritzer]

I don't understand why that government spends millions upon millions of dollars to allow some irrelevant family to live 99% better than the rest of the population. Maybe it has something to do why their empire failed?

Especially considering the left of center, socialist/labor party uprising in that country of recent years, they seem content with paying ridiculous taxes which in part support a lavish, luxurious lifestyle for a group of people who have zero power or relevance politically.

[xQx]

Originally Posted by Fritzer

I don't understand why that government spends millions upon millions of dollars to allow some irrelevant family to live 99% better than the rest of the population. Maybe it has something to do why their empire failed?

Especially considering the left of center, socialist/labor party uprising in that country of recent years, they seem content with paying ridiculous taxes which in part support a lavish, luxurious lifestyle for a group of people who have zero power or relevance politically.

Well, in a large part for the same reason why Australia still has state governments. In the days before telcommunications and air-travel, you couldn't effectively govern people from 1,000 miles away - state governments represented the original colonies - and the maximum practical geographic area that could be governed as a single unit. Today, it'd be far more efficient (and much cheaper) simply to divide state government responsibilities up between local councils and the federal government.
I wouldn't dare to say this translates to the USA; but certainly for australia with a population of 20 million; we don't need three levels of government.

To summarize: That's the way it was established and it's too difficult to fix now.

The other part is simple: It works. The UK has a working democracy, so there's little need for the Monarchy. The Monarchy stays out of the way of the government, so there's no motivation amongst the plebs to want to change it. Sure, we're (I can say we, because Lizzy is Australia's queen too) paying money to some useless family - but how much does it cost to have your president? Those election campaigns look far more expensive than anything our prime ministers do. ... And while the Monarchy don't use their power, don't be mistaken into thinking they don't have any. The monarchy steps in when the government fails. This has happened once in Australian history, and it provides a smooth transition from one failed government to an election and onto a new government - without leaving the country at risk of becoming a military dictatorship. For a good practical example of how a Monarchy is useful, look at Thailand's history for the last few decades. Democracy fails, the military has a coup, the king steps in and sets up a new election.

It didn't work in France, they overthrew their king and decided to have a president. Australia might eventually become a republic, I'd vote for it if we had another referendum on the subject - but the current system isn't really that broken.