Arguments against the British Monarchy have increased since the announcement of next week’s wedding; this makes sense, misconceptions about the fiscal burden of the event abound, but I am always quick to point out several key factors:
1. Taxpayers are not paying for the wedding. The Queen is footing the majority of the bill from her personal wealth; even the Middletons have contributed in this instance.
2. Taxpayers are paying for the security of the event, which, I’ll be honest, could cost as much as the actual wedding. If you applied a “per head” sum that each British taxpayer will contribute toward the Royal Wedding security, it amounts to about £1.50.
3. Last year the British Monarchy cost taxpayers approximately £1.00, which is a decrease from previous years. Yes, if I had £1.00 from every person in America I would be filthy rich; but I don’t contribute (much) to the betterment of American society, charities, or tourism. This leads to my final and most important point:
4. The Monarchy is good for Britain’s economy; it may be true that only one “Top Ten” British landmark is a royal venue (Windsor Castle; I find this hard to believe, since surely Buckingham Palace is also on that list); however, the Royal Family–and the Royal romance–continually draws tourists to Britain. In London this morning reports show:
“Apparently the Kate effect could boost the economy by more than $3 billion as a result of increased tourism, and that’s before you count the power of the princess-to-be to boost charities and fashion sales.”
This is what I have been saying for months! The wedding is already revitalizing a nation in a recession, and more successfully than any American event has an impact on our economy. I recognize there are some macro/microeconomic theories that I am ignoring, but these are my opinions and I stand by them!