Quote: Charley @ March 13, 2008, 8:58 PMWe would still get the tourism. They will still come to London.
Of course. There just wouldn't be as many of them, they wouldn't stay as long, and they wouldn't spend quite as much money.
Quote: Charley @ March 13, 2008, 8:58 PMWe would still get the tourism. They will still come to London.
Of course. There just wouldn't be as many of them, they wouldn't stay as long, and they wouldn't spend quite as much money.
Quote: Aaron @ March 13, 2008, 10:32 PMOf course. There just wouldn't be as many of them, they wouldn't stay as long, and they wouldn't spend quite as much money.
...without a Queen's head on it.
Quote: Aaron @ March 13, 2008, 10:32 PMOf course. There just wouldn't be as many of them, they wouldn't stay as long, and they wouldn't spend quite as much money.
Why don't the tourists pay for the f**king royal family then?
EDiT: Sorry that sounded a bit angry What i meant to say was that if the royal family raises more money than it takes to maintain it then why don't we privatise it. Get balfour Beatty to run them. Tunnel crashes may increase but the Royal Family are long overdue for some natural selection.
Adam, advocating privatisation?!
Quote: Aaron @ March 16, 2008, 9:19 AMAdam, advocating privatisation?!
Only for the Royal Family
Reverse Darwinism aka The Royals.
I like watching the monkeys masturbating in the zoo. Do you think we can get them to do the same?
Do you really wanna see that?
Ner, your right. I'll stick with monkeys.