Prince William, Kate Middleton Wedding

But I sort of thought she did do a little of that. Personally (speaking as someone who fell in love quite young herself), I just think she was young and in love and willing to wait because she knew she was young and so was William. IMO, there is nothing wrong with that. If it didn't work out, she still had her whole life ahead of her. Just my two cents speaking as the "woman in love" if you will.

Kendra, I don't think you need to defend your royal watching hobby for any reason. If people don't get it, who cares? People don't get my Tyler obsession, but as Millie says I don't give a "medium size rodent's tiny lower colon" either. It is what it is. I don't understand what makes other people tick sometimes either. Variety is the spice of life!

 

Here you go Kendra, it is in spanish though... El Pais is the best newspaper in Spain and one of the best in the world, so I trust them with information a lot!
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/agenda/Kate/Guillermo/quieren/sirvientes/casa/elpepigen/20101228elpepiage_3/Tes

I quote the part I mean:
Una alta fuente del palacio de Buckingham confirma que las preferencias del mayor de los hijos de Lady Di distan mucho de las extravagancias de las que se ha acusado a su padre (de quien se ha publicado que cuenta con cuatro sirvientes que lo visten diariamente, mientras uno está especializado en ponerle la pasta de dientes todas las mañanas a su cepillo).

and translate:
A high (meaning important) source of Buckingham palace confirms that the preferences of Lady Di's oldest son are very distant from the extravagant ones his father has been accused of (it has been published that he has 4 servants that dress him daily while one is specialized in putting toothpaste on his toothbrush every morning).
M.

And I edit once again to add: I said in my post that I do not begrudge anybody their love for any celebrity. I don't "get it" but I dont "get" a lot of stuff, and of course it does not change my life in any way if you Kendra love the royal family or you, Kim, Aerosmith. I don't, but I do not care one bit if you do. But saying you admire them for one thing when really that is not the truth, well then I feel in my right to point this out and to point out why that is not correct. I don't get it, but I respect it, as long as you are not telling me how wonderful they are when we all know that their work is minuscule in the larger picture (and tons of people whose work is not minuscule are being ignored).

 

So, something that has been published previously but not mention of where. Its a game of telephone with an "insider source" as its start.

 

I'm NOT ignoring the big people picture but there is the fact that the visits from the high profile people bring attention and donations to those causes. Look at all the fawning over Angelina Jolie (whom I personally hate) when she shows up to do UNICEF visits.

I have said I don't particularly like the "glamor" aspect. It is one of the reasons I dislike the whole Diana industry and actually probably one of the things that turned me off of William. I do like the pretty pictures but only of the people I respect for what they are when they aren't in their fancy clothes.

 

:good: Same here. I'm sure I'll get the jist of it all from the entertainment shows...

 

I agree Kim, I have an obsession over a couple celebs because of their hotness as well as obsessing about Disney. I think it is great that people do their own thing. Now if only Kiefer Sutherland would come to my house...

 

Honestly? It never occurred to me that non-Brits would even think about watching it. It's not even on my radar I guess . . .

 

Tyler who? You have a Tyler obsession?

 

I'll watch.. I watched Charles and Diana's wedding as a little girl with my mom. We watched Diana's funeral together too.. for me it's a little way to capture that childhood memory. Harmless really, in the scheme of things. Our governments waste millions on things that don't matter to us, or worse, are harmful to us.. at least a royal wedding is a happy event.

 

I won't watch even though I am a monarchist (as opposed to a republican) because I don't care what people in public positions do in their private lives.

The cost of the royal family's living expenses are paid by profits from crown estates, not taxpayers. The royal family pay tax themselves anyway. There have also always been jokes about Prince Charles having a servant to help him with every little thing (up to and including having somebody wipe his bottom) so I don't believe for a second that somebody is employed exclusively to put toothpaste on his toothbrush.

I don't read that to mean (neither in Spanish nor in your English translation) to mean that an important source has confirmed the stories about Prince Charles. I read it to mean that the source has confirmed that Prince William and Prince Harry do not use (or want) servants to do things like put toothpaste on their toothbrushes. I don't see how you can conclude from that paragraph that these stories are anything except rumours.

 

And from your other resident royal-watcher: what Kendra said. I was in hospital (severe gastroentritus) when Charles adn Diana got married, so I most definitely did not stay up to watch it, even though at age 18 I was already a huge Royalty fan thanks to my British grandfather (he could remember Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee). I will watch William and Catherine's wedding, but I just can't get worked up about it. Like Kendra, I loved, loved, loved Crown princess Victoria of Sweden's wedding, and I really liked Edward and Sophie's wedding as well as Felipe of Spain's nuptials.

I am just not a huge William fan, and I certainly am no Diana fan (I have had the distinction of being known on various Royals messageboards as the world's biggest Diana-hater, which isn't true since you actually have to care about someone to hate them). Since almost all the articles about the upcoming wedding have mentioned how William is imitating Diana, or following in Diana's footsteps (look! Kate and WSilliam are having flowers at their wedding! Diana had flowers too!), or how proud Diana would have been, I've been avoiding them like the plague. And I know all the coverage of gthe wedding itself will drag Diana into it no matter what, instead of concentrating only on Catherine, William, the Queen, etc.

On the messageboard I help moderate, we've already been joking about which wedding guest will have the worst hat, which guest will show up in a dress like a shower curtain, and so on.

 

This paper may be good--but evidently no one bothered to check facts or figures, or even to get the late Diana, Princess of Wales' title right. "Lady Di" ceased to be so-styled the day she said "I do" to HRH The Prince of Wales. And recycling old stories from Murdoch-owned papers does not improve the article's credibility (Rupert Murdoch's papers have been encouraged for many, many years to report, repeat, and exaggerate not-necessarily-true stories about the British Royal Family). So please forgive me if I take this story with a well-topped grain of salt.

Also, Charles does not live off of taxpayers' money. The Duchy of Cornwall was set up centuries ago as a separate source of income for the Monarch's oldest son, so that neitehr the Monarch nor the Government would fund the Heir-Apparent. Charles cannot sell off assets from the Duchy, nor can he dissolve it. Its surplus revenues go back into the Duchy after Charles and Camilla's living and working expenses have been paid for, and he voluntarily paid income tax on it starting from 1969, when he really started his official working life. William will become Duke of Cornwall when Charles accedes to the Throne.

As for the Monarch, Elizabeth II and her father George VI did not pay income tax on their private incomes. In George VI's case, it was because he assumed the burden of paying out for his brother, the Duke of of Windsor, after the Abdication (Parliament would have had to cough up the 10,000 per annum UKP otherwise) and so Parliament agreed to not charge the tax. When Elizabeth II came to the Throne, the arrangement was continued because A., she kept paying teh Duke fo windsor for an additional 5 years; B., she had not ahd the benefit of Duchy of Cornwall funds while Heir Presumptive; and C.,she would be assuming the cost of raising and educating the Heir Apparent. Of her predecessors, Edward VII and George V all paid income tax n their private incomes from the Duchy of Lancaster.

As someone else also mentioned, the British taxpayer actually doesn't "pay" per se for the Monarchy (which is why I get impatient with the annual "this is how much per head the British Monarchy cost each Brit" report, because it's smoke and mirrors to cover how much the PM and Parliament cost the British taxpayer instead). The income from the Crown Estate gets signed over to the government every year, and in return theMonarchy gets its running costs back. Last year the income from the Crown Estate was somewher ein the region of 200 million UKP, and the cost of running the Monarchy, including the old Civil List, Grants-in-Aid, and so on, was around 50 million UKP. So quite frankly the government made a profit of around 150 million UKP. that's not including the amount of tourist dollars and so on the Monarchy brings in.

And while I will agree the Royals may not work as hard as some, they do work much harder than others. Most people Elizabeth II's age--almost 85--are retired, not going on tours of countries, attending State Visits, holding Investitures, and so on. heck, lots of people her daughter's age--60--wouldn't even dream of doing what Anne does on a daily and weekly basis. So while they may not be down on hands and knees scrubbing floors or whatever day in and day out, they're also not sitting around eating bonbons, either.

Okay, off my soapboax now.

 

That was impressive, Holly! I don't know anything about any of it but it's obvious you do. :lol:

I know it's not "work" in the sense of traditional work but we watched on one of the evening news programs a few months ago a story about Prince Charles and his work re: the environment. Can you or Kendra tell me anything about this? My curiosity was piqued after watching but I sort of forgot about it until now.

 

My favourite joke comparison is "Look! Kate effectively exchanges oxygen for common dioxide! Just like Diana!"

Princess Beatrice

Princess Mable if she is invited or 50/50 on Grand Duchess Marie Terese.

-----

About Charles' environmental work, I'm sure you've heard about him talking to the plants....

Holly is always better at this stuff than me but his most recent focus has been on slowing rain forest deforestation. http://www.rainforestsos.org/

Here is Charles' official web site (with a whole section devoted to finances http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/

 

In addition to what Kendra said, Charles has produced a new book, "Harmony," in which he promotes sustainable development, enironmental awareness, and re-creating planet-wide health on every level. And while Charles gets a lot of flak--some deserved, alot not--for appearing to be "do as I say, not as I do," he was still the first Royal to introduce recycling into his households, along with non-GM foods, natural farming techniques, etc. He's been derided in the media as being a "dabbler," but the environment has been one of his longest-running concerns. Back in the early 1980s he was warning about the dangers of global warming--and getting knocked down about it--and it turns out he was right. I think he gets it from his father--Prince Philip introduced low-flush toilets in the various Royal residences way back in the 1970s and was urging water cleanup as early as the 1960s. And while it may not seem like work to some, still, doing what Charles does--creating forums where people from all disciplines can get together and work towards saving our planet--makes a difference.

Now to more fluffy stuff: I'm hoping Princess Laurentien of the Netherlands shows up at the wedding in something truly ghastly, that Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie break out the too-short miniskirts and bad hats, and Anne shows up wearing the *exact* same outfit she wore to Charles and Diana's wedding (if you want to know who the real recycler is in the British Royal Family, it's Anne. She can, and will, wear dresses and suits that first saw the light of day thirty years ago).

 

Yes, that is what I saw on the news program I mentioned. Isn't there a film too? Thanks for the info!

 

Yes, there's also a film as well. I haven't seen it yet, though. Charles got slammed in the media for praising, in his book, a slum in India for its people's efforts in creating a sustainable environment, but he wasn't celebrating poverty, he was pointing out that if these people, who have nothing, can create a pollution-free habitat and a healthy environment for themselves, then we who have much more should be able to do the same.

 

same here