If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   British Royal Family costs less than $60 million each year. The U.S. Presidents family cost the taxpayer $1.4 billion per year. So, that Revolution thing, how's that working out for you Yanks?   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 187
    More: Interesting, British Royal Family, obama, US President, George H. W. Bush, Air Force One, commander in chief, Dwight Eisenhower  
•       •       •

9067 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Sep 2012 at 5:45 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



187 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-29 01:26:59 PM  
Are you implying paying secret service to keep watch over the president's private beer production is more of a waste than state sponsored jersey shore?
 
2012-09-29 01:28:18 PM  
Yeah, but imaging what the Royals would cost you guys if you had to elect new ones every 4 years. Although I have to admit, the campaigns would be hilarious.
 
2012-09-29 01:37:22 PM  
We don't get detained at sporting events for not smiling.

So eat that dick.
 
2012-09-29 01:49:02 PM  
Well considering the UK has practically outlawed firearms and the fact that the Royals don't do anything politically I would sure hope the presidency costs more to maintain.
 
2012-09-29 01:50:03 PM  
You get what you pay for

/*ducks*
 
2012-09-29 02:03:35 PM  
The President actually does something. Maybe not much, but it's still more than just a handout.
You could say Elizabeth is a...Welfare Queen.
 
2012-09-29 02:08:58 PM  
Oh go and eat a bowl of spotted dicks.
 
2012-09-29 02:09:45 PM  
We'd be so much better off with a comically absurd class of nobility. I guess it's time to write to the Kardashians.
 
2012-09-29 02:19:18 PM  
It's actually working out rather well, since the Obama Administration spent $200 million less than the Bush Administration in 2008:

img822.imageshack.us 

Math, how the Fark does it work?
 
2012-09-29 02:22:50 PM  
Wait a goddamn second. You means things cost money? When the hell did this happen?! This is an outrage!
 
2012-09-29 02:28:40 PM  
Oh, I'm sorry, did you Limeys forget that the American President and his staff actually WORK for a living, as opposed to your royal welfare recipients?

Tell you what, you bloody twats, why don't you post Prime Minister Cameron's budget instead, for a more accurate comparison to the Office of the President of the United States?
 
2012-09-29 02:30:03 PM  
Long as Kate keeps flashin' dem titties, y'alls getting a bargain.
 
2012-09-29 02:36:29 PM  
Given that the President is head of both state and government, you have to add in the Prime Minister for that comparison to have any remote relevance.
 
2012-09-29 02:43:09 PM  
So, you have a Welfare Queen? Hey, the first step is acceptance.
 
2012-09-29 02:44:31 PM  

kronicfeld: Given that the President is head of both state and government, you have to add in the Prime Minister for that comparison to have any remote relevance.


THIS.

And the Queen does work. Her public appearances alone are a full-time job.

Besides which, you guys have forgotten that she gives tons of money to the government in exchange for a small percentage of her income back. Her family has inherited huge holdings in land alone. They got it the same way other families did - in wars, by gift, and by marriage. Look back far enough, that's how rich families get land, originally. The only real difference is, their family has held it in an unbroken line, without splitting it up every generation or having cetain family members sell most of their portion off every so often.

So lay off, limeys, or cut her off entirely, give her back all her private property, and let her go back to being the richest woman in England with absolutely no duties to the State.
 
2012-09-29 02:48:12 PM  
Did anyone mention that the royal family doesn't really do anything yet?
 
2012-09-29 03:02:43 PM  
Well we're not British, so we've got that going for us.
 
2012-09-29 03:06:25 PM  
There is so much fail in that headline that it's giving me a headache.
 
2012-09-29 03:09:15 PM  
So the President is worth 20 British Royal Families.

ha.
 
2012-09-29 03:26:35 PM  
My teeth are fantastic
 
2012-09-29 03:27:06 PM  
i47.tinypic.com

"They say he will return to his farm." King George said of George Washington. "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world."


Yeah, we win. Again.
 
2012-09-29 03:32:35 PM  
If you mouse over the "read more" link at the bottom you'll find this Daily Mail story appears to come from Daily Make Shiat Up. This is sort of like Fars relaying the Onion's polling report; A case of a questionable news source repacking a story from a satirical news source because they don't know any better.
 
2012-09-29 03:34:23 PM  
So, that Revolution thing, how's that working out for you Yanks?

Well, they were a lot better than the New Power Generation...
 
2012-09-29 03:43:10 PM  
Well, let's see. You bankrupted yourselves with two world wars and had to basically give your empire to us in exchange for outdated destroyers. I think it worked out pretty well.
 
2012-09-29 04:41:08 PM  
If the Brits had to add dental care to the royals payout, the price would shoot up to well over triple what we pay for President Obama and his family.
 
2012-09-29 05:31:08 PM  
Oh look - the americans are angry at Dad again.
 
2012-09-29 05:44:53 PM  
Them's fightin' words, subby.

We've invaded bigger and better countries for less.

We still got our pride, dammit!
 
2012-09-29 05:45:48 PM  
assets.flavorwire.com
This guy's reign gonna be worth $60 mil a year for the decade-plus after his mum croaks?
 
2012-09-29 05:48:14 PM  

mr_a: Yeah, but imaging what the Royals would cost you guys if you had to elect new ones every 4 years. Although I have to admit, the campaigns would be hilarious.


David Cameron said on Letterman that he spent 4 months campaigning at a whopping cost of about $150,000. The reason: the UK doesn't allow political ads on TV. We could learn a thing or two from them, methinks.
 
2012-09-29 05:48:18 PM  
Both sides of the pond are bad, so vote Tory.
 
2012-09-29 05:49:56 PM  
At least our guy needs more than two hands to hide his "head of state".
 
2012-09-29 05:49:57 PM  
i.imgur.com

Cost taxpayers 1.6 billion a year.

Well done to Obama for reducing government spending!
 
2012-09-29 05:50:19 PM  
An expense allowance for the President? Not like he has to spend money on anything. Weird.
 
2012-09-29 05:51:42 PM  
Our President is the leader of the WHOLE FARKING WESTERN WORLD so go eat some spotted dick
 
2012-09-29 05:51:44 PM  
Without going too deep into it, you may kiss my ass subby. That is all.
 
2012-09-29 05:54:35 PM  
>> So, that Revolution thing, how's that working out for you Yanks?

At least we get to drive forward on the correct side of the road.
 
2012-09-29 05:56:35 PM  
For a better comparison, wouldn't the cost of the Royals+PM and his/her family be more accurate?
 
2012-09-29 05:57:21 PM  
Guess these troll headlines keep Fark in business
 
2012-09-29 05:58:11 PM  
Well, since we're filthy rich, worked out pretty good
 
2012-09-29 05:59:59 PM  

homelessdude: >> So, that Revolution thing, how's that working out for you Yanks?

At least we get to drive forward on the correct side of the road.


And don't forget...we can say "aluminum" without sounding like total retards.
 
2012-09-29 06:00:26 PM  
Talk about apples and oranges.

Obama probably puts in more traveling time than the entire royal family, and to far more hostile destinations, such as: Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Afghanistan.

Other key difference is that Obama is the elected chief executive of the United States; the royal family hold ceremonial positions that they receive through hereditary (yes, I know that the Queen is technically the head of state, but the last time the monarch vetoed a bill was 1707).
 
2012-09-29 06:01:06 PM  
Does that include or exclude the $200 million he spent on that trip to India?
 
2012-09-29 06:02:19 PM  
Subby got medieval on our ass.
 
2012-09-29 06:02:30 PM  

PainInTheASP: homelessdude: >> So, that Revolution thing, how's that working out for you Yanks?

At least we get to drive forward on the correct side of the road.

And don't forget...we can say "aluminum" without sounding like total retards.


And we go to THE hospital and THE university.
 
Xai
2012-09-29 06:02:39 PM  
given the amount of stuff we sell to tourists every year, the queen actually makes us money.
 
2012-09-29 06:04:13 PM  
Say there, chap. How would one go about a revolution in the UK without any guns?


Oh, right.
 
2012-09-29 06:04:21 PM  
img829.imageshack.us
 
2012-09-29 06:05:14 PM  

fusillade762: mr_a: Yeah, but imaging what the Royals would cost you guys if you had to elect new ones every 4 years. Although I have to admit, the campaigns would be hilarious.

David Cameron said on Letterman that he spent 4 months campaigning at a whopping cost of about $150,000. The reason: the UK doesn't allow political ads on TV. We could learn a thing or two from them, methinks.


That pesky 1st Amendment.
 
2012-09-29 06:05:26 PM  
9 trillion by my count.
 
2012-09-29 06:06:30 PM  
i.imgur.com

Money well spent.
 
Displayed 50 of 187 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report