Baby Names
+2
Tony H
Amber
6 posters
Page 1 of 1
Baby Names
George Alexander Louis - not the names you would expect a modern young couple to choose for their baby I appreciate the need for some tradition and the need to bear in mind that 'King' will be preceding the name one day, but that's really stuffy IMO.
Re: Baby Names
As a slightly more modern couple they would have probably chosen a more modern names, but the Queen has veto so I expect they were a bit limited and followed the usual route of using ancestors name. I agree though.. bit stuffy
Tony H- Posts : 197
Join date : 2013-07-09
Location : near St. Goussaud, 23
Re: Baby Names
Hi Folks
I'm in Victor meldrew mode again, who cares?.The tax payers will be footing the bills for the young ones up bringing and education. Note also the birth was not in a NHS hospital and so will have cost us all a large sum of money.
Simmo in the Correze
I'm in Victor meldrew mode again, who cares?.The tax payers will be footing the bills for the young ones up bringing and education. Note also the birth was not in a NHS hospital and so will have cost us all a large sum of money.
Simmo in the Correze
simmo- Posts : 281
Join date : 2013-07-13
Age : 73
Location : In the woods of the High Correze
Re: Baby Names
I think you have to weigh up the cost of the Royal Family against certain other factors such as tourism, world opinion etc.
The Queen has never retired and has worked a lot longer than most of us. Would you rather have Cameron as President - I think not.
Are the tax payers really paying for them? Remember that Kate was a working woman and is William in the Army or somethig? Sorry, but I do not keep up with UK news and probably know more about Monsieur Hollande than the Royals. All I do know is that the press, as usual, bored people to tears while waiting for the arrival.
The Brits should be very happy at the moment with their sports wins and an economy that has been boosted by the birth of the baby, whether you like it or not.
The Queen has never retired and has worked a lot longer than most of us. Would you rather have Cameron as President - I think not.
Are the tax payers really paying for them? Remember that Kate was a working woman and is William in the Army or somethig? Sorry, but I do not keep up with UK news and probably know more about Monsieur Hollande than the Royals. All I do know is that the press, as usual, bored people to tears while waiting for the arrival.
The Brits should be very happy at the moment with their sports wins and an economy that has been boosted by the birth of the baby, whether you like it or not.
Tradzoner- Posts : 82
Join date : 2013-07-11
Location : North Creuse
Re: Baby Names
I agree with Tradzoner. The Royal Family is a bit of an easy target when it comes to having "a bit of a pop" but the fact remains that our institution of Royalty is studied with great interest around the world and attracts a huge amount of income from tourism. I don't have the figures relating to how much income "Royalty" earns for the UK and any statistics would always have to treated with a certain amount of circumspection, but I would bet a large sum of money that it attracts a lot more than a president.
I also think that Kate & William are excellent role models for young people and I'm not sure how you put a value on that.
I also think that Kate & William are excellent role models for young people and I'm not sure how you put a value on that.
tocyvi- Posts : 361
Join date : 2013-07-10
Re: Baby Names
Tony H wrote:As a slightly more modern couple they would have probably chosen a more modern names,
Hi Tony. I know watcher mean like, but Dwayne Kyle Brooklyn Shane Cambridge just don't kinda sound right, does it?
tocyvi- Posts : 361
Join date : 2013-07-10
Tofu_Lover- Posts : 43
Join date : 2013-07-15
Location : South of the Corrèze
Re: Baby Names
So that's two of us that's lost our bets then. Damn! I really thought I was onto a winner with that.
tocyvi- Posts : 361
Join date : 2013-07-10
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|