advertisement


King Charles III

Tony L said:
I really don’t want this thread to be political, but that is simply wrong. The institution of monarchy “owns” staggering wealth; vast swathes of land, castles, palaces, much of the coastline plus all the gold, jewels, trinkets and art obtained over the centuries. £500m is creative accounting in the extreme. The reality will be countless £bns, a fair percentage of the UK fixed asset wealth. This won’t be limited to the UK either, there will be holdings all across the globe.
Click to expand...
If she gave it to the UK government, it would disappear in minutes and nobody would notice a difference in the quality of life. I'm not happy with how her ancestors got the wealth they have, but they say the Royal Family brings in more than it spends. Without the associated wealth and castles etc, would that still be the case?
 
Ponty said:
.... that’s £65 each. Doesn’t go very far does it.
Click to expand...

In your cloistered world I'm sure that's peanuts - but I'm also sure those using food banks and unable to 'heat and eat' would be exceptionally grateful for it, and if it was distributed by means and need, the sum would be far greater.
 
gustav_errata said:
As an American in the UK (9 years now) this is all a bit distant for me and I would generally desist from any meaningful discussion on the topic. However I will point out one thing that baffles me: referring to the Queen's "service" to her country. This is a constitutional monarchy, so the country can be considered to be one or both of: the monarch and her subjects. It's nonsensical to say that one serves one's own subjects. So we are applauding her service to herself and the royal family?

I'm asking this genuinely and without maliciousness. As I said, it's all distant for me despite living here. I'm happy to be corrected with some missing perspective.
Click to expand...
Sound "self-serving" as you say.
 
<moderating>

I’ve moved a few posts relating to the wealth and property holdings of the monarchy to this thread. As stated I’d prefer to keep the other one as a basic RIP thread. I’m all for scrutinising the concept and history of monarchy, but that thread is not the place.
 
richardg said:
If she gave it to the UK government, it would disappear in minutes and nobody would notice a difference in the quality of life. I'm not happy with how her ancestors got the wealth they have, but they say the Royal Family brings in more than it spends. Without the associated wealth and castles etc, would that still be the case?
Click to expand...
Works for the Americans and the French.
 
gustav_errata said:
.... This is a constitutional monarchy, so the country can be considered to be one or both of: the monarch and her subjects. It's nonsensical to say that one serves one's own subjects. So we are applauding her service to herself and the royal family?
Click to expand...

A very good point - spot on in fact :)
Sums up the blatant lie in the 'service to the country' bollox plied through every orifice of the propaganda machine
 
windhoek said:
I cancelled my TV license earlier this year as I just don't watch TV, not even catch-up TV, and thank goodness - I can only imagine how all-consuming the media behemoth is just now. I appreciate some people have lost a family relative and that sucks for sure. But I'm just not a fan of how the whole country is obliged to wear black, even if it's just metaphorical. But when you've not got a TV license, you're not quite as exposed to the behemoth as most folks so thank goodness I cancelled :)
Click to expand...

It's wall-to-wall on the French media, too. I switched on early for the 20h news on France 2 last night, it was already just the Queen (and the insufferable Stéphane Bern). The news didn't happen, just more Queen. It was quite interesting hearing the French take on things, but after 90 minutes of Queen, I realised we weren't going to get any news or even the rest of the evening's schedule.

To avoid R4 this morning, I put on France Info, and it was all Queen.

Perhaps I should try German radio.
 
richardg said:
If she gave it to the UK government, it would disappear in minutes and nobody would notice a difference in the quality of life. I'm not happy with how her ancestors got the wealth they have, but they say the Royal Family brings in more than it spends. Without the associated wealth and castles etc, would that still be the case?
Click to expand...

Quite. The govt machinery would lose half of it in administration costs (keeps them in a job I suppose).
 
What I object to is the shutting down of the country while the monarchists have their fortnight in the sun (again) at our expense. I doubt they'll be football this weekend, the cricket's off today, you can't strike - even if you've voted to do so. It's impossible to avoid the mass hysteria sh!t show. That's before the coronation! Truss will use every manoeuvre in the book to gain advantage legislatively, politically etc while everyone else is asleep at the wheel and Starmer is enslaved to the 'National Interest'.
 
gustav_errata said:
As an American in the UK (9 years now) this is all a bit distant for me and I would generally desist from any meaningful discussion on the topic. However I will point out one thing that baffles me: referring to the Queen's "service" to her country. This is a constitutional monarchy, so the country can be considered to be one or both of: the monarch and her subjects. It's nonsensical to say that one serves one's own subjects. So we are applauding her service to herself and the royal family?
Click to expand...

The extent of gaslighting is extraordinary. We are programmed to accept this imposed elite hierarchy from birth as a normal part of our day to day life. It’s like being in a more sinister version of The Truman Show. I watched some reaction on live YouTube last night and the viewpoint of US leftists is remarkably direct and to the point. I watched the first half-hour of this Vaush stream and he pulls no punches. He clearly has the same contempt for the concept I do, but I’ve had 59 years being programmed to accept it via every single news broadcast, every newspaper, every political party every day of my life, so like everyone else in the UK I have a degree of Stockholm Syndrome. I should logically be far more angry than I am. Monarchy is an entirely unacceptable concept we have been programmed to see as normal. It is a very weird feeling and I only hope the passing of ‘The Queen’ will help some question their environment a little more.
 
Finnegan said:
I think you might be overestimating Macron’s Gallic charm. The Palace of Versailles still packs ‘em in though, despite the French doing the right thing 230 years ago.
Click to expand...
Sure am, hes a politician, not a statesman. And very transient.
 
windhoek said:
I cancelled my TV license earlier this year as I just don't watch TV, not even catch-up TV, and thank goodness -
Click to expand...

Didn't know that Americans needed to pay a licence (sorry, license) fee. When the BBC decided to renege on G.B.'s (?) free licence for over 75s, I initially thought it iniquitous, but now paying £13.25 per month, I realise just how much pleasure I get from my guestimate of 40 to 60 hours a month. My daughter doesn't pay a licence fee as her TV receives only Netflix etc. Bloody repetitive adverts have me reaching for the mute button every time !

I'm not sure I'm a Royal Family supporter, but am certainly not any kind of enthusiast, nor particularly interested in royal affairs. However, I am in favour of the status quo and believe that this country has been and still is a beneficiary from having this perpetuating royal history.

My skin (sister) is now 98 and looked forward to getting that letter (think telegrams are out?) from the Queen. Not sure she'll come to terms with a Carolean communication instead. ;) Wonder if his accession to the throne means his dukedom finishes and all those Duchy delights become renamed Cornish consumables.
 
eisenach said:
It's wall-to-wall on the French media, too. I switched on early for the 20h news on France 2 last night, it was already just the Queen (and the insufferable Stéphane Bern). The news didn't happen, just more Queen. It was quite interesting hearing the French take on things, but after 90 minutes of Queen, I realised we weren't going to get any news or even the rest of the evening's schedule.
Click to expand...

The French regularly display a bit of 'buyers remorse' over swapping their royal family for a republic (twice).
 
Is he not going to do the right thing and pass the hot potato straight over to William? I just don't see him pulling this off at all. And he has not got much time left to show us what he is worth.
 
eisenach said:
To avoid R4 this morning, I put on France Info, and it was all Queen.
Perhaps I should try German radio.
Click to expand...

Reine, surely. :D (Or Konigin mit umlaut?). The global coverage of this event surely signifies the esteem that H.R.H. holds in her unprecedented longevity on the throne.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top