advertisement


Queen's consent - time to abolish it, and the family that has so abused their power ?

A

avole

The wise never post on Internet forums
Oh, I'm suggesting that the queen and only her children are allowed to remain in their palaces, which they must buy back at market prices, but the freebies stop there.

The Guardian has the details, and a book is shortly to be published. I also accept that the queen probably doesn't even bother to look at the majority of bills, but even so, while I am one of her subjects, I do not think she and her husband should have the power to effectively feather their own nest.
 
So the queen alters the law to prevent revealing the
extent of her wealth and Charles alters another to prevent his tenants buying their properties.
Oh btw do you see they took around a million
pounds in farming subsidies from the EU in 2019.
 
Not to mention their gains from approving the sale of part of their properties to build new train lines...

There really is no excuse any more.
 
The telling aspect of the Monarchy is symbolic rather than economic. The monarchy represents the fundamental flaw in our democracy that is our need to be led, and led by a person in whom we invest almost magical properties. We retain a scepticism in our political leaders, but we seem to need to balance that rational doubt with an irrational faith in a god-like figurehead in whom we place unquestioning trust and adoration.

The monarchy is a symbol of our political immaturity.

However, the popularity of the monarchy is so entrenched, it’s hardly a battle worth fighting while there is so much else within parliamentary politics that needs addressing
 
Last edited:
A very great deal of their wealth is private, nothing to do with the state and they have paid income tax for quite a few years now.
So the UK moves to having a president, and how much would that cost from the public coffers?

President Blair, Thatcher, Johnson, Wilson, Benn?

ks.234 said:
The worst aspect of the Monarchy is symbolic rather than economic.
Click to expand...

LLLLLLLLLLOL - that has got to be one of the more ludicrous statements to appear on PFM. Just for starters - check online what foreign income, in normal years, is directly associated with the Royals.
 
Vinny said:
A very great deal of their wealth is private, nothing to do with the state and they have paid income tax for quite a few years now.
So the UK moves to having a president, and how much would that cost from the public coffers?

President Blair, Thatcher, Johnson, Wilson, Benn?



LLLLLLLLLLOL - that has got to be one of the more ludicrous statements to appear on PFM. Just for starters - check online what foreign income, in normal years, is directly associated with the Royals.
Click to expand...
If you actually read my post, you’ll see that I wasn’t making an economic argument, so checking up on the economics is irrelevant
 
Vinny, a lot of your tax etc goes to support the monarchy. Other countries give a moderate stipend and limit residencies, but the "royal" family has used its more than generous state income multiply its wealth who knows how many times over, yet baulks at giving even a fraction back to her "subjects".

The models used in other countries would work, and be so much better for all, why not try them ?

P.S. ks.234 makes a good and valid point.
 
Vinny said:
A very great deal of their wealth is private, nothing to do with the state and they have paid income tax for quite a few years now.
So the UK moves to having a president, and how much would that cost from the public coffers?

President Blair, Thatcher, Johnson, Wilson, Benn?
.
Click to expand...
Where are your workings for this private wealth? Where does this private wealth come from?

Andrew gets a small fortune selling instruments of death and torture to other monarchies, and Charlie gets a generous income from the estates he has been given in the first place, but that’s hardly ‘nothing to do with the state’
 
Dogberry said:
So the queen alters the law to prevent revealing the
extent of her wealth and Charles alters another to prevent his tenants buying their properties.
Oh btw do you see they took around a million
pounds in farming subsidies from the EU in 2019.
Click to expand...
The Royal Family has no power to alter or create Law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top