Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

tommonymous -> Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 6:45:15 AM)

I came across a couple of articles this morning about the British royal family, one of which has probably the best headline I've ever read. They got me to thinking, why continue the burden on the taxpayer? Tradition, public figurehead, et al, but I've got to think that there are much better uses of 30+ million pounds of public monies annually.

Oh, the articles? Apparently, the Queen is down to her last million pounds of savings, and she's emphatic that her protection detail 'keep their sticky fingers' off her nuts.

I'd like to hear what her subjects think about the institution and its usefulness today. I'd also like to try to keep this out of P&R. (And don't tell anyone, but I hope to have made at least a couple of you sick chuckers fuckle...)

Thanks all.



tj444 -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 7:35:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tommonymous
she's emphatic that her protection detail 'keep their sticky fingers' off her nuts.


if I take a box of paper clips home from my employer its theft.. perhaps not as damaging to the employer as embezzling but its not honest, none-the-less.. especially if it gets out of hand.. maybe the Queen should have a basket of doughnuts out just fer her coppers.. [;)]

As a Canadian, we do "pay" for having the Queen as out figurehead (not as much as the Brits but still..).. and I personally am fine with that as I like the tradition & I like her & the Royal family (they come and visit but never overstay their welcome! [:D])



AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 7:55:10 AM)

fr

The financial situation is a bit more complex than that. The royal family are paid from money from the Crown Estates and it's a fraction of the total profit that comes in. George III signed the Crown Estates over during his reign and it was a bargain for the country to take that deal.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/7850335/The-Royal-family-is-a-bargain-for-Britain.html

Also, tourism. Especially with the big events in the last few years - jubilees, weddings, births. Big business. Brings in a lot of money.



servantforuse -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 8:12:31 AM)

We have our own royalty sitting in the white house right now. They are probably paying less than we are.



TNDommeK -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 8:25:40 AM)

How awesome it must be to have a Queen....instead of what we have. [:'(]
Seriously though, that must be awesome.



Winterapple -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 9:15:16 AM)

FR
I have a great deal of respect for Queen Elizabeth and other
royals but I no interest in bending the knee ( as they say in
Game of Thrones) to anyone.



George Washington turned down a crown, refused to
be a king. When King George heard this he slumped
on his throne and said "If that's true he must be the
greatest man who ever lived". And he was certainly one
of the greatest. I don't think America is missing anything
because we threw off one monarchy and didn't replace
it with another. I'll take our constitution over a royal
wedding or a coronation always and forever. Meritocracy over
aristocracy. We can enjoy foreign royals vicariously without
having to pay for them or have them as figureheads.



dcnovice -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 9:28:54 AM)

quote:

We have our own royalty sitting in the white house right now.

Double play: bitter and irrelevant. [8|]


quote:

They are probably paying less than we are.

The U.S. President is head of both state and government, so an apt comparison to the UK would need to include the costs of Downing Street as well as the monarchy.

It also bears noting that security costs for the President probably outpace those for the PM. Two reasons: (a) The President is a global figure in a way that modern PMs aren't, and (b) assassins have slain four American Presidents.



Toysinbabeland -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 9:39:35 AM)



Edited for protocol



VideoAdminRho -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 10:04:03 AM)

Since the OP wishes to keep this out of P&R - please, let's leave American politics out of the conversation.



TNDommeK -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 11:50:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Winterapple

FR
I have a great deal of respect for Queen Elizabeth and other
royals but I no interest in bending the knee ( as they say in
Game of Thrones) to anyone.



George Washington turned down a crown, refused to
be a king. When King George heard this he slumped
on his throne and said "If that's true he must be the
greatest man who ever lived". And he was certainly one
of the greatest. I don't think America is missing anything
because we threw off one monarchy and didn't replace
it with another. I'll take our constitution over a royal
wedding or a coronation always and forever. Meritocracy over
aristocracy. We can enjoy foreign royals vicariously without
having to pay for them or have them as figureheads.


Interesting. I never knew that.



MariaB -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 1:48:52 PM)

I agree with Athena

The Crown Estate earns a huge yearly income and in itself is worth a whopping 13 billion. In 2012 the annual profits for the Crown Estate was 250 million pounds. The royal household is only given 15% of those profits in what is known as the Sovereign Grant. The queen only gets a rise when the Crown Estate makes more profit. The remaining money goes directly to the British Treasury, so in actual fact the public profit from the Crown Estate.

The queen also has a massive private income from the Duchy of Lancaster ( 45,000 acres of real estate) and its with this income that she pays for all her personal expenses and those incurred by her extended family.

There are plenty of British anti-royalists and an abundance of propaganda in the trashy tabloids about how much the queen costs its nation. The majority of British citizens don't know how the queen is paid and many believe its all taxpayers money!



PeonForHer -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:09:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TNDommeK

How awesome it must be to have a Queen....instead of what we have. [:'(]
Seriously though, that must be awesome.


It isn't, TK. It's embarrassing - for me, anyway. It's a lot of anachronous drivel.

The Royal Family, plus its buildings and what-not, does indeed add a bit to the UK's attraction as a tourist attraction. But few tourists say that the existence, or otherwise, of our RF would have made any appreciable difference to their given motivation to visit the UK. There are more visitors to the London Eye, apparently, than there visitors to Buckingham Palace.

There's a massive irony that comes to light when one compares the British Royal Family with that of the French. The French, of course, got rid of theirs in 1789. Yet, the Palace at Versailles gets more visitors, despite there being no resident Royals, and despite it being a long way from Paris, than does Buckingham Palace. So the bottom line is: we'd arguably be better off having *once had* a Royal Family, than the situation now, where we *still have* one. Buck Pal opened up, almost entirely, like Hampton Court (the one time-main residence of our monarchs)? Oh yes - now that would draw in the tourists.

For me, the most revolting thing about British culture has always, and will probably always be, its class-ridden culture. The institution of the British Royal Family underpins all that. I don't see it even beginning to fade away till the Royal Family disappears.

An admired pal of mine, a fellow Brit, disagrees with me on this. He will be along shortly to give his side, no doubt. He just needs to finish his present mug of coffee. ;-)



kdsub -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:14:48 PM)


If I were a subject of the Queen I would want the connection to my past. England is blessed to have a glorious, rich, and well documented history that is linked directly to today. I would find pride in the pomp and circumstance of the Royal family and would be willing to support it with taxes.

Butch



Dvr22999874 -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:15:50 PM)

I agree completely with all you say Peon...............and we still have monarchists here who think the queen and all her tribe are one step up from the gods.The sun shines out of her arse and every fart's a sunbeam.
I would be happy to see Australia become a republic. One of the reasons I left U.K. was to get away from all that bullshit.



PeonForHer -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:25:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: VideoAdminRho

Since the OP wishes to keep this out of P&R - please, let's leave American politics out of the conversation.


You know, seriously, Rho, it's almost as though since it's 'only' about UK politics, it doesn't really fit into the category of 'politics' at all? It's quite strange. For some Brits, like me, this really is hot politics. For most Brits, it doesn't matter one way or another. For a few, our Royal Family is vital and they're the flip side of the coin that I live on. For Americans, I have no doubt, it doesn't matter much and is just some whimsical little debate.

Personally, I wouldn't want to leave out American politics here. For instance, I'd particularly like to know why a Royal Family in the UK is somehow acceptable, right and 'natural', whereas in the USA it would look unbelievably stupid, ridiculous and unacceptable.

Oh, and another thing, Rho . . . Royalists in the UK have always banged it as much as they can that our Royal Family is "above politics". To we non-Royalists, this is bollocks. It's a game that pro and anti Royals have been playing here in the UK for centuries.



hlen5 -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:43:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

.....For me, the most revolting thing about British culture has always, and will probably always be, its class-ridden culture. The institution of the British Royal Family underpins all that. I don't see it even beginning to fade away till the Royal Family disappears.



For that family to disappear, wouldn't it have to go the way of the French or Russian Monarchy? No one wants that, I hope.

People speak of the rich history of Britain. Our US history is forever entwined. It reminds me of a story I read. Some US couple were on a British flagged cruise. Went they came down to breakfast on July 4th, there was a cake. "America, Happy Birthday, Love Mum". I love that story!!



Dvr22999874 -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:50:26 PM)

I could probably find quite a few volunteers to send them the same way as the French and Russian monarchy. They too thought they were 'Chosen and annointed by god to rule' as the queen has said a number of times. Well, I guess they were given the opportunity to discus that with him/her



Politesub53 -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:51:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

An admired pal of mine, a fellow Brit, disagrees with me on this. He will be along shortly to give his side, no doubt. He just needs to finish his present mug of coffee. ;-)


MariaB is already doing a good job of explaining how the Crown Estate works. I shall finish my coffee and just be glad we dont have to pay for the upkeep of the Kremlin. [8D]



PeonForHer -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:54:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

.....For me, the most revolting thing about British culture has always, and will probably always be, its class-ridden culture. The institution of the British Royal Family underpins all that. I don't see it even beginning to fade away till the Royal Family disappears.



For that family to disappear, wouldn't it have to go the way of the French or Russian Monarchy? No one wants that, I hope.

People speak of the rich history of Britain. Our US history is forever entwined. It reminds me of a story I read. Some US couple were on a British flagged cruise. Went they came down to breakfast on July 4th, there was a cake. "America, Happy Birthday, Love Mum". I love that story!!


I don't want to see any member of our Royal Family locked up or shot, Hlen, if that's what you mean. I think we're all beyond that, these days.

But no, I absolutely do *not* see or feel the monarchy to be some 'essential' part of British history. It's just a big, red, pulsing pimple that's always been on the body of British history, that's all. We have the mother of all parliaments, here, so it's said. Some of the finest inventors, the best radical thinkers of all kinds . . . *these* are the traditions that I'm proud of. The Royal Family? Nup. They were (and remain) just alive while a series of admirable people here did, and do, things around them, that's all.



Politesub53 -> RE: Thoughts on royalty (UK, specifically). (1/28/2014 2:58:19 PM)

Peon...... British culture is class ridden from top to bottom. The same as America, France, Russia, China and all the other banana republics. [;)]

Those "With" the money almost always see themselves as superior to those "Without"



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875