Helen F
Warrington
|
61 of 67
Tue 2nd May 2023 3:37pm
One of the biggest resentments is 'we pay for them', which isn't broadly true. Only those earning above the 70% highest incomes pay for anything but what they and their kids use. We see the Royals living in very luxurious places like Windsor but only some of those properties belong to the King and the nation would have to pay for their upkeep anyway. Much of the money that goes towards the Royals is from a fund (properties etc) set up a long time ago. I suspect that its value is perhaps declining compared to expenses in modern times, hence Charles' desire to reduce the number of Royals suckling on it.
I'm not a monarchist but neither am I a republican. I don't want a president. They cost a lot of money, in elections alone. They can't be as free from politics as the Queen used to be. It remains to be seen if Charles can refrain from meddling. On the face of it, the Royal family has its uses. We get benefit from it and should pay. What is the going rate for child stars? Harry and William had more starring roles than the Harry Potter kids.
The other issue is that we don't really know what we want the Royals to do. Open stuff? Be the face of a charity? Look pretty and shut up? How low down an event should a Royal turn up? Are we really impressed with a Royal being a patron or even with many charities? Sure, they are very useful when we want to impress foreign dignitaries but how many do we need for that? The Royals promote British businesses but are supposed to buy what they use, not accept things for free. Unless it's race horses sent as a gift from a prince who has had his daughter kidnapped from this country. That's ok. We want them to be relatable but at the same time aloof. We want them to be glamorous but inexpensive. We want them to support causes but not causes we don't like - and we don't all like the same causes.
While polls suggest 38% don't support the monarchy, I think it's been worse in recent decades. |
Memories and Nostalgia -
Coronation Day, 1953
|
argon
New Milton
|
62 of 67
Tue 2nd May 2023 3:55pm
No institution is perfect. The monarchy shows the same human frailties as any other family. As I see it the problem is the continual spotlight on any royal. Being a royal seems to me a burden rather than a privilege and the record from the past seems to me to show that in the main we have had value for money. The younger generation of royals are to me a product of the times. I have no time for Harry and Meghan's juvenile behaviour and regret Harry's marriage to a publicity seeking celebrity. However the idea of removing the monarchy and becoming a republic is to me risible. Can you see any of our present 'leaders' as president? Look at the record of current presidents e.g. Russia China, N.Korea, Iran to name a few. Once in you may not be able to dislodge them. Who can say that it couldn't happen here. Don't change a winning team. |
Memories and Nostalgia -
Coronation Day, 1953
|
Mick Strong
Coventry
|
63 of 67
Tue 2nd May 2023 5:41pm
From Helen's post "One of the biggest resentments is 'we pay for them', which isn't broadly true."
From Google:
"Ever wondered how much the royal family cost the taxpayer? Accounts for the Sovereign Grant, which funds the Monarchy's household's official expenses, released in June of 2022 show that they cost the taxpayer £102.4m during 2021-22 - an increase of 17% from the previous financial year."
And this is just for their expenses
|
Memories and Nostalgia -
Coronation Day, 1953
|
Helen F
Warrington
|
64 of 67
Tue 2nd May 2023 6:13pm
But a lot of the expenses are maintaining our buildings. Paying for banquets that host foreign dignitaries, etc. The Sovereign Grant is that trust I mentioned. It was invested in buildings that provide rent and doesn't directly come from taxation. Some of it goes to staff. Some of it goes on travel expenses used in their duties. Some of it goes to the Royals as salary. Ok, if we got rid of the Royals the revenue of those buildings would come to the government instead but we'd still be paying out to look after the royal buildings, pay some of the staff when we wanted to use them as civic buildings, etc. |
Memories and Nostalgia -
Coronation Day, 1953
|
Dreamtime
Perth Western Australia
|
65 of 67
Wed 3rd May 2023 8:58am
Queen Elizabeth served her country well as she promised she would, and now we are soon to have King Charles. Better a loyal/royal family like these than the wicked disloyals from centuries ago. It's a good job they did away with the guillotine, goodness knows how they would pay for their sins today. A very debatable topic whichever way you look at it. I shall be watching the Coronation (even if it's just to see what Kate is wearing). |
Memories and Nostalgia -
Coronation Day, 1953
|
Mick Strong
Coventry
|
66 of 67
Wed 3rd May 2023 7:10pm
I shall dig out my box set of "Only Fools & Horses" and watch as many as I can.
Then roll on Sunday !!
|
Memories and Nostalgia -
Coronation Day, 1953
|
bk
Coventry
|
67 of 67
Fri 5th May 2023 12:34pm
Quite a few coronation images in the CT archive.
|
Memories and Nostalgia -
Coronation Day, 1953
|