![]() |
we have a monarchy, so we should have a coronation on change over. It's probably a bit over the top, but its one of the only things the UK actually does well
|
Quote:
Yes, but so many can not afford, an event. |
So what, they get a day off, no-one is asking them to spend money
|
The entire thing is extremely tasteless and out of touch, when most of the country is facing financial hardship, shoving the royal families personal wealth (which isn’t being used to afford this show) is ridiculous
|
Quote:
On the otherhand it lifts many a spirit...brings communities together..gives everyone a day off work and takes people away from everyday life. The world loves the pomp and ceremony...and we deliver it in leaps and bounds. |
It’s not like we would have a windfall instead of a coronation ....
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Because what you say is totally accurate. |
Quote:
Are you talking about the poor people who choose to travel to London to be part of the historic celebrations whilst being forced to wave flags and worship their King???… |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The monarchy brings in much more money than it costs to fund it. |
Quote:
- ‘the royals have an unusual agreement with the British government—an agreement that likely makes British citizens' tax bills cheaper, not more expensive. This is due to a deal originally cut in 1760 by King George III, allowing the British government to reap the revenues from the royal family's vast private property, called the Crown Estate, while giving them their taxpayer-funded stipend in return. In total, these properties brought £486.9 million, or $671.9 million, in revenue in 2021. In contrast, the royal family's taxpayer-funded expenses, in the form of a "sovereign grant," totaled only $118.5 million that year, thus netting the British government a profit of almost $550 million in 2021 dollars. Were the monarchy to be retired, this deal would likely end, allowing the royal family to retain the whole profits from the Crown Estate. [From ‘What would happen to the U.K. balance sheet if the monarchy were retired?’] |
Bring back the guilotine for harry. Make it the new grand national or nations event.
|
|
Quote:
We would never go that far back. |
Quote:
Liniker commenting The left would allow this. I vote corbyn. |
Quote:
Ok….:joker: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
"They make obscene revenue off of the vast amounts of private land they own as part of their wealth-hoarding and they give that money back to the country so long as we validate them as an active monarchy ... if we stop doing that they'll keep all of it for themselves." Doesn't paint the best picture when you phrase it slightly differently, does it Jet? |
:hehe:
|
The palace of Versailles is the most visited attraction in Europe, it attracts endless amounts of people and money, the palaces in Britain aren’t anywhere close to being on the same level and what’s the difference? Ours are inhabited by the biggest scroungers in the country, abolish the monarchy, open up all the palaces and you can double the revenue they make by tourists paying to come and tour the homes of the longest reigning monarch in our history, sorted, the apprentice here I come
|
Quote:
And there would be no more pesky engagements, charity work and ‘grin and bear it’ diplomatic relations with other more worthy :rolleyes: mega rich heads of state. |
Quote:
Please make a donation and help the Palace of Versailles. https://en.chateauversailles.fr/news...-of-versailles All profits are reinvested in the running and upkeep of the Palace and its estate. Opening up all the Royal Palaces would be disastrous, it would lose money, not make it. You’re fired! :laugh: |
im out
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:54 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.