The Queen- OT

[Mark Rand]

It's not the individual, but the institution that I have a problem with. The royalty live in unbelievable luxury at taxpayer expense and contribute (nearly) nothing (figure heads for public events). Blood sucking leeches.

Not the really case at all. The Monarchy as an institution is quite rich and all the profits from the Crown Estates (which are the collected properties of the Monarchy) go to the government. Currently it's worth £15.2 Billion and produced revenues of £487 million last year. That's a net profit to the tax payer of £140 million last year. Her Majesty also voluntarily pays tax on the profits of her personal wealth.

This does not count the value of the work done, the value of the diplomatic services provided or the value of the tourism generated.

Seventy years in the same job. God bless you, Your Majesty!

[A.K. Boomer]

ok, here's the pic I used .

You chose well - same as mine except all face... yes she's clever looking with a touch of mischievous...

[boslab]

Received English ( posh bbc talk), think the royal family should throw the towel in after HRHs days, they’re all a bloody disappointment to everyone, they don’t know how to conduct themselves, as for Blackforrests comments re thick British accent he knows what I sound like, unintelligible ( it’s the Welsh I’m afraid, but valley in my case) methinks the queen would have positively loved BFs sheep handler, I thought it was inspired, sheep should all be trained in its use, I think the welsh government should buy one for the National Assembly building, I think it would really work, jokes aside I have tried manhandling a sheep, a terrible admission for a Welshman I realise, I don’t think my back muscles were designed for such a severe pounding, needed horse linament to ease the pain.
shearing sheep is not an easy task, yet we all wear wool, in fact rely on it for hot metal clothing se every sheep needs a hairdresser with muscles.
mark

[MaxHeadRoom]

One of the reasons that the British Monarchy lasted longer than some of their European counterparts that lost their heads, was that supreme rule was removed when the Magna Carta was signed (1217).
.
It sought to prevent the king from exploiting his power, and placed limits decreeing he was not above the law. !!
,

[Bob Engelhardt]

Not the really case at all. The Monarchy as an institution is quite rich and all the profits from the Crown Estates (which are the collected properties of the Monarchy) go to the government. Currently it's worth £15.2 Billion and produced revenues of £487 million last year. That's a net profit to the tax payer of £140 million last year. Her Majesty also voluntarily pays tax on the profits of her personal wealth.

The revenue from the Crown Estates is quite independent of the current existence of royalty - it's a consequence of historical royalty, of a royalty with absolute power. If today's royalty were disbanded, the Crown Estates income would continue. And the taxpayer would be relieved of the £86 million annually paid to the queen.

This does not count the value of the work done, the value of the diplomatic services provided or the value of the tourism generated.

Seventy years in the same job. God bless you, Your Majesty!

Whatever the qualities of the person who happens to be queen, she is the pampered figurehead of an antiquated & expensive institution.

[darryl]

Well, I agree with the Beatles- she's a pretty nice girl. Just think- if I could have made her mine way back then, I'd be soaking in hard-won British money and touring in motorcades. No, actually I'd probably be dead by now. She has shown a remarkable durability, and she can still smile. My personal opinion- I think Britain and much of the world has benefitted from her reign, regardless of the costs of lavishing on the monarchy like they have done. At any rate, I only started this thread because I too think she's a pretty nice girl. Have a great day everyone.

[darryl]

By the way, I have a friend who received a complementary letter from the Queen- or her office- regarding a song he wrote about Sir Norman Wisdom. I don't know if she heard his song directly- and I doubt that she responded personally- but was a nice gesture anyway. Maybe she did hear the song and liked it, who knows.

[old mart]

I couldn't resist this link.

https://news.sky.com/story/platinum-...twist-12530600

[gellfex]

the previous line of the Royal family up to Queen Victoria was the house of Hanover of which Victoria was the last monarch..
The House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha as a British dynasty was short-lived.

The name was changed several times for political reasons but if you use common sense lineage instead of Primogeniture the 308 year direct dynasty from from when they dragged distant Royal cousin George I from Germany to succeed Queen Anne is the longest in English history. As you say, Vicky was actually a Hanoverian, her father was the 4th son of George III.

Historically, the biggest problem for the British Royals, no matter what dynasty, was producing legitimate heirs. Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, Charles II, William & Mary, Anne, and George III elder 3 sons could not produce heirs. Part of the problem was the men were not so fond of their wives, plenty of royal bastards were scrambling about though...

[PStechPaul]

What many do not consider is where the money paid to the queen goes. If it is not simply accumulated as private wealth, it is paid to people, or companies that hire people, and those people in turn buy goods and services, as well as paying taxes, that keep the economy going. Much the same argument could be made for providing welfare payments or services such as education, child care, and health care to impoverished or disadvantaged people. As long as such publicly funded money is actually spent for legal purposes, it eventually benefits the economy. The only real waste and detrimental effect of such public spending, such as the queen's income, is when it is simply accumulated (which may still benefit financial institutions), or when it is spent illegally on such things as drugs and firearms where the money enriches and empowers criminals and cartels and unfriendly foreign governments. I doubt this is the case for the queen.

[Bob Engelhardt]

...
it is paid to people, or companies that hire people,
...

Yeah, for the benefit of the queen! Entirely different than it being spent for the benefit of the needy, or some other public benefit.