Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
#1
Question 
British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
Buckingham Palace is in crisis mode, and questions are swirling over the Queen's hold on "The Firm".

Harry and Meghan's decision to "step back" from their roles as senior members of the Royal family has,
inevitably, sent Royal pundits and commentators into a frenzy. But it is the manner in which they reportedly
blind-sided the palace that has landed the biggest blow—not least of all because it's undermined the
carefully curated "modern royals" narrative.

The party-loving Prince and the Hollywood actress were widely seen as a driving force in the reinvention
and refreshing of the Royal "institution", and with their departure comes questions about its continued
relevance to modern day society.

Harry and Meghan have their own wealth. But how will they earn money?  At the moment, the couple
say they are largely funded by Harry's father, Prince Charles, through income from his Duchy of
Cornwall estate, which last year brought in 21.6 million pounds ($40 million), although it's not yet clear
if they plan to continue to access these funds.

Harry inherited an estimated 7 million pounds ($13 million) from his late mother, Princess Diana, and
Meghan has a personal wealth of $2.2 million.

What's more galling—for Canadians—is that security experts say its taxpayers could also be on the hook
for millions of dollars a year in security expenses if the couple move there, even part-time, as they're
"internationally protected people" according to a 1973 UN convention.

—In my humble colonialist's opinion, the Royal family is an anachronism whose time has long passed,
and its youthful members are yet another drain on the taxpayers of the UK and countries like Australia
and Canada.  Hopefully, when Betty departs this mortal coil, Australia will become a republic, and the
currently most powerful person in the country will no longer be the representative of another country's
queen, with the power to dismiss an entire government (as per the disgraceful 1975 sacking of Whitlam).
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • Phaedrus
Reply
#2

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-11-2020, 09:08 PM)SYZ Wrote: —In my humble colonialist's opinion, the Royal family is an anachronism whose time has long passed....

They are likely a money-making tourist attraction in Great Britain.
Reply
#3

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
Move them to St. Louis, we already have a zoo.
  [Image: pirates.gif] Dog  
Reply
#4

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
I'd applaud them for deciding they no longer want to be parasites.  But let's see how much they try to soak the good citizens of Canada for first.

I'm sure the Quebecois are dying to have two more Limeys around.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Reply
#5

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-11-2020, 09:25 PM)Alan V Wrote:
(01-11-2020, 09:08 PM)SYZ Wrote: —In my humble colonialist's opinion, the Royal family is an anachronism whose time has long passed....

They are likely a money-making tourist attraction in Great Britain.

 That's a glib  cliche. As  with glib cliches generally, it has an element of truth I think, even a lot of truth.

As far as I'm aware, the British monarchy attracts billions of pounds in tourism to the UK each year.  (there is flow on to the rest of the country)  

Another glib cliche is the monarchy survives because 'We we the people'  want it. Bullshit of course, imo. 'We the people' are sheep .

The British  Royal family are the living embodiment of the establishment and class privilege . For goodness sake, they hand out  irrelevant knighthoods, life peerages and imperial honours to actors, pop singers  an sporting personalities --------------

 English parliamentary democracy has a 2 house system; The House  of Commons, consisting of elected members, and The House Of Lords. It is the Lords  who must  ratify all legislation before it goes to the monarch for royal assent .  Only 'peers of the  realm'  qualify to belong to The House Of Lords.  These are life positions and are not elected.   In reality, many peers do not take up their seat in the Lords.

The current PM, Boris Johnson is a true member of the establishment. 'public' school  educated, and a 'Hooray Henry, or 'upper class twit' .He will see being made a knight the acme of a successful life. 

The monarchy will disappear when it is no longer useful to the  British  establishment, and not a moment sooner. 

As an Aussie, it infuriates me that Queen Elizabeth 11 remains  constitutionally  Australia's Head of State .   Her representative  here is called  "The Governor General" .  The Queen  retains the constitutional power to prorogue  parliament ---this happened in 1975, creating what has been called "The greatest constitutional crisis  in Australian History" ---Australia  is still yet to become a Republic.   

Harry and his missus?  A pair of affable, photogenic, entitled ,parasites. Could not care less if I never  hear of them again.
The following 1 user Likes grympy's post:
  • Minimalist
Reply
#6

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
I just heard about this sillyness today.  I'm not going to lay awake at night worrying too much about Harry and Megan.  I'm sure they'll be ok.  I give them some credit for at least trying to strike out on their own. She's actually a pretty bright gal.  When she was 11 or so  she campaigned to have Ivory soap clean up their gender specific ads and they finally did change them.  



The other woman, what's her face that's married to the older brother,  is as boring as a fence post. I give Megan credit for having some spunk.

The royal family is like a Soap Opera slash Disneyland tourist attraction.   Big Grin
                                                         T4618
The following 2 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • SYZ, Fireball
Reply
#7

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
The British royal family is collectively worth an estimated $88 billion when looking at
the crown’s concrete assets in combination with the value of the family brand, Forbes reported
in 2017.  Queen Elizabeth II had an estimated personal net worth of $530 million.  
Most of the British monarchy’s wealth comes from inherited lands and investments, but British
taxpayers also support the royal family through a "sovereign grant" issued by the treasury.
In 2019, the sovereign grant amounted to $104 million.

The Queen privately owns the $65 million country house, Sandringham House, and
the $140 million Scottish estate Balmoral Castle.

It’s impossible to know the wider economic benefit of the monarchy exactly.  Some of the claims
following the wedding of Harry and Meghan argue that we shouldn’t begrudge the monarchy the
public costs from their wedding—for example security—because they create so much economic benefit.

Do they though?

One estimate came from consultancy Brand Finance who said that in 2017 the monarchy
contributed $2.4 billion to the UK economy, of which around $718 million came from
tourism
.  I couldn't find any actual evidence confirming these two figures though.  And how
exactly  does "tourism" produce that alleged income?  Or is it just bullshit "leaked" by the
royal family to justify its own existence?
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
Reply
#8

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-11-2020, 09:08 PM)SYZ Wrote: Buckingham Palace is in crisis mode, and questions are swirling over the Queen's hold on "The Firm".

Harry and Meghan's decision to "step back" from their roles as senior members of the Royal family has,
inevitably, sent Royal pundits and commentators into a frenzy. But it is the manner in which they reportedly
blind-sided the palace that has landed the biggest blow—not least of all because it's undermined the
carefully curated "modern royals" narrative.

The party-loving Prince and the Hollywood actress were widely seen as a driving force in the reinvention
and refreshing of the Royal "institution", and with their departure comes questions about its continued
relevance to modern day society.

Harry and Meghan have their own wealth. But how will they earn money?  At the moment, the couple
say they are largely funded by Harry's father, Prince Charles, through income from his Duchy of
Cornwall estate, which last year brought in 21.6 million pounds ($40 million), although it's not yet clear
if they plan to continue to access these funds.

Harry inherited an estimated 7 million pounds ($13 million) from his late mother, Princess Diana, and
Meghan has a personal wealth of $2.2 million.

What's more galling—for Canadians—is that security experts say its taxpayers could also be on the hook
for millions of dollars a year in security expenses if the couple move there, even part-time, as they're
"internationally protected people" according to a 1973 UN convention.

—In my humble colonialist's opinion, the Royal family is an anachronism whose time has long passed,
and its youthful members are yet another drain on the taxpayers of the UK and countries like Australia
and Canada.  Hopefully, when Betty departs this mortal coil, Australia will become a republic, and the
currently most powerful person in the country will no longer be the representative of another country's
queen, with the power to dismiss an entire government (as per the disgraceful 1975 sacking of Whitlam).

Anachronism or not, the county polls at 80 % for keeping the monarchy. 
It may cost money, but the billions of pounds which British "royal" tourism brings in, is a huge return on outlayed cash, (and far better than any other advertising scheme yet devised). They are handling this poorly. They should have said "that's nice Harry, keep in touch, .... could you pass the scones, care for a crumpet ?". They got over the abdication of a king who moved to France. I think they'll get past a prince and his wife moving to Canada.
The following 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post:
  • Alan V, adey67
Reply
#9

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
It's weird how a son saying he's moving out and not mooching off the elders has so many people in an uproar. This is what kids are supposed to do.
The following 5 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post:
  • SYZ, Minimalist, Fireball, Old Man Marsh, brewerb
Reply
#10

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-12-2020, 12:02 AM)SYZ Wrote: The British royal family is collectively worth an estimated $88 billion when looking at
the crown’s concrete assets in combination with the value of the family brand, Forbes reported
in 2017.  Queen Elizabeth II had an estimated personal net worth of $530 million.  
Most of the British monarchy’s wealth comes from inherited lands and investments, but British
taxpayers also support the royal family through a "sovereign grant" issued by the treasury.
In 2019, the sovereign grant amounted to $104 million.

The Queen privately owns the $65 million country house, Sandringham House, and
the $140 million Scottish estate Balmoral Castle.

It’s impossible to know the wider economic benefit of the monarchy exactly.  Some of the claims
following the wedding of Harry and Meghan argue that we shouldn’t begrudge the monarchy the
public costs from their wedding—for example security—because they create so much economic benefit.

Do they though?

One estimate came from consultancy Brand Finance who said that in 2017 the monarchy
contributed $2.4 billion to the UK economy, of which around $718 million came from
tourism
.  I couldn't find any actual evidence confirming these two figures though.  And how
exactly  does "tourism" produce that alleged income?  Or is it just bullshit "leaked" by the
royal family to justify its own existence?
 

Pickle me grandmother!   I had no idea they were that wealthy.  Inflation I guess.   Facepalm


Slightly OT:  the base for the present Queen's wealth was made by Queen Victoria .She mourned the death of prince Albert for 40 years.  Even allowing for that, she was notoriously mean, and spent virtually none of her parliamentary allowance. Of course she also paid no taxes. That I think was started by Prince Charles, following an unusual bout of conscience----even today, Queen Elizabeth claims  she couldn't possibly afford to look after/repair  Buck House. Her wealth is estimated at  500 million pounds sterling.
Reply
#11

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
They remind me of the upper 1% here.  They have all the money they need for 1,000 lifetimes and they always have their fucking hands out for more.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 1 user Likes Minimalist's post:
  • Fireball
Reply
#12

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-12-2020, 02:23 AM)grympy Wrote: [...] even today, Queen Elizabeth claims  she couldn't possibly afford to look after/repair  Buck House. Her wealth is estimated at  500 million pounds sterling.

If half-a-bil can't even do your upkeep and maintenance ... phew. I'm out of my league here.
Reply
#13

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-12-2020, 01:53 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:
(01-11-2020, 09:08 PM)SYZ Wrote: Buckingham Palace is in crisis mode, and questions are swirling over the Queen's hold on "The Firm".

Harry and Meghan's decision to "step back" from their roles as senior members of the Royal family has,
inevitably, sent Royal pundits and commentators into a frenzy. But it is the manner in which they reportedly
blind-sided the palace that has landed the biggest blow—not least of all because it's undermined the
carefully curated "modern royals" narrative.

The party-loving Prince and the Hollywood actress were widely seen as a driving force in the reinvention
and refreshing of the Royal "institution", and with their departure comes questions about its continued
relevance to modern day society.

Harry and Meghan have their own wealth. But how will they earn money?  At the moment, the couple
say they are largely funded by Harry's father, Prince Charles, through income from his Duchy of
Cornwall estate, which last year brought in 21.6 million pounds ($40 million), although it's not yet clear
if they plan to continue to access these funds.

Harry inherited an estimated 7 million pounds ($13 million) from his late mother, Princess Diana, and
Meghan has a personal wealth of $2.2 million.

What's more galling—for Canadians—is that security experts say its taxpayers could also be on the hook
for millions of dollars a year in security expenses if the couple move there, even part-time, as they're
"internationally protected people" according to a 1973 UN convention.

—In my humble colonialist's opinion, the Royal family is an anachronism whose time has long passed,
and its youthful members are yet another drain on the taxpayers of the UK and countries like Australia
and Canada.  Hopefully, when Betty departs this mortal coil, Australia will become a republic, and the
currently most powerful person in the country will no longer be the representative of another country's
queen, with the power to dismiss an entire government (as per the disgraceful 1975 sacking of Whitlam).

Anachronism or not, the county polls at 80 % for keeping the monarchy. 
It may cost money, but the billions of pounds which British "royal" tourism brings in, is a huge return on outlayed cash, (and far better than any other advertising scheme yet devised). They are handing this poorly. They should have said "that's nice Harry, keep in touch, .... could you pass the scones, care for a crumpet ?". They got over the abdication of a king who moved to France. I think they'll get past a prince and his wife moving to Canada.

Funnily enough, at this point in US history the Royal family isn't looking so bad. Compared to the piece of shit we have over here the royal's look like a family of Einsteins.
                                                         T4618
The following 4 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • Bucky Ball, grympy, Minimalist, adey67
Reply
#14

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-12-2020, 02:55 AM)Minimalist Wrote: They remind me of the upper 1% here.  They have all the money they need for 1,000 lifetimes and they always have their fucking hands out for more.

Just like politicians. You hand them a revenue stream and they suckle on it like little piglets...just try to get a piglet off the teat, and listen to it squeal.

Then again, if I didn't have that black walnut paneling and pierced tin ceiling, I really wouldn't be keeping up with the Joneses. That's a fucking joke, BTW- I don't have paneling anywhere in the house, it's all drywall, and the ceilings are textured (which my wife detests, but I'm not dropping upwards of $4k US for its removal). Growing up, We were poor as piss on a plate. It amazed me that people would pull up perfectly good carpet and give it away (to us, complete with embedded dog crap) so that that they could have the latest rage (shag carpet) laid...and later, torn out to have the new rage, Berber. When you have that kind of money, conspicuous consumption becomes a way of life.

I'm a member of a wood working site where one of the members is making a chest that will ostensibly end up at the White House. Members congratulate him, but I'm more interested in the workmanship aspect. That chest could be used at the foot of the chump's prison bed, as far as I am concerned.
Reply
#15

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
@Fireball

"Just like politicians. You hand them a revenue stream and they suckle on it like little piglets...just try to get a piglet off the teat, and listen to it squeal

It's all relative.

Politics here do not attract the best and the brightest . Politicians' salaries are not high compared with the private sector . I'd be wary of any politician not independently wealthy who assert politicians are well paid . Many, (especially former prime Ministers) make their money after leaving politics.

My perception is that it is the unelected and poorly paid, politically appointed administrators who tend to be bright and competent. Having worked for government at that level is highly lucrative in the private sector.

Imagine what would happen if politicians tried to do the admin work . You'd end up with ,well, the Trump administration ---

I did know one bloke who went into State politics for the salary and parliamentary pension . A good little party hack, he was rewarded with a junior ministry, The Department Of Correctional Services. Soon after taking up the job, he learned that the Adelaide Remand Centre (where people are held pending trial) had a swimming pool. He had it filled in. The bloke was a moron, even when I worked with him.
The following 1 user Likes grympy's post:
  • Fireball
Reply
#16

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-12-2020, 03:56 AM)grympy Wrote: @Fireball

"Just like politicians. You hand them a revenue stream and they suckle on it like little piglets...just try to get a piglet off the teat, and listen to it squeal

It's all relative.

Politics here do not attract the best and the brightest .  Politicians'  salaries are not high compared with the private sector . I'd be wary of any  politician not independently wealthy  who assert politicians are well paid . Many, (especially former prime Ministers) make their  money after leaving politics.

My perception is that it is the unelected and poorly paid, politically appointed administrators who tend to be bright and competent.  Having worked for government at  that level is highly lucrative  in the private sector.

Imagine what would happen if politicians tried to do the admin work . You'd end up with ,well, the Trump administration ---

I did know one bloke who went into State politics for the salary and parliamentary pension . A good little party hack, he was rewarded with a junior ministry, The Department Of Correctional Services. Soon after taking up the job, he learned that the Adelaide Remand Centre (where people are held pending trial) had a swimming pool.  He had it filled in.  The bloke was a moron, even when I worked with him.

"The best and the brightest" certainly doesn't describe our politicians, either. But those are no criteria for how they are elected, sad to say. I'm reminded of the Russian model of the person who is on the "team" but has NO qualifications- de facto, the Communist Party man, albeit not publicly acknowledged.
The following 1 user Likes Fireball's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#17

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
Quote: But those are no criteria for how they are elected, sad to say.



[Image: quote-the-men-the-american-public-admire...284860.jpg]
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 3 users Like Minimalist's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus, Fireball, Chas
Reply
#18

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-11-2020, 09:58 PM)Minimalist Wrote: I'm sure the Quebecois are dying to have two more Limeys around.

The Royal family is actually rather popular in the region since Kate Middleton and Prince William visited the province about 6 or 7 years ago. They made very good impression and brought us a fat stack of cash. In Quebec right now even whispering anything about openning a constitutional debate (like abolishing royalty would) could get you shot. While Quebec nationalism is still a powerful force in the Province's culture and politics, the idea of independance has been on the backburner for about two decades.
The following 1 user Likes epronovost's post:
  • grympy
Reply
#19

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
I'm not sure how much Megan's ethnic background has to do with all this.  A while ago I was reading about some event she participated in and the comment section was full of racist crap.  I don't know how racist the press is over in the UK or if this has made it difficult for them to be accepted as a couple.
                                                         T4618
Reply
#20

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
Rumors of Harry not being a royal have circulated for many years.

Maybe no longer a rumor?
Reply
#21

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
Quote: The Royal family is actually rather popular in the region since Kate Middleton and Prince William visited the province about 6 or 7 years ago.


There is an astounding amount of interest in those people here, too.  What I can't figure out is "why?"

They are anachronisms.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 3 users Like Minimalist's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus, Fireball, tomilay
Reply
#22

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
Harry's a dead ringer for his grandfather.
The following 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post:
  • Dancefortwo
Reply
#23

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-12-2020, 05:33 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote: I'm not sure how much Megan's ethnic background has to do with all this.  A while ago I was reading about some event she participated in and the comment section was full of racist crap.  I don't know how racist the press is over in the UK or if this has made it difficult for them to be accepted as a couple.

 I'm assuming they both speak French?

If they were sensible enough to choose Oz, it would be a mixed bag.

Of course our incumbent conservative government  and many of their supporters would welcome them,  many Aussies would not. Especially once they realised their international status of protected persons was going to cost us a lot of money, ongoing. 

I don't blame them (especially her) for wanting to get away from  the dysfunctional royal family and press, at least to a degree. However, I think Harry may be a bit naive to think he can get away.  He has to stand up to the Queen, his father and his brother. This escape could well cause an estrangement from his family.  

Ah well, as they say in the classics; El Fucking Stiffo.   Tongue
Reply
#24

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
(01-12-2020, 05:33 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote: I'm not sure how much Megan's ethnic background has to do with all this.  A while ago I was reading about some event she participated in and the comment section was full of racist crap.  I don't know how racist the press is over in the UK or if this has made it difficult for them to be accepted as a couple.

There are murmurs of this in the British press. Wasn't their newborn compared to a "baby chimpanzee"?
Reply
#25

British Royal family more dysfunctional than ever?
Well if Canada is the choice, maybe its the weed.

Show ContentSpoiler:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)