Why does the Royal family need so much money?


(David Naylor) #21

I thought it might be of interest to you Barbara with you being the oracle regarding catering. Or were you just trolling? :smirk:


(Barbara Deane) #22

No I am not trolling…I brought up a subject which means something to me…and possibly others.
And you mentioned your association with the Royal family though your work.
I was making it clear that I was not expecting the Royal Family to get involved in the
conversation and that many people have data and info relating to all sorts of things including
favourite foods, fav colours…much of their life is public.
That is one of their sacrifices.


(Catharine Higginson) #23

We did once have a “Prince Harry” sign up but I assumed it was a fake ID and declined the membership request. Maybe I made a mistake… :slight_smile:


(stella wood) #24

your question was… “None so queer as folk…does the Royal family favour Brexit?”… and that is what I was referring to… (ie surely only the Royal Family knows the answer)…

Sorry if I have got everyone confused…


(Barbara Deane) #25

yes because you said nothing as queer as folk…
and you said that your local French people liked the Royal
Family…but I am not sure if they are in favour of disconnecting with
Europe…Brexit is disconnecting!
To my mind it is any way.
But it is a bit of a tangle.
I am not a troll…I was thinking that this could have been an interesting
conversation,


(stella wood) #26

Hi Barbara… my none so queer as folk, referred to the fact that the French had abolished their own Monarchy but so many seem dazzled/impressed/interested etc etc in the British Monarchy…


(David Naylor) #27

Barbara you’ll notice after my troll comment a smiley winking face. It was a jokey reference to the thread you started earlier in the morning. Please keep up :wink:


(Barbara Deane) #28

yes of course I noticed.


(David GAY) #29

I think Barbara that their is a stratum of French society that cares a great deal about money and another that cares a great deal about power. In the case of money they can be more reserved than say the British. The French Revolution barely scraped the upper classes. They are still there behind those anonymous grey gates in the countryside and discreet doors in the inner arondissements of Paris.


(Barbara Deane) #30

Yes the mystery of those big gates and hidden gardens.Is that what brought
me here in the first place?
Was it perhaps the idea of living behind the scenes of opulence?
Well if the French are greedy for money and power on the whole they
do it gracefully.
Mick Jagger and Sarkosy found romance with the same woman…interesting
as neither of them is devoid of wrinkles But, of course they both will go on
through history… because of the passion for money and power.
ps…you do not become a rock star or a politician because you love your
work?


(Trevor Hunton) #31

You do indeed on some occasions become a politician or a rock star because you love your work, some love it all their lives, some become bored with it, some become dissolutioned, but some do indeed love it. I wonder if the Queen loves being the Queen or wether she would prefer a simpler life on much much lower benefits.
The French murdered their royal family, then proceeded to murder each other followed by murdering the ones who instigated the murdering. Had a little flirtation with a midget would be empire builder, brought back a king, all ended in another debacle and back to a Republic.
I think the biggest problem with money is that the more you have, the more you want. You have to have a motivator, and money is a motivator, just motivates some a hell of a lot more than other’s.


(Véronique Langlands) #32

The English executed their king 150 years before the French did… then restored the monarchy. Perhaps thinking that as head of state it is better to have some numpty who is there by accident of birth rather than a power-hungry maniac convinced of his mission to save or rule the world.


(Trevor Hunton) #33

They British restored the monarchy because Cromwell took all the fun out of life, but what Cromwell did was create a proper professional army. Poor old Louis the sixteenth had to deal with Louis the fourteenths legacy of debt debt and more debt. Versailles and Chambord must have cost hundreds of millions in today’s money, bankrupted the country. Apparently poor old charlie boys dutchy gets around a million a year in EU farming subsidies, the hoover brexitaire Dyson gets even more than that.


(Bob Wilkinson) #34

While I agree that the trappings of the royal family could be scaled down a bit (do they really need umpteen palaces with all the maintenance that entails?), I am not convinced that keeping a President in luxury would cost very much less.

And when I consider that if the UK were a republic, we might very well have President Blair ensconced in Buckingham Palace with Cherie as the First Lady… no, no, I think our dear old queen is not such a bad idea after all.


(Trevor Hunton) #35

Poor old Blair, what did the poor chap ever do? Oh yes, created a booming economy, invaded Iraq, put loads more money into public services which the Tories in turn cut right back. Queen’s never achieved anything whatsoever. Traveled around the world meeting various heads of state, and never came back with one single decent trade deal. But then Fox has been doing exactly the same thing and also hasn’t come back with one single offer of a decent trade deal.


(Timothy Cole) #36

Funniest post I’ve seen for years.:grin:


(Sergio Boggio) #37

I rarely post on forums but I feel I have to weigh in here as it seems like this is a very one-sided discussion. I for one am against the monarchy. I don’t believe they bring anything to the UK (tourist attraction - really??!! perhaps distraction might be a better word). The French friends that I have on the whole see them with contempt, as I do.

The idea that the government still gives money (our taxes) to the Royals, while they take their own money (Duchy of Lancaster) and put it offshore in order to avoid paying British taxes makes my stomach turn. You can say that it is all down to the accountants, but at the end of the day, its the monarchy that must be held accountable.

And its the same with all those people that are profiting from avoiding paying taxes. Say what you want, but at the end of the day it is unethical. Anyone arrogant enough to think that they should be allowed to choose not to pay taxes should be shunned. “Oh - but look how much they do for charity” - rubbish!!! Why should only the ultra-rich be able to choose how they’re taxable income should be distributed?) If you are British but do not pay your required share of British taxes, then you should not have the right to a say in British affairs. They’re right to vote should be removed.

Of course, what is happening now is not illegal, but so clearly selfish and unethical, that it needs to end. But will it? No. The rich will keep getting richer, the poor will keep getting poorer… and everyone will continue to be distracted by an irrelevant monarchy.


(Barbara Deane) #38

Yes it has been a little one sided!

But now it has moved on…


(Timothy Cole) #39

Perhaps you think the Queen should be locked in the Tower because her financial advisors unwisely invested some of her money offshore, probably without her knowledge. Do away with the Royals and replace them with??? Name me one current political figure in the UK that you think would better represent the country.


(Barbara Deane) #40

oh it is not about the current thing with Bono etc…it goes way beyond that.
Is there another leader…no maybe not. But that is not my job to choose who
represents a country.