plans to boost public funding of the monarchy by 45% from 2025.

[FoxEye]

You can argue that they shouldn't exist but they do and due to the laws of our country you can't just strip people of assets that they own because you don't like it.

Historically, that's how a lot of wealthy families came upon their estates Be allies with the right person, get given lands. Which often were taken by force from the previous owners

Hereditary wealth and privilege is incredibly hard to justify without a lot of mental gymnastics.

 

[arknor]

Inflation must be hitting the royals hard and now he has to be extra careful about accepting bags full of cash or the banks might cancel him like they did farrage

Prince Charles given €3m in cash in bags by Qatari politician, according to report

Money was passed immediately to one of the prince’s charities, says Clarence House

www.theguardian.com

Prince Charles accepted €1m cash in suitcase from sheikh

The Prince of Wales accepted a suitcase containing €1 million in cash from a controversial Qatari politician, The Sunday Times can reveal. It was one of three lots of cash, totalling €3 million, which Prince Charles personally received from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, the former prim

www.thetimes.co.uk

Prince Charles 'accepted a suitcase with 1m euros', report claims

Clarence House says the correct processes were followed with the Qatari sheikh's charitable donations.

www.bbc.co.uk

One rule for the elites

Prince Charles will NOT be probed by Charity Commission over £2.5M

The watchdog said it has looked at the information and has decided against intervening following allegations Charles was reportedly given three million euros by a former Qatari prime minister.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[StriderX]

In any other serious country a head of state accepting bags of cash from foreign powers would be seen for it is, but not plucky Britain.

 

[Maccy]

You are very welcome....




Not to post.

You are also very welcome not to post if I feel like it. Careful.

 

[Chris Wilson]

In any other serious country a head of state accepting bags of cash from foreign powers would be seen for it is, but not plucky Britain.

Suitcases of cash accepted by the EU hierarchy? How does that lie within your personal morality outrage, comparatively speaking?

 

[Angilion]

Taxpayer ripoff or bargain? The cost of the British royal family

Critics of the monarchy say it is outdated and a waste of money, but supporters argue it more than pays its way.

www.aljazeera.com

"Much of the royal family's expenses are covered by an annual taxpayer-funded payment known as the Sovereign Grant"

The "taxpayer-funded" part is, to be polite, creative accounting. Or to be less polite, a lie.

The monarch pays 100% income tax on most of their income. The treasury returns 25% of that to cover the expenses of a head of state - the sovereign grant.

see the answer above.

Which doesn't answer my question. My question was excessively lenient too, so I'll make it clearer:

Assume a scenario in which you work for me.
You give me £100.
I return £25 of the £100 you gave me. You must use that £25 only for expenses you incur while working for me.

In that scenario, have I really given you anything? Doesn't look like it to me.

 

[Angilion]

Historically, that's how a lot of wealthy families came upon their estates Be allies with the right person, get given lands. Which often were taken by force from the previous owners

Hereditary wealth and privilege is incredibly hard to justify without a lot of mental gymnastics.

What cap would you place on inheritance? Just a ballpark figure. £1M? £10M? £100M? Richard Branson comes to mind. His assets total a few billion. When he dies, how much do you think his children should be allowed to have from his estate?

How would you enforce it? Richard Branson comes to mind again as he's a notorious tax evader. He's just got much better at it since he was convicted. Either that or he pays people who are much more skilled at it than he is. And yeah, I know people like to call it avoidance rather than evasion when it can't be proven to be illegal. But it means the same thing.

 

[Quartz]

Taxpayer ripoff or bargain? The cost of the British royal family

Critics of the monarchy say it is outdated and a waste of money, but supporters argue it more than pays its way.

www.aljazeera.com

"Much of the royal family's expenses are covered by an annual taxpayer-funded payment known as the Sovereign Grant"

Al Jazeera are wrong.

 

[arknor]

The monarch pays 100% income tax on most of their income. The treasury returns 25% of that to cover the expenses of a head of state - the sovereign grant.

yea ofocurse they do.

but how much of that money is from the countries assets? like the sea bed... and the money the royal family get from all those offshore windfarms for owning our sea bed? then that money is passed along to the people in our electricity bills etc...

get rid of the lot, all corrupt clearly. corruption starts at the top and flows down in that family.

no one else would think it was normal to accept a bag of cash.....

 

[FoxEye]

What cap would you place on inheritance? Just a ballpark figure. £1M? £10M? £100M? Richard Branson comes to mind. His assets total a few billion. When he dies, how much do you think his children should be allowed to have from his estate?

How would you enforce it? Richard Branson comes to mind again as he's a notorious tax evader. He's just got much better at it since he was convicted. Either that or he pays people who are much more skilled at it than he is. And yeah, I know people like to call it avoidance rather than evasion when it can't be proven to be illegal. But it means the same thing.

Not being able to stop it (as you rightly say) doesn't mean I have to like it Personally I find hereditary wealth in the millions (or billions) to be distasteful.

And the same goes for hereditary privilege and power.

And yeah, I know in this country that's an unpopular opinion, as everybody wants to be rich and laud it up over the plebs And the plebs in turn worship the rich as their gods.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

The "taxpayer-funded" part is, to be polite, creative accounting. Or to be less polite, a lie.

The monarch pays 100% income tax on most of their income. The treasury returns 25% of that to cover the expenses of a head of state - the sovereign grant.

Yes but we could get 100% and just give back 2% if it were an elected head of state.

 

[arknor]

Yes but we could get 100% and just give back 2% if it were an elected head of state.

Also we would have a bunch of palaces we can stick tens of thousands of refugees in

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Also we would have a bunch of palaces we can stick tens of thousands of refugees in

Homeless, ex-service members who have fallen on hard times. Open up all parts of the palaces to the publics and make a killing in admission fees. Its a win win all round expect for the sponges that are the Windsor family. We can give them a couple of £m each and they can head off into the sunset. I'm sure they'll do well giving paid speeches etc.

 

[arknor]

Homeless, ex-service members who have fallen on hard times, open up all parts of the palaces to the publics and make a killing in admission fees. Its a win win all round expect for the sponges that are the Windsor family. We can give them a couple of £m each and they can head off into the sunset. I'm sure they'll do well giving paid speeches etc.

bet they all have hidden wealth abroad, just give them a plane ticket to panama

 

[MichaelAwkward]

Just opening up the estates and palaces more to the public would probably earn us a fortune and attract more tourists than the royals themselves do.

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Imagine being the OP but instead of just being a massive whining pillock, you were anything else.

See? Feel better now? Yeah you do, ok let's cuddle.

 

[Mrwong]

You mean people massively underestimate how good the monarchy is for London. Therefore all the profits are kept in London, while the rest of the cities suffer.

Tourists don't know there is more to England outside the M25.

Add Londoners

 

[Mrwong]

All this nonsense about billionaire fighting, I think we should put MrWong and Dowie in a room with a 6 pack of red bull each and give them a topic to argue over.

Then again those chaps at Cern might end up looking a bit silly as those two could probably create a singularity.

"uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unforeseeable changes" to overclockers forum

 

[Tykey]

(snip)

You can argue that they shouldn't exist but they do and due to the laws of our country you can't just strip people of assets that they own because you don't like it.

Who's suggesting strip them of assets that they own? I haven't. I just prefer it if they went their own way, stop being funded by the taxpayer and lived off their own means and earning, you know, like everyone else does.

 

[Tykey]

The "taxpayer-funded" part is, to be polite, creative accounting. Or to be less polite, a lie.

The monarch pays 100% income tax on most of their income. The treasury returns 25% of that to cover the expenses of a head of state - the sovereign grant.



Which doesn't answer my question. My question was excessively lenient too, so I'll make it clearer:

Assume a scenario in which you work for me.
You give me £100.
I return £25 of the £100 you gave me. You must use that £25 only for expenses you incur while working for me.

In that scenario, have I really given you anything? Doesn't look like it to me.

We could go back and forth about whether it's tax payers money or not. The article linked to in OP's first post alludes to the fact that wherever they get their money from seems to have been made all the more harder to follow...hmm. There's been pro-monarchy posters in this thread saying the public only pays £x per year towards the monarchy, yet other pro-monarchy posters have also said nothing comes from tax payers, so which is it?

I'm not buying the argument about giving and receiving money. I don't believe they give back more than they receive. It depends on what articles you read written by whoever with whatever biases.