Are the Royal Family losing their touch?

The £1.25 comes from the amount of the Sovereign grant divided by the number of people in the country. That amount is currently about £70 million pounds.

It includes money for the upkeep and renovation of Buckingham Palace, which is not owned by the person of Monarch directly, but which is held be her/him because they are Monarch. So in the event that a Monarch is replaced by and elected Head of State, the ex-monarch would have to give up any claim to Buckingham Palace because they don't actually own it. (They could move to Sandringham, or Balmoral, or one of their other many homes.)

So, the new HoS could live in Buckingham Palace if we thought that was a good idea, and so we wouldn't need a new "Palace or two". And the "firm" that Callistemon says is keeping the whole shebang on the road will now be keeping the new shebang on the road. HM and Family will have to employ their own shoe-breaker-in'ers.

Not sure who owns the limos for sparkly hats, but I suspect its not the personal property of HM.

So, your kitchen table economics needs a bit of looking at Callistemon. Not really so brilliant after all.

That is a very good article by Tatchell Grany.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/15/lgbt-campaigners-jubilee-queen-pageant-national-treasure?CMP=share_btn_tw

For me, it's both. But if they cost nothing I would still disagree with a monarchy, on principle.

The amount £1.25 what a funny way to justify the cost of HoS
It includes all people 70 million not just the adult wage earners.
Actually the Sovereign Grant is currently stands at £85 million for one family and this amount can only go up not down!

Plus £22 million each for Charles and queen from two duchies.

£104 million which they don't include in palace financial report for security for their many publicly funded grand homes.

The local councils pay for their visits walkabouts bankrupting at least one council.

Their use of transport for their private use as well as engagements the very polluting expensive helicopters private jets all £15,000 and under not included if financial report.

Again as others have said it's not about the money though it's a lot it's about the principle and principles matter.

A town council is divided over whether to use public money to celebrate the Queen's platinum jubilee.
Later this month, events will take place across the UK to mark the Queen's 70 years on the throne.
One councillor in Ruthin, Denbighshire, said public money should not be used due to the "unprecedented" cost of living crisis.
However, the town's ex-mayor argued the cost is justified, as the celebration would "bring people together".

Councillor Ethan Jones described the idea of using public cash to mark the record-breaking anniversary as "skewed priorities".
He said: "People are having to make choices between heating and eating. People are out of work.
"Almost one in three children in Wales are living in poverty. Is it really the best use of public money?"

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-61440819?at_custom2=twitter&at_medium=custom7&at_custom3=%40BBCWalesNews&at_campaign=64&at_custom1=%5Bpost+type%5D&at_custom4=06032CC6-D4E6-11EC-97E0-99482152A482

We had a republic once. That didn't end well...

Well. I suppose blaming a person who has been dead for nearly 400 years is a variation on the "we might end up with Trump" approach.

It’s not about money? Well some posters on here constantly mention money and the evils of inherited wealth etc, so it’s excusable if I thought that was what counted.
Would we be a fully democratic country if we didn’t have the RF?
No.
It would still be the people who have money who would have the most power and even more than the RF, make the decisions which affect the rest of us.
The HoS would be appointed -not by whether he/she would be best for the country, but by what a few people wanted to choose-so in effect no more choice than we do about having a monarchy.
We can’t even agree in the UK about which MP or which political party would be best for everyone, not even when there’s a difference of over 1,000,000 votes between two outcomes.
And we would still be paying, as do the people in France. The horses and riders in last night’s display from the Garde républicaine are paid for by the people of France.

Callistemon21

I like to keep a check on my finances, nadateturbe to see if I'm getting value for money!

I don't see the point. You can't cancel.?

Not blaming Oliver Cromwell. Just pointing out that we tried a republic and ended up going back to a monarchy. Suspect most people forget that. Over to you Roundheads...

The content of your post MollyGo just demonstrates that you are not following this argument at all.

The HoS would not be appointed. You are so mired in the concept of a plutocracy that you have just made that up. In a Republic such as the one being advocated by the Republicans on GN, the HoS would be elected.

The problem is not inherited wealth, it is the opportunity for the RF to play the law for their own benefits. Maybe they do and maybe they don't, but any system which allows individuals and their families to do that is suspect. And we can do nothing about it. We don't get scrutiny of their affairs, whereas we would if they were private citizens. We can do nothing about it. They have power that no other citizen of this country has, and if anyone questions it we are accused of being "nasty to the Queen".

And yet again we have "We can't agree on which MP to have". That's democracy!! That's how it works!! We get to chose who we want to represent us and vote them out next time if they are crap at the job. If our HoS is crap at the job, we're stuck with them and their offspring forever.

A lot resting on P. Charles then, interesting times ahead.

Not be appointed? You mean he/she would just slip into place if they happened to be there at a convenient time? Or are you confusing appointed with elected?

I’ve already read on GN that a HoS is not elected-Although that’s what happens in France so are you going to choose elected or have you got another word for the decision making process that appoints a head of state?

nadateturbe

Callistemon21

I like to keep a check on my finances, nadateturbe to see if I'm getting value for money!

I don't see the point. You can't cancel.?

I can't cancel the tax I pay, the Council tax I pay, the water rates etc etc
I can check if I'm getting value for money from what I pay and I reckon my £1.25 pa to the Monarchy is better value than my Council tax

Good grief.

We'd have an election. Like they do in, for instance, Germany. And France. And the US.

So the President would be elected. Just as they are everywhere I can think of where they have a working democracy.

It may come as a surprise that lots of different countries have lots of different forms of government. We don't have to have the same system as France, or the US, or anywhere else.

Is this what people are hung up about? Are people confused about this?

Mollygo

Not be appointed? You mean he/she would just slip into place if they happened to be there at a convenient time? Or are you confusing appointed with elected?

Its not me who is confused. Not by a long chalk.

Not confused just not convinced.

Aveline

Not confused just not convinced.

Well can you explain it tooe people who have got the wrong end of the stick then.

Or even those who have got the wrong stick entirely?

Bridgeit

A lot resting on P. Charles then, interesting times ahead.

I think given the short time he might have, Charles would do as well to be a new broom sweeping everything clean. If nothing else for the sake of his son who I think might be giving his own input too. It's a case of now or never.

I don’t think harking back to the 17th century really stands up. Oliver Cromwell was disliked because of his puritanical views- banning Christmas and other celebrations- hardly what we’d expect to happen in 21st century U.K. Monarchs were believed to be deity then- seems some folk still believe that.

I think a lot depends on whether you're the type who would be excited to go to a "garden party" or get an "Honour" .I'dont want either of those so it doesn't affect me.I have no delusions of granduer I'm working class and always have been .
I strongly believe that the RF is thenot just source of the divisive class system but the reason it continues into the 21st century and which is in my opinion a cancer on society

Sadly it is far wider spread & not exclusive to & in some cases much more vulgar than RF.

I do not want a president, he/she will be involved with a political party and money supporting the candidate will pour in by the party who nominated him/her.

It wasn’t titled people who owned the iron works and coal mines in South Wales

That is a valid opinion Anniebach.

But some of us do want a president.