Thread: England's special family

I'd prefer the head on spike treatment for the lot of 'em, but I'd settle for just sailing them off to sea in a fucking coracle.

Failing that, strip them of all their wealth and assets and put them in a council house in some god-forsaken shithole sink estate and force them to see the reality of "their" nation as it actually is.

That some deluded cows cunts actually support them says a lot, it says they're utter fucking idiots who know nothing about our and their history, or don't actually care that they have been robbing us blind for centuries and treated us with nothing but contempt in return.

Fuck them, fuck the flag waving shitcunts who support them, and fuck the elitist institutions which they are the figureheads of.

"Oh, Kate's having a bayyy-bee, innit great?"

No, it ain't fucking great you dumb fucking fuck, it's a fucking shite state of affairs, it's another mouth to feed at massive expense.

I'm all for allowing the stupid fawning cap-doffing morons their precious Royals, but allow them to pay for them. Add on an extra 10% tax for anyone who declares themselves a monarchist and wishes them to continue arrogantly lording it over us based on nothing more than the luck of which family they were born into.

Failing that, strip them of all their wealth and assets and put them in a council house in some god-forsaken shithole sink estate and force them to see the reality of "their" nation as it actually is.

the socialist politics of envy laid bare. what a malevolent post.

Dutch royal family 'overtake Britain's as most expensive in Europe'

The Dutch royal family has overtaken the British monarchy to become most expensive in Western Europe at a cost of £31 million a year to the country's taxpayers, an international study has found.


By Bruno Waterfield, Brussels4:35PM BST 19 Jul 2012

In his sixth report on the costs of European heads of state, Herman Matthijs, professor of administrative science and public finances at Ghent University, notes the Royal Family had cut spending .

Queen Elizabeth II's cost to the taxpayer has fallen as result of austerity measures which have been deeper and faster than reductions to the Dutch monarchy's annual bill at a time when belt-tightening is affecting all of Europe's royal families.

Prof Matthijs's research found that the cost of British monarchy, praised as one of the most open about its finances, had been reduced by 16 per cent, falling from £35.5 million to £29.7m over the last year.

The £30.7 million Dutch bill for Queen Beatrix and her children, including £14m in personal allowances, is four times the cost of keeping the Spanish royal family, a country that is at heart of the eurozone's debt crisis.

Moreover, the burden to taxpayers of the Dutch royal family, Europe's most expensive, is proportionately heavier because the population of the Netherlands is almost a third of the size of Spain's and a mere quarter of Britain's.


In contrast to King Juan Carlos of Spain, Queen Beatrix on Wednesday announced that she saw "no reason" to reduce the £647,000 annual allowance she receives for carrying out her duties, a salary over the three times the size of that pocketed by the Spanish monarch.
King Juan Carlos announced on Wednesday that he had cut his own salary, as well as that of his son and heir Prince Felipe, by about 7 per cent
The research by Prof Matthijs is based on comparisons of civil lists and parliamentary reports on national accounts and do not include the cost of security for European royals, or compare their incomes from private wealth.

But Europe's most expensive head of state is not a King or a Queen but the president of a republic.

The study found that the most expensive head of state is Francois Hollande, the president of the French Republic, with the annual cost of the Elysée Palace running to £87.2 million – almost three times the bill for the Dutch royals.







More from The Telegraph

29.7 million is a drop in the ocean compared to gdp, and i would imagine the royals, as a tourist attraction, attract more than 29.7 million in revenue. its good business, its good for britain, they make a profit for the country. if that 29.7 million figure is accurate, then they are worth every penny of it.

which is more than can be said for most other royal families.

long live the queen !!!

Originally Posted by The Ghost Of The Moog

This thread is spineless.

You wouldn't dare write it about the Thai royal family. Yet this is a Thai forum.

Actually, I think if the censors were capable of putting two and two together, any substantive criticism of the British institution from an ideological perspective would necessarily apply to any similar, so while it might be acceptable (if pointless) to laugh at certain specifics, delving too deeply into the existential legitimacy of the British Crown might put one on thin ice. FFS, even Shakespeare-as-allegory can get an artist in trouble in these parts.

Originally Posted by taxexile

Too true, that's what they are,

that is exactly what they are now, but then royalty has always been a tourist draw, even in medieval times.

they have no choice as to their position in society, they are damned if they do and damned if they dont. and living in a council flat might even be preferable to living in a goldfish bowl, but they dont have the choice.

the last royal to opt out of the system, king edward viii, abdicated in order to marry an american slapper and ended up rejected and banished, living in exile in paris.

no wonder the kids of these families go crazy.

I don't think you are giving the British version of the institution sufficient credit for their success in keeping themselves relevant. If handing out a knighthood to Mick Jagger doesn't constitute keeping with times (long in the tooth as he may be), what does? There is something to be said for tradition as a unifying force, and in that regard it is hard to imagine any royal doing a better job than Elizabeth II*. Not to mention, without a Queen to whom would the soldiers swear an oath of loyalty that is above politics? You hasn't got Constitution. The place of the royals is presumably to set something of an example, and when they start failing badly at doing that it is bad for them and arguably bad for the nation. . .

Given what I said above maybe is time to STFU.

*OK, sorry, just thought of one. Long may he reign.

Originally Posted by taxexile

as a tourist attraction,

Oh that old chestnut ,, when did you or anyone you know who ever went to see your dearly beloved Royals ever catch a glimpse of em ??

I aint talking about the cover of Hello magazine .

There is ofcourse the architecture Buckinham Palace which is off limits to the people who pay for its upkeep , but one can view through railings in amazement