The Royal Family #16

[Boring Monday]

He will soon no longer be my leader, most likely it will be Ben Wallace, very straight laced

That doesn’t change anything.

 

[TYL159]

Just an apartment?!

Apartment 1A takes up half of the 17th century palace's Clock Tower wing and boasts nine bedrooms in four stories and located in the middle of central London and one of the most expensive places in the country!

So what, it is there London base but belongs to the Crown Estate whether they lived in it or not

I think that’s a problem for the Royals as a whole.
Yes, the Monarchy is in need of trimming down which means the way they work will have to change … but they still need to be visible and seen to be doing the bread and butter of royalling. Zoom calls are all very well, but they aren‘t visible. They need to be more visible than just high days and sporting finals. It may not be glamorous, but Hospital wings and Schools and Community Halls in The Shires still need opening. Conduct all your ‘work’ behind closed doors and people might just start to wonder more and more just how much bang for the Buck they are actually getting.


And two kitchens.

And all those visits require more sovereign grant to pay for. Being a workhorse like Princess Anne is no doubt a good thing but it is no great argument for constitutional monarchy and a President and their family could also do such visits at taxpayer expense or not as they chose. It is the global name recognition, Jubilees, Royal Weddings, Coronations and apolitical nature of the role that makes me a constitutional monarchist, not their number of visits per head

 

[TYL159]

Monarchy hasn’t been mentioned as a reason for any country’s success or failure.

This whole thread is about monarchy and the royal family. Just notable that constitutional monarchies like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Australia and Canada are in the top half of that social mobility table.

Constitutional monarchy Japan is ahead of France, a republic. Constitutional monarchy Spain is ahead of Italy, a republic. Plus constitutional monarchy the UK is ahead of the USA, a republic, too

Counries with monarchies have them because they have not had long periods of instability where the Monarchy has been overthrown. The Scandi countries have used that stability to increase their countries prosperity, and opportunities. We haven't. I think maybe you need to look at why, out of all your beloved Monarchies, ours is doing so much worse in terms of social mobility than the others, even worse than Japan, a country steeped in tradition that also keeps people in their place. If the Monarchy affects equality, as you have said, why is our Monarchy doing so little for us compared to the others? Switzerland has no social mobility because its extremely wealthy as are the vast majority of their citizens. The US has poor health care and poor welfare, they are the country your buddies on the Right of the Tory party want us to emulate in that regard. Why are we keeping company with them?

Though arguably social mobility on that metric is also based on economics. Switzerland and the US still have higher gdp per capitas like Norway and higher than say France or Italy. For example if most people had £5000 and a few at the top had £10 000 it would be easier to be socially mobile and less unequal than a nation where most had £50 000 and a few had over £1 million. However people in the latter would be wealthier

 

[Great_Kate]

There is no need to get either York sister up and running as full time royal. Same for Louise, James, Peter and Zara. A slimmed down monarchy to 7 (for now) or even less means less engagements. The BRF is already an outlier with their numbers. W&K might look lazy compared to his family but are quite average compared to all the other royal households across Europe- especially if you remember they are behind Charles and Camilla. I mean, all royals could work more, non of them even remotely works the hours like normal people in normal jobs. William and Kate will end up with around 200 engagements each when they are actually reigning and around 150 each when Charles is king. The times of 350 engagements for one person will be over the second Anne retires/steps back a bit.
Slimming down will cut the numbers of the BRF drastically. You cannot slim down personal and expect the same outcome. Especially if you also expect a general modernisation. W&K biggest problem is that what they have shown from the more modern approaches has either been sloppy (Heads together, Early years) or is still to young to be properly judged (Earthshot).They need better execution and PR. So many missed chances to sell their determination. I mean I highly doubt the other royals are humanitarian angles, laying awake at night planning to save the world (even though some desperados they to appear as just that). Non of them are. But they have found better ways to appear involved and invested. This also goes for all royal households. I mean everyone would work less for the same money if possible. They are just as opportunistic and lazy as everyone else. But some are better in appearing not lazy as others. No excuse though. With their resources at hand, they should rake in praise without end for their work. They need better strategies (public relations and the actual jobs).

 

[Jinx2019]

Why is it just Prince William at the match?!

 

[TYL159]

I think it's more an academic point for me. I dont think we eill ever become a Republic, unless the Royals actually decide for themselves they dont want to do it. I think for me, I that being a monarchy keeps us wedded to the past and engenders a culture of deference to our ' betters' that leads to inequality and a 'We used to rule the world' mentality that is not good for this country. But that will not change immediately if we had a Republic. I think if I lived in one of the Commonwealth realms, I'd be wondering why my HoS was someone from a different country.They should be allowed to go without having the Royals sent there on some charm offensive persuading them to stay. For me, I think conversations about the monarchy are more a distraction from actual issues, because day to day they are irrelevant to me. I don't admire them, and I don't care if my children don't know who they are. I think that that people in the Public eye need to be allowed to criticise them and say they are Republican without being seen as unpatriotic. I think Monarchists often do the Royals no favours when they treat the Royals like their very own performing monkeys standing outside hospitals waiting for women to give birth, and demanding to see grieving children.The Royals will do what they say to the detriment of their own children because they know long term their privilege is ultimately dependent on doing what these people say. I dont want them preaching about things they know little about and forelock tuggers saying they are so amazing for doing them bare minimum , for example Prince William complaining about population control when he has 3 kids with carbon footprint 100's of times that of most other children in the world and he himself doesn't curb his helicopter use, or The Queen complaining about other people not acting fast enough on the environment when she gets herself exemptions from environmental legislation or Kate pretending to be an early years expert without mentioning the decades of work done before and no mention of underfunding of early years services. I think our National Anthem is an insult, in that it is not ' national' at all, but is about one person not the country or its inhabitants. It should be changed. But do I think about the Royals day to day when I'm not reading Tattle? No.
[/QUOTE

The idea having a constitutional monarchy leads to greater inequality is of course ludicrous, most of Scandinavia has constitutional monarchies and are some of the most equal nations on earth while some of the most unequal nations on earth, including Brazil, the USA and India are Republics.

The Royals position has always been it has been for the remaining Commonwealth realms to decide their future and Australia indeed voted 55% to keep the Queen in 1999.

Of course Republicans like you will whinge whether the Royals do campaign or don't campaign as it suits your ideological agenda. I don't disagree we could have a UK Anthem as well as the Royal National Anthem but that is no reason whatsoever to become a Republic

 

[Whatamadworld]

Most of the really old aristocracy built their wealth on land and farming … mainly sheep for wool … and keeping on the right side of the current/next Monarch.

That land must have cost a bit to begin with. Any idea how they afforded it and what kind of background those land owners had before they bought it?

 

[TYL159]

This is quite interesting so I looked it up and it seems that the U.K. is one of the poorest performing countries when it comes to social mobility.
Goldman Sachs Research did a study of this and published the results earlier this year. Seems it isn’t due to films and tv programmes (though that may hold a certain sway, I don’t believe there has been much research in the area
View attachment 1402805
Why is the U.K. performing so badly on social mobility and has the situation been exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic?

Steffan Ball: There is actually very little consensus on causes of the U.K.’s relatively poor performance both on social mobility and inequality metrics. Some researchers have argued that’s it’s due to a combination of strong education transmission from generations to generations and, added to that, the significant earning premium for graduate level jobs. A second explanation has been the large regional income differences we have in the U.K. and the growth of higher paying service sector jobs, particularly in the South. Finally, other researchers have noticed that the more progressive tax systems in some countries such as Denmark, Finland and Norway often lead to higher social mobility. And in the U.K., it could be that the tax system is disadvantageous to inequality and mobility.

Undoubtedly, the pandemic has increased inequality further and there is survey evidence to show this. YouGov did a report not so long ago and it showed over half - 56% - of the U.K. population felt Covid-19 had increased social inequality. This is consistent with the impact you see in the labor market. Covid-19 has had a larger impact on lower income jobs as they tend to be consumer facing rather than office based. These lower income jobs were more likely impacted by government lockdowns, while office jobs could be done remotely more easily.

Surveys also show a big regional difference. People in the North of England tend to say they have experienced harsher conditions recently than people in the South – particularly for employment and education. Survey evidence compiled by the Social Mobility Commission shows that 35% of people living in the North said Covid-19 had a detrimental impact on employment, whereas only 17% in the South did. On education: 21% in the North thought that they suffered more during the pandemic in terms of education outcomes, whereas only 8% of people thought that was the case in the South. More recently, rising energy prices are a concern, because they have a large impact on the households at the bottom of the income distribution and these people also tend to have little to no saving buffer as well.


How can social mobility be improved in the U.K.?

Steffan Ball: In the report we highlighted four main policy areas for improvement. The first one is improving geographical inequality by increasing public investment in less well-off regions of the U.K. The second is education and in particular focusing education on equalizing opportunities and improved access for children from lower income households. The third policy area is apprenticeships and retraining programmes that are retargeted toward people from disadvantaged backgrounds. And finally, high quality digital access for less wealthy households, in particular those living in more remote locations.

Granted this is just one study by one company.

So Denmark and Norway with constitutional monarchys are best in terms of social mobility and the Republic of the USA, supposedly built on meritocracy, is worst followed by the Republic of Switzerland. Ironic

 

[TYL159]

I think it’s their own PR people … who are just as out of touch as they are.

Strip away Dan Wooton’s <spit> purple prose and it said exactly the same about William’s feelings about his upbringing as Harry has said about his.

If the are going to be People Like Us … then they don’t get to pick and choose which parts of the job description they aren’t going to do. If the are People Like Us then if they are working part time or doing lighter duties then the pay should be reduced accordingly.

i actually think William and Kate have done pretty … they had as normal a start to married life as an heir to the throne ever has, they were excused onerous Duties while William was air ambulancing. They only really became full time working Royals around 2017 and now it’s being mooted that he’s only wanting to work school hours. I mean, come on man, you’re 40. Time to start earning the shiny baubles.



Still better than Charles though, eh?
At least he had 2 of ‘em.

There is no job description for an heir to the throne, you can do as many or as few royal duties as you like until you actually become Monarch in which case your day will clearly be set out with affairs of State. As the Sovereign Grant mainly funds official duties you don't get as much if you do fewer duties anyway

 

[Boring Monday]

So he got an Oxbridge interview with predicted and achieved B and C grades, not all As. So even your anecdote proves you did not need straight A grades to get into Oxbridge back then.

William got A B C grades and went to St Andrews not Oxbridge

No. As I said. He was predicted 2 A,s, a B and a C.
He also achieved 2A’s a B and a C.

 

[Whatamadworld]

Do William, Kate, Charles or Camilla smoke or drink? Never seen either of them do so which got me wondering if they do so.

 

[thegirlscout]

I’m surprised William is still travelling with his entire family, especially by helicopter.
If, God forbid, a fatal accident happened then Harry would inherit the throne after Charles!

That’s what I was thinking. After Kobe died I read lots of articles that said unless it was a military helicopter, helicopters aren’t the safest way to travel.

 

[Phoenix Lazarus]

I read a comment saying ''I loved Harry more while he was dancing naked in Vegas and pissing in the pool''.

Is this being seriously commented upon as something he allegedly actually did!?

 

[thegirlscout]

new video of the Cambridges and their dog leaving Kensington Palace (I think?).

 

[Whatamadworld]

I wonder if the potential future partners of the princes have to go through a screening to make sure they have the best genetics to breed with. I never considered it before, but it would make sense wouldn't it. I guess the only one (that I know of) who didn't come from privilege/aristocratic background is Kate Middleton. Most of the wives of the royal males have come from aristocracy have they not?

 

[Eirawen]

Do you think Charles will keep this name when he becomes King or chose another?

I heard he wants to be George vii

 

[Tangent Tiger]

Sophie’s tiaras are awful. I would have that one she had for her wedding reset. It has a funny tall bit and then what looks like a ‘gap’ either side!

I had to look that up! So that's the Anthemion tiara, I quite like it as it's got a delicate pattern, like a snowflake.

You got your wish @JAR21 apparently she remodelled it in 2019 to add more jewels, so you'd probably like this version!

 

[Whatamadworld]

I don't know why they attend Wimbledon to be honest. Seems a bit pointless.

 

[Whatamadworld]

To be honest, I reckon most country homes in this country are owned by those who have inherited it. So many aristocrats in this country who have inherited wealth. Spencer family is one off the top of my head. Where these aristocrat's ancestors got their money to begin with, who knows. I wonder if slave trade played a big part.

 

[FenellaTheWitch]

Is this a thing? They can change their name?

TQ's dad was Albert, known as Bertie. He changed his name to George.