Worked with leaving the EU! NHS has £300million extra A WEEK!!People behave like if we didn't have a monarchy, the money saved would make everything else in the country ok. Obviously if we get rid of the monarchy then the NHS would run perfectly, homelessness would disappear and energy bills would be pennies.
I find it interesting that people find it performative because I think that charity work in general gives most people a sense of purpose. Perhaps I’ve just read a Christmas Carol one too many timesI think the issue for a lot of people is that it looks so performative. I agree they can’t win as they would be criticised whatever they do but when I see them it just highlights how much they have versus how little the people they are helping have. Maybe it’s the gushing tones of the articles about them being there that sets my teeth on edge rather than the photos themselves.
I think I would hate their life to be sure but I am convinced Kate has decided it’s worth it and so I don’t feel that sorry for her. She has decided to choose it, she didn’t have to but presumably she wanted the man and the Crown and could put up with the lifestyle. The children and William I do feel sorry for. No choice in it and no real choice in what they will do or achieve in their working lives. I hope the slimming down of the royal family will make it possible for Charlotte and Louis to have a more fulfilled life than George and William.I find it interesting that people find it performative because I think that charity work in general gives most people a sense of purpose. Perhaps I’ve just read a Christmas Carol one too many timesbut I imagine they really do care about the causes they support and feel that the press they get by doing things like this will really help. I would imagine their lives would be awful without charity work to give it a sense of purpose tbh… they live in a goldfish bowl. Like someone said, if Kate scratched her muff it would be shared a million times on social media.
However I can understand that when you think of how rich they are etc it can feel grating. Very much them v us. But I’d argue that poverty and wealth distribution (of the lack of) is more to do with the government (bring on the election!).
I guess I just don’t think they would suddenly be poor if we ousted the Royal Family. And it’s nice to see them actually taking their kids to do charity work and it’s good to teach them the value and to show them how “the other half live” as it were…
Yet you have people believing these toys were 'pre loved'. Laughable reallyThis shite is almost farcical at this point. As was William posing with his homeless pal three years in a row. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Last year, Charles went to visit a gurdwara which feeds people every day. Apparently when he visits place like that, the boot of his car is filled with food donations, in addition to any personal monetary donation he may make. Even if he's raided the Duchy Original warehouse, it means that his company is losing that money and the recipients get a product that is sold as high quality.William and Catherine also make personal donations to these charities too. Catherine doesn't walk into the baby bank with a load of stuff but donations are sent and she has arranged for companies to give huge donations to baby banks across the country.
What’s your proof they weren’t - and so what if they were new ? Am sure kids who get f*ck all will be glad of them-Yet you have people believing these toys were 'pre loved'. Laughable really
Didn't the actual charity worker ask the kids to select what they themselves would choose or did I mishear?What’s your proof they weren’t - and so what if they were new ? Am sure kids who get f*ck all will be glad of them-
Yeah, because they were packing present gift bags from the donations the charity had received. I use to do something similar as a child with my childminder. We did these shoeboxes and she would always say to pick things I would want and then it would go to a girl a similar age as me. We would get things like pens and pencils etc and then also a small gift from a charity shop. It’s actually something that’s really stuck with me and even though I don’t have kids, I buy toys to donate at Christmas. Hopefully this is something that will make an impact on the Wales children too, because with their privilege definitely comes responsibility to give back.Didn't the actual charity worker ask the kids to select what they themselves would choose or did I mishear?
the two aren’t really comparable though. They serve hugely different purposes, two totally different institutions with a totally different history. The comparison doesn’t work at all.People behave like if we didn't have a monarchy, the money saved would make everything else in the country ok. Obviously if we get rid of the monarchy then the NHS would run perfectly, homelessness would disappear and energy bills would be pennies.
It’s giving Marie Antoinette taking her kidsI think the issue for a lot of people is that it looks so performative. I agree they can’t win as they would be criticised whatever they do but when I see them it just highlights how much they have versus how little the people they are helping have. Maybe it’s the gushing tones of the articles about them being there that sets my teeth on edge rather than the photos themselves.
It’s definitely doable to transfer the assets to a public body. I wouldn’t bet on the amount of transferred good staying into the countries hand though.the two aren’t really comparable though. They serve hugely different purposes, two totally different institutions with a totally different history. The comparison doesn’t work at all.
the NHS *is* expensive because it provides essential health services.
but part of the reason it’s expensive is because it bears the brunt’s of cuts. An oft quoted example is elderly patients not being able to be discharged because they can’t get a home assessment. There aren’t enough social workers to sign off that their homes are safe. So the NHS doctors can’t discharge them, so they take up a bed an extra few nights at costs which can range up to the hundreds. This then puts pressure on less essential services and makes it longer to wait for a bed for new admissions.
the NHS can’t operate properly because it doesn’t have the peripheral services it needs to function correctly.
the Royal Family, on the other hand, are nothing like the NHS. They provide a purely constitutional “service” which doesn’t really have tangible or many intangible benefits IMO. They hold a priceless art collection in trust. They own vast estates. They have a rich source of personal wealth. They receive huge funding from the state and in return… they serve a ceremonial purpose. They head up charities and get some good PR for their causes whilst also for themselves.
with the correct legislation, there’s absolutely no reason why the U.K. would be bought up by China/Russia. The assets the royal family holds could, therotically be transferred to another trust holder. A charity? The government? Either or. They don’t have a monopoly on being good at holding estates in trust. They already outsource many aspects of it (Royal Historic palaces).
sorry but there’s no real reason to not believe that there could very realistically be a transfer of assets from the royal family to a public body that was seamless and effective. It’s worked elsewhere (Versailles, The palace of Belem.. any European former royal residence etc).
would the money be funnelled to the NHS? No. Would it need to be? No.
if we were to remove the royal family, we’d likely see knock on effects that aren’t connected to their immediate wealth ownership .
for example, a huge point of contention in the U.K. is the unequal distribution of wealth, geographically. Why is this the case?
because London is the centre and subsidies the rest of the U.K. it generates the most wealth, has the most investment and so on.
why?
Largely because of its history of being central government. Because of the Westminster system.
and why do MPs and Civil Servants need to be based on the Westminster system, and being based in London?
because there’s a monarchy and it’s based there.
inagine a world where parliament could be held in multiple locations. Where investments could be made in multiple locations. Where the underlying culture of the U.K. was one of meritocracy instead of having a head of state appointed based on nepotism. What sort of cultural shift might we see for the better if we decided that actually, people aren’t born more or less special. How might that contribute to the dismantling of classism that is prevalent in the U.K.?
there are financial benefits to removing the royal family for sure. But I think the less tangible, knock on effect benefits could be much much more valuable.
Giving Evidence has found that from 2019-2020 74% of charities with Royal patrons did not manage to get any public engagements and they couldn’t find any evidence that Royal patrons increase a charity’s revenue. Fewer than half of their patronages are with registered UK charities.But from the charities point of view if having a royal member visit brings so much awareness to the cause and in doing so brings in more donations that's only a good thing!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?