British support for the monarchy is apparently at an all time low

[Social Media]

 

[NanLaew]

It would be of greater relevance and importance to know about the British public's stance on the ongoing industrial action and strikes; they should be abolished, are not very important or not at all important.

[3NUMBAS]

sketeltons in their cupboards are now very  apparent looting ,slavery and all the chicanery going back generations

 

wokeism to the fore

[youreavinalaff]

2 hours ago, Timbob said:

Good. The Windsors are Britain's biggest benefit scroungers! 

Benefits? Please explain.

[proton]

Having a head of state in place, not on suitability or talent but purely on who their parents were is as stupid as having an hereditary professor of history. Even the Romans avoided it and when they did appoint their sons more often they were not up to the job. Plus in the case of Charles he's rubbled the publics nose in it over the relentless PR for his home wrecking wife, who is now to be Queen, when originally he said she would not be. Should have ended for good when Charles the first's head hit the basket. CH1 was a convicted traitor, I think CH3 might go in the same direction.

[Timbob]

1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

Benefits? Please explain.

Sovereign Grant, plus a whole host of other benefits (i.e. zero inheritance tax).

 

They are parasites.

 

But it's not personal. I think they'd be far happier and live more fulfilled lives if the monarchy were abolished. 

[Hummin]

If they wanted a popular King, why didnt they skip Charles, and make William the next ? 

[it is what it is]

tbh most people in the uk have bigger things to worry about. and there is another side to consider;  the tourists seem to love the monarchy, and where there's tourists there's brass

[it is what it is]

Just now, Hummin said:

If they wanted a popular King, why didnt they skip Charles, and make William the next ? 

 

because succession to the British throne is determined under common law, and not by the people.

[youreavinalaff]

1 hour ago, Timbob said:

Sovereign Grant, plus a whole host of other benefits (i.e. zero inheritance tax).

 

They are parasites.

 

But it's not personal. I think they'd be far happier and live more fulfilled lives if the monarchy were abolished

I can't believe you don't know the Sovereign Grant is a percentage (15%) of what the treasury collect from the Crown earnings.

 

The Crown are large net contributors to the economy.

 

 

[youreavinalaff]

2 hours ago, proton said:

Having a head of state in place, not on suitability or talent but purely on who their parents were is as stupid as having an hereditary professor of history. Even the Romans avoided it and when they did appoint their sons more often they were not up to the job. Plus in the case of Charles he's rubbled the publics nose in it over the relentless PR for his home wrecking wife, who is now to be Queen, when originally he said she would not be. Should have ended for good when Charles the first's head hit the basket. CH1 was a convicted traitor, I think CH3 might go in the same direction.

And what elected head of state of any country has been suitable or talented?

 

Trump? Macron? The majority of those in Africa? South America? Asia?

[still kicking]

37 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

I can't believe you don't know the Sovereign Grant is a percentage (15%) of what the treasury collect from the Crown earnings.

 

The Crown are large net contributors to the economy.

 

 

The long weekend is expected to cost British taxpayers at least £100 million ($125 million). 

Does this answer your comment?

How Much Will King Charles' Coronation Cost Taxpayers? | Time

[youreavinalaff]

11 minutes ago, still kicking said:

The long weekend is expected to cost British taxpayers at least £100 million ($125 million). 

Does this answer your comment?

How Much Will King Charles' Coronation Cost Taxpayers? | Time

Indeed. Not tax payers though. It will cost the treasury. The money will come from funds receive from 85% of the Crown earnings from tax year 2022/2023.

 

The UK economy will lose more money because of the extra bank holiday that so many wanted.

[Timbob]

53 minutes ago, it is what it is said:

tbh most people in the uk have bigger things to worry about. and there is another side to consider;  the tourists seem to love the monarchy, and where there's tourists there's brass

France chopped the heads off their Royals over 200 years ago. To this day, the Palaces of Versailles gets more tourists than Buckingham Palace. 

[youreavinalaff]

1 minute ago, Timbob said:

France chopped the heads off their Royals over 200 years ago. To this day, the Palaces of Versailles gets more tourists than Buckingham Palace. 

And what about the plethora of castles and other royal sights around Britain?

[Timbob]

1 minute ago, youreavinalaff said:

And what about the plethora of castles and other royal sights around Britain?

They will still get visitors, just like in France.

[still kicking]

1 minute ago, Timbob said:

They will still get visitors, just like in France.

Ha, how many visitors does Germany or any other country get by tourists visiting castles?

[youreavinalaff]

7 minutes ago, Timbob said:

What if the next in line to the throne is mentally retarded?

I can't answer that. However, there will likely be some kind of legislation to deal with it.

 

William seems OK as does George. The monarchy seems in good hands for the foreseeable future.

[Timbob]

5 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

I can't answer that. However, there will likely be some kind of legislation to deal with it.

 

William seems OK as does George. The monarchy seems in good hands for the foreseeable future.

They'd probably tell the world they died and ship them off to a mental hospital.... just like they did with the late Queen's cousins. Charming.

 

With any luck the British public will have had enough of this nonsense long before George gets close. 

[JimmyJ]

3 hours ago, it is what it is said:

tbh most people in the uk have bigger things to worry about. and there is another side to consider;  the tourists seem to love the monarchy, and where there's tourists there's brass

Correct.

They are a (grotesque) tourist attraction.

[brewsterbudgen]

I suspect Charles III may be the final monarch.  William seems to realise times have changed.

[transam]

I was going to have a pop at the anti-UK Royalty brigade posters above, but thought better to point out my thoughts on the possible lower Royalty support, if there indeed is one.

 

In our times the problem has been the Harry nut job, gone the same way as his mother, him doing the Oprah, Netflix, Spare thing, when he could have just walked away.

I hope to see the <deleted> given some verbal grief when he shows up, booing would be great if it is away from the proceedings.

 

As for the Brit anti Monarchy blokes above, I think you will see on May 6th, the resounding pleasure given by the British people to the event, to our countries centuries of King's and Queen's coronations, whilst you have your envious noses stuck in a beer glass......????

 

As for non-Brits, well, I feel sorry that your monarchy was removed, if you never had a monarchy, well, I feel sorry for you too......????....

 

 

[transam]

8 hours ago, Timbob said:

They'd probably tell the world they died and ship them off to a mental hospital.... just like they did with the late Queen's cousins. Charming.

 

With any luck the British public will have had enough of this nonsense long before George gets close. 

Does your country have a King or Queen.....?

[onthedarkside]

Reported troll posts removed

[transam]

8 hours ago, Timbob said:

France chopped the heads off their Royals over 200 years ago. To this day, the Palaces of Versailles gets more tourists than Buckingham Palace. 

Yes, they want to see where the guillotine was situated.........

 

Just think what Russia was saddled with for a loooong time after the rabble murdered their monarchy........ Communism, that killed off many thousands of anyone they didn't like......

Even now they have a leader that has done very well for himself and family, and now off on a killing spree for land grab, as if Russia needs any more land.....

[Hummin]

10 hours ago, it is what it is said:

 

because succession to the British throne is determined under common law, and not by the people.

Im not talking about the people choice, Im talking about the house realize their future would have looked better in Williams hands than Charles. 

 

Charles should have stepped aside for the house or Thrones best, but I guess thats a long shot for someone to accept even here at AN

[transam]

6 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Im not talking about the people choice, Im talking about the house realize their future would have looked better in Williams hands than Charles. 

 

Charles should have stepped aside for the house or Thrones best, but I guess thats a long shot for someone to accept even here at AN

That is just a layman way of thinking, just leave it to those who from birth know everything about it........Except that fruitcake, Harry.....????

[Hummin]

4 minutes ago, transam said:

That is just a layman way of thinking, just leave it to those who from birth know everything about it........Except that fruitcake, Harry.....????

I see someones lazy confused emotion I do not care! My point is not a Laymans choice, just common sense inside the house where Charles could have realized the future of the Kingdom might had been better off with a younger King who so far have done quite well as far I can see both media and with the people. 

 

Cant say Charles have succeded in same way. 

[transam]

22 minutes ago, Hummin said:

I see someones lazy confused emotion I do not care! My point is not a Laymans choice, just common sense inside the house where Charles could have realized the future of the Kingdom might had been better off with a younger King who so far have done quite well as far I can see both media and with the people. 

 

Cant say Charles have succeded in same way. 

Again, a layman assumption, I am sure those brought up in the Royalty circle, know how to tie their own shoelaces, except Harry, that is, his Mrs. has to do it for him...........????

[Hummin]

1 minute ago, transam said:

Again, a layman assumption, I am sure those brought up in the Royalty circle, know how to tie their own shoelaces, except Harry, that is, his Mrs. has to do it for him...........????

Oh, every Kingdom have their princess or prince who go way out of the line. 

 

We got Martha who now Engaged to Durek!

 

We will see how well it goes for UK, first Brex it, now this ????