But will you tug the forelock to Queen Camilla?

[Twisterboy]

Not a huge royal fan, but I admire the queen and her reign, in my lifetime (38 years) she has gone through so much Windsor Castle Fire, Divorce of Charles, Diana, Andrew and Fergie, Death of Diana, weddings of her grand children, Harry and Megan’s Oprah interview and the death of Phillip.

I know that she did not see eye to eye with Camillia at first but she seems to have a strong Allie in her.

Personally for me I would rather have William on the throne over Charles.

[MSS]

Personally, whilst not a Royalist in any shape or form, the queen has done her duty for the country and for Royal Household. Far the last 10+ years I've felt that Charles as King would be far more relevant to the new generation. Now, I feel Harry would be the better King of them all. I just fail to see William and Kate in such a role if it is to be relevant to the subjects.

Royalty will have come of age when the palaces are used to provide shelter for the homeless - a bit like a certain scene in Doctor Zivago for those who have seen the original film with Omar Sharif and Julie Chritie.

[MissMoppet]

Originally Posted by Twisterboy

. . . she has gone through so much Windsor Castle Fire . . .

Indeed. Apparently the taxpayer was expected to foot the bill (£36.5 million) but there was so much outrage that after "discussion" she contributed £2million and was forced to pay income tax in 1993 for the first time.

[KWIL]

You have to be very carerful when you make a claim as to what the Monarchy actually owns itself and what is owned by the State.

I for one would not like to have a President in any form.

[wraymond]

I suppose it’s not generally known, nor hardly appreciated, that many charities enjoy private donations from many sources. Often donations and other helpful offers come through discreet agents and confidants who are gratefully thanked, in private.

Not all donations are made public and not even the recipients necessarily publicise their benefactors. Now that is the real charity work – not seeking any recognition. This is apart from the societies and organisations that are affiliated to Royal connections, there are hundreds of them.

As for the famous and infamous personalities, they are individuals who happen to be born into certain positions and are necessarily a product of those groups. Our criticisms, and less than favourable opinions, usually come as a result of particularly objectionable behaviour, sometimes misinterpreted, and can then be indiscriminately applied to all.

As for the royal succession, what sort of regime would the critics prefer? Personally and, after a so-far rather unexpectedly long life, I can’t think of any substitution that I might have any respect for.

[grivas]

Originally Posted by mileshawk56

And why not, good luck to them(her) dont be such a grump I shudder at the possible alternative. Chris S.

God forbid we might for a moment even consider the remote possibility of Britain the Republic, after all we need the monarchy to look after us all, guide us with their divinity and good example etc etc. Why I simply cannot understand anyone would take exception to the allegedly vast wealth of the royals, haven't they dedicated their royal lives for the betterment of the great unwashed, haven't they showered the deserving with honours, knighthoods and orders of various types, and why not. We the undeserving must not be jealous of their billions, they are in need of it.

[planenut]

Regardless of any wealth, hop back to the original point, then consider that The Queen makes a statement regarding her own departure, with the loss of her Phillip, felt and mentioned too.
Prince Charles has spent how many years wondering when, and perhaps if at all he would become the ruling Monarch?
Now, consider what will happen if Charles does not linger very long?
I am thankful I was not born into their way of life.

[wraymond]

Couldn't agree more. True, there is much pomp and comfy circumstance but the constant criticism and carping is very hard to ignore and, of course, 'they' are unable to answer back or complain.

All this apart from the fact that despite it all, 'they' bring in huge investment and interest from all over the world. Indispensable. Not least, what a gift to history despite the relatively few transgressions. Let those who have never faulted throw the first stone.

[maxi_crawf]

67 billion, I find that very hard to believe.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[MissMoppet]

Originally Posted by maxi_crawf

67 billion, I find that very hard to believe.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

My deepest most grovelling apologies. I exaggerated. Got quite carried away. According to the Express:
Royal Family net worth

In 2017, Forbes estimated the family as a whole to be worth £65billion.
Then in 2019, it was reported that the Queen’s net worth alone was an estimated £365million according to the Times Rich List of 2021.
This is £15million more than the previous year.