Prince Charles to be King in 2021

[Monster Hunter]

<jealous treasonous rubbish>

Oh look the man child made another soc account.

Yes the constant vicious attack over the princes letters to Blair about saving the environment billed by the media as royal interference into parliament were totaly about "rebuilding his reputation"

The monarchy is here to stay get over it, or start a civil war.

- - - Updated - - -

can you elaborate please

His shtick is the same every thread, makes a bunch of claims, fails to back it up and then blames the media for his ideas or candidate's being unpopular.

Says he's super pro free speech but then blames the media for all his problems..... His arguments are no different than the alt rights and wouldn't be out of place on 4chan.

[DarkTZeratul]

Except even the official UK tourism board cannot come up with any evidence whatsoever to backup the presupposition that any significant number of tourists come to the UK because of the royal family. Republics have castles and palaces that get tons of visitors each year, I mean, for fuck sake our zoos get more visitors than the castles do anyway.

Sure, they're coming for the castles and not the royals. But the royals own the castles, not the UK, so if the monarchy is dissolved then they all become private properties that the UK no longer gets tourism revenue from.

[ranzino]

......


This unfortunately is most British people's attitude to the monarchy. Even when a prominent royal is publicly outed as being involved with a sex trafficking ring involving underage girls they still maintain this unbelievable level of fawning sycophancy. It is as if they think the Royals are their personal friends or something. It is very creepy to listen to.
This explains how Andrew associated with a monster like Epstein after his conviction-the British public just don't care, and he probably thought he could get away with anything..

to pick that silly tooth: the age of consent is much lower than you think.

[Monster Hunter]

Sure, they're coming for the castles and not the royals. But the royals own the castles, not the UK, so if the monarchy is dissolved then they all become private properties that the UK no longer gets tourism revenue from.

Something the stupid republicans conveniently forget is that the goverment rents an awful lot of land from the crown (at a fenomonally cheap rate compared to the value) and dissolving the crown dosn't mean they suddenly get the land rather the queen would simply become the largest private landowner and the goverment would likely end up spending millions and millions more on rent or have to try to buy the land.

They also forget there's laws in place to prevent compulsory purchase of land or sizing land below the market value that no one wants to see gone.

In the end removing the monarchy would cost us more than keeping it.

[Monster Hunter]

The sex trafficking ring involved underage girls by the standard of any jurisdiction.

- - - Updated - - -



If only laws could be repealed by act of parliament...oh wait they can.

With concent of the Lords and Queen.

Or will you abolish then change? Because if so your then stealing land from a private citizen. How many people do you think will be OK with the goverment having that power? You know that law came in due to public outrage at the compulsory purchases of the early 1900s and the suicides that resulted right.

Hell its even questionable if its legal under eu law and human rights.

But then you don't seem like the kind of guy that cares about such things when they get in between you and your ideology.

[Monster Hunter]

The Lords are not needed. They can only delay legislation. Assuming the Lords exists for much longer.

If the Queen were to object she would in essence be destroying the constitutional monarchy by herself.

That said it probably isn't necessary to change the laws as compulsory purchase orders take place all the time.

And MUST be at the market value and can be challenged in court at great expense. We can't even get HS2 rolling because of this and you want to compulsory purchase the whole royal estate?

Like just sit there and really really think about the logistical and monetary cost of removing the monarchy, the human cost especially if like every other time it sparks war and rebellion...

There's no way in hell that's worth it unless your so dogmaticaly obsessed with republicanism your litteraly willing to cut off your nose to spite your face.

And for what do we actualy gain at all by going through that pain, cost and bloodshed? Litteraly what benefit would it be? Save a few million quid that she arguable makes us back? The fucking goverment spends that of bloody stationary a year. What's a few million when we litteraly piss billions away on a yearly basis?

[Monster Hunter]

Just get this through your thick little head. NO ONE and I do mean NO ONE is going to fight for the monarchy when and if the propaganda machine surrounding it is destroyed. The monarchy persists only because of that machine.

The objective reality of that machine is that an old woman who dodged her taxes for years and lives off vast, undeserved inherited wealth, that literally lives in a state of feral disgust literally surrounded by vast quantities of corgi shit, who underpays her staff despite having limitless wealth, and married an old racist twat who himself is a dodgy foreign immigrant that comes from a family entirely composed of nazis, is simply a drain on the state. She provides no service that could not be provided by any other individual at a tiny fraction of the cost.

Essentially the royals are upper-class benefit scroungers that you would be vilifying constantly if they were poor and did not have the benefit of the aforementioned brainwashing. Indeed they behave like a real-life version of Shameless lurching from one ugly scandal to the next as they parasitically consume the wealth of the nation.
What is truly pathetic is that you have absolutely no critical faculties at all, and cannot recognize how deeply irrational you are and how your belief system has been manipulated to achieve that end.

so you haven't a clue how to logistically do it, completely dodged the question and then just laid out that you are exactly as i surmised, like most republicans just a dirty little back room bar troll playing out your revolutionary fantasy's whilst jerking over the idea of ending the monarchy but without any where near the brain power to light a bulb let alone overthrow the institution.

good to know, thanks for that.

thats kind of a trend with you, just a bundle of salt and hate that's only useful for spiting out expletives and insults but hasn't got a fucking clue how to do anything useful.

[DarkTZeratul]

Something the stupid republicans conveniently forget is that the goverment rents an awful lot of land from the crown (at a fenomonally cheap rate compared to the value)

Technically they're not renting it; the deal King George III gave Parliament (that they immediately recognized was way too good to pass up) was that they get to keep all revenue (tax or otherwise) from the properties in exchange for an annual stiped for the monarch. At the time, the king saw it as a solution to his problem of being incredibly broke and massively in debt.

[Monster Hunter]

Technically they're not renting it; the deal King George III gave Parliament (that they immediately recognized was way too good to pass up) was that they get to keep all revenue (tax or otherwise) from the properties in exchange for an annual stiped for the monarch. At the time, the king saw it as a solution to his problem of being incredibly broke and massively in debt.

Aye it is an incredible deal for the goverment. A small stipend to the monarchy and they get access to all that land and the revenue generated from it.

No imagine if the gov suddenly had to pay the market value of rent on that land?
Or has to buy it all at current market values?

Because unless you go fiddling with property rights laws, and the lengthy court battles that would ensue if they tried that, that's what they will have to do.

People who complain about the cost of the monarchy should be bloody thankful she's the monarch not a normal private landowner.

[ranzino]

Aye it is an incredible deal for the goverment. A small stipend to the monarchy and they get access to all that land and the revenue generated from it.

No imagine if the gov suddenly had to pay the market value of rent on that land?
Or has to buy it all at current market values?

Because unless you go fiddling with property rights laws, and the lengthy court battles that would ensue if they tried that, that's what they will have to do.

People who complain about the cost of the monarchy should be bloody thankful she's the monarch not a normal private landowner.

so let's talk numbers here....

The Crown Estate is one of the largest property managers in the United Kingdom, administering property worth £14.1 billion, with urban properties valued at £9.1 billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

Him being a pedophile sounds like a conspiracy theory just like everything negative about The Royal Family including the stuff like Charles killed Diana. Why would he be a pedophile? He’s under surveillance 24/7

[Monster Hunter]

so let's talk numbers here....

The Crown Estate is one of the largest property managers in the United Kingdom, administering property worth £14.1 billion, with urban properties valued at £9.1 billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

The Royal family cost the UK £76m via the Royal grant.

The most over the top republican estimates put all the costs at £350 million with security travel e.t.c and they really really stretch to get to that amount. They want to get to that ammount because as a hard fact the crown estate returned
£329.4 million in 2017 and its usually around that.

Economic experts at brand finance, and independant consultancy put the totaly worth of the monarchy to the UK economy at 1.8billion pounds when they factor in the revenue generated from Royal events and tourism as well as trade gained from ambassadorial duty's. Eod though republicans might scoff at prince's, Kings and Queens, for a large part of the rest of the world, especially especially rich places like Saudi, rocking up with a Prince or monarch as your ambassador does make you stand out above the normal suite no name diplomats of republics.

- - - Updated - - -

Him being a pedophile sounds like a conspiracy theory just like everything negative about The Royal Family including the stuff like Charles killed Diana. Why would he be a pedophile? He’s under surveillance 24/7

I don't understand the pedophile thing, the only girl he's accused of sleeping with was 17 which is over the age of concent in the UK. Only thing if its true he could be done for is rape due to her concent being courced by epstine, but even then its unlikely to land a conviction because he could just claim he didn't know it was courced.

Tbh it wouldn't Suprise me of he had raving drug fuled sex party's with epstine, he was after all called randy Andy by spitting image in the 1980s for a reason, but then Al I say is throw him at the Americans in exchange for that dumb bitch who killed a motor cyclist down south then fled and claimed immunity. They can have randy Andy and we get her.

As fir the wider monarchy its meaningless as Andy in meaningless, he's a bottom tier royal.

[Kallisto]

Him being a pedophile sounds like a conspiracy theory just like everything negative about The Royal Family including the stuff like Charles killed Diana. Why would he be a pedophile? He’s under surveillance 24/7

Even if the worst-case around Prince Andrew is true then he wouldn't be a paedophile under UK law. 16 is the Age of consent and she was 17 (No there isn't any law in the UK that says 16/17 for under certain age 18 for all others. It's 15 years 364/5 days depending on leap year? Illegal, 16th Birthday? 100% legal.).

But he could be done on sex trafficing and other offenses around those kind of laws. Including rape. Also like Monster Hunter said, no exchange with the US until they hand over the stupid woman that thought the UK should be forced to drive on the wrong side of the road for her and ran to the US like a coward.

[Lynarii]

If you can prove that Prince Andrew slept with underaged women through Epstein, by all means take your evidence to the press or to court or something. The problem is 'we all know' and 'do you think' are not legal arguments that can be used to prosecute him. I agree that Andrew is a terrible person and I would like to see him punished for things that he has done, but not so much that I am willing to flaunt due process and punish him for things that I imagine he has done, but can't prove. The tragedy of Epstein's death isn't that the bastard is dead, but that we'll probably never be able to catch anyone else who should be in jail as well.

Also, Epstein was first and foremost a power broker. While it seems like underage sex was one of the services he offered, it wasn't the only thing he was involved in, and it's unlikely in the extreme that everyone who associated with him knew about it or engaged in it. Prince Andrew is more likely to be guilty than most, but you still need some actual evidence.

[CostinR]

Making Charles king would be an absolutely fantastically bad way for the British royal family to move forward in this and age. People like and admire Elizabeth across the globe. She's as close as a global world statesman as we can get.

Charles has too many controversies behind him. No people have not forgotten about Diana and what he did there, and people are going to scrutinize him and the overall family in a way that they aren't doing right now.

Really William should just get on the throne as quickly as possible because of Kate.

[Easo]

I dont see a source for this... OP, please do deliver? Because since it was not on the faking BBC of all media, then it likely is just not true.

Well i dont care, but its like sweden who need to pay extra for a face that only can wave

Oh look, ANOTHER one who does not understand that royals in UK actually bring in more money for the UK than they cost. Why the hell would you not like a popular figurehead loved by people, which ALSO makes money for you (indirectly, but still)?

[markos82]

Didn't he denounced the throne in favor of his eldest son after the marriage to that chick?

[ranzino]

Didn't he denounced the throne in favor of his eldest son after the marriage to that chick?

nope
afaik the church was consulted prior to that marriage, they gave green light.

[DarkTZeratul]

Pop Quiz for you. France has no monarchy. Does it make precisely nothing from tourism? Does the Republic draw no income from its lands and buildings? No? Then why the fuck would you imply that anything that stupid about a republican Britain?

Because the French government owns their major tourism properties, while the British government merely manages them for the Royal Family who privately owns them and gives all proceeds to the government.

[Mihalik]

Well, whatever to distract the plebs from the food and medicine shortages and the collapse of the NHS if Brexit goes through, or to distract them from Year 5 of "We're totally leaving the EU, soon™".

- - - Updated - - -

Because the French government owns their major tourism properties, while the British government merely manages them for the Royal Family who privately owns them and gives all proceeds to the government.

Well, the government could simply just nationalize all Royal property and just pay them something in compensation, that if they feel particularly generous.