The Royal Family

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people

Do you approve of the royal family?

Approve
4
9%
Disapprove
31
72%
Cock-end
8
19%
 
Total votes: 43

Herainestold
Catbabel
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Herainestold » Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:43 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... _net_worth
Outside Europe the people who seized oil and self-declared themselves monarchs are all top.

In Europe Wikipedia has Liechtenstein bloke top, Luxembourg second.

Spain 3rd, Monaco 4th.

Elizabeth Windsor is only 5th, Charles Windsor 6th (if combined they'd beat Monaco).

The wealth tax should sort this out. Leave the constitutional monarch with nothing, but pay them a fair whack for their charity, ambassadorial and government work.

ETA:

Top charity CEO gets £240k a year
Top ambassador gets £185k a year
Prime Minister gets £160k a year

Assuming a third of time on each, that averages to about £200k a year. Seems a reasonable salary for a head of state and will leave Elizabeth Windsor in the best paid 0.5% in the country. Chuck in part time use of Chequers, shared with the PM. Chuck in a good travel allowance and maybe even a wardrobe allowance for her fancy dress. Chuck in free banquets whenever another head of state is in town.

I'd take the job for that. It is discriminatory against me that I am denied the chance to apply for this job merely on the basis of my birth circumstances.
This is a good idea . In any top public service job, there should be some kind of performance appraisal.Maybe every two or five years. Whether it should be a straight up referendum or not is another matter. And how to replace them if they fail?
Interestingly Canada's Governor General recently resigned due to poor job performance. It was public pressure/embarassment rather than any formal mechanism.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
After Pie
Posts: 1670
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: The Royal Family

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:47 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
Good stuff
Cheers for that, very interesting.
Mike Patton wrote:"You overdo it sometimes. There I am, peeing on Axl Rose’s teleprompter." He looks rueful: "I didn’t really have to do that."

User avatar
Little waster
Dorkwood
Posts: 1323
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:35 am
Location: About 1 inch behind my eyes

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Little waster » Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:49 pm

Blackcountryboy wrote:
Mon Feb 08, 2021 5:26 pm
If we get rid of the Royal Family we need a Head of State - Nigel Farage doesn't appear too busy nowadays; he would have a good chance if we did it by election.
Under an Irish-style parliamentary system we'd probably end up with some variant of President Tony Robinson (or even President Jackie Weaver, assuming she has the authority).

Under a US or French Presidential system we might end up with a President Johnson* (... or Blair ... or Cameron) and YMMV on how appealing that prospect is. However as the Orange Buffoon over-the-water taught us the wonders of democracy means even the worst President gets to be very publicly ejected eventually. Whereas we are stuck with Brenda and her brood in perpetuity, unless something changes.




*assuming he'd even win a straight head-to-head Presidential race versus his current position based on a vague mix of half the Tory MPs after 5 run-off ballots, two-thirds of the 100,000 geriatric weirdos who make the Tory membership, a third of the voters of Uxbridge and a third of the general electorate's support under FPTP
It's meta, so it is allowed.

User avatar
nekomatic
Snowbonk
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by nekomatic » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:33 pm

Blackcountryboy wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:00 pm
My view is a written constitution is required, whether we keep the Royal family or not.
I always thought that, but David Allen Green argues* that the un-writtenness** of our constitution is not what is wrong with it, and that actually debates about the important constitutional changes we ought to be urgently discussing always get derailed on to how and by whom the writing** of this whole new constitution would be done, which gets in the way of actually changing anything.

If that’s not persuasive, consider that the USA has a written constitution and that doesn’t seem to have helped them much.

* apologies for not linking to where he actually argues it, his site on my phone is slower than a conveyancing solicitor
** Of course our constitution is written; it’s just not all written in one place.

User avatar
nekomatic
Snowbonk
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:04 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by nekomatic » Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:43 pm

FlammableFlower wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:46 pm
In the main, I'd probably prefer a parliamentary republic (German style) as opposed to a presidential (USA style).
The German style thing that we could really do with is probably a federal organisation of regions. But that’s even less likely than agreeing on a written** constitution.

User avatar
Sciolus
Snowbonk
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Sciolus » Wed Feb 10, 2021 6:55 pm

Little waster wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:49 pm
Under an Irish-style parliamentary system we'd probably end up with some variant of President Tony Robinson (or even President Jackie Weaver, assuming she has the authority).
The Irish president should be ex officio head of state of the UK as well. I'd be very happy with any of the three they've had since 1990 (I don't know much about earlier ones) to replace the Windsors.

User avatar
dyqik
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3409
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: The Royal Family

Post by dyqik » Wed Feb 10, 2021 7:20 pm

nekomatic wrote:
Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:33 pm
Blackcountryboy wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:00 pm
My view is a written constitution is required, whether we keep the Royal family or not.
I always thought that, but David Allen Green argues* that the un-writtenness** of our constitution is not what is wrong with it, and that actually debates about the important constitutional changes we ought to be urgently discussing always get derailed on to how and by whom the writing** of this whole new constitution would be done, which gets in the way of actually changing anything.

If that’s not persuasive, consider that the USA has a written constitution and that doesn’t seem to have helped them much.

* apologies for not linking to where he actually argues it, his site on my phone is slower than a conveyancing solicitor
** Of course our constitution is written; it’s just not all written in one place.
The UK doesn't have a constitution worth the paper it's written on. Because any element of it can (although not trivially) be completely changed with a simple majority in Parliament. Thus the UK's constitutional law does nothing much to set out the relationship between the people and the state, or to protect the populations from the whims of government, as the government has a parliamentary majority by default.

Where the US and other real constitutions differ from the UK's constitutional law is that changing the constitutions requires more than just the government's (parliamentary majority's) say-so. And changing that in the UK means getting rid of the only absolute in UK constitutional law - the primacy of Parliament and the principle that it can't bind itself.

User avatar
jimbob
After Pie
Posts: 2190
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: The Royal Family

Post by jimbob » Wed Feb 10, 2021 8:55 pm

Sciolus wrote:
Wed Feb 10, 2021 6:55 pm
Little waster wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:49 pm
Under an Irish-style parliamentary system we'd probably end up with some variant of President Tony Robinson (or even President Jackie Weaver, assuming she has the authority).
The Irish president should be ex officio head of state of the UK as well. I'd be very happy with any of the three they've had since 1990 (I don't know much about earlier ones) to replace the Windsors.
Yup. Someone popular with moral authority but little actual power.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

secret squirrel
Snowbonk
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by secret squirrel » Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:48 am

lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... _net_worth
Outside Europe the people who seized oil and self-declared themselves monarchs are all top.
...
Apart from the King of Thailand in the top spot, who, in addition to his vast wealth, receives over a billion US dollars a year from the tax payers of a fairly poor country. Nevertheless, and in spite of his well known personal flaws, despite draconian laws that give elderly ladies decades long prison sentences for criticizing him, the royal family remains broadly popular in Thailand (though less so with the younger generation). The power of propaganda is truly impressive.

User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
After Pie
Posts: 1670
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: The Royal Family

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:03 pm

secret squirrel wrote:
Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:48 am
lpm wrote:
Tue Feb 09, 2021 1:49 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... _net_worth
Outside Europe the people who seized oil and self-declared themselves monarchs are all top.
...
Apart from the King of Thailand in the top spot, who, in addition to his vast wealth, receives over a billion US dollars a year from the tax payers of a fairly poor country. Nevertheless, and in spite of his well known personal flaws, despite draconian laws that give elderly ladies decades long prison sentences for criticizing him, the royal family remains broadly popular in Thailand (though less so with the younger generation). The power of propaganda is truly impressive.
Assuming you're still in Thailand, give us a shout if you need us to disappear this post ;)
Mike Patton wrote:"You overdo it sometimes. There I am, peeing on Axl Rose’s teleprompter." He looks rueful: "I didn’t really have to do that."

secret squirrel
Snowbonk
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by secret squirrel » Sat Feb 13, 2021 7:51 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:03 pm
Assuming you're still in Thailand, give us a shout if you need us to disappear this post ;)
Thanks. Fortunately, I doubt there are many Thai ultra-royalists browsing this forum. Also, even if I posted this on facebook or something and it came to the attention of the authorities, as a foreigner I think I would likely only lose my job and be deported.

noggins
Stargoon
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:30 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by noggins » Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:03 pm

If you were a Thai and looked at your neighbours’ governments and histories, monarchy starts to look quite appealing.

secret squirrel
Snowbonk
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: The Royal Family

Post by secret squirrel » Sat Feb 13, 2021 4:03 pm

noggins wrote:
Sat Feb 13, 2021 1:03 pm
If you were a Thai and looked at your neighbours’ governments and histories, monarchy starts to look quite appealing.
Well, on paper they're a constitutional monarchy, and in practice they were a military dictatorship for much of the 20th century. They struck deals with the Japanese to avoid the worst of Japanese occupation during WW2, and they didn't get bombed by the US like Laos and Cambodia did, which goes a long way to explaining their current position relative to their neighbours (excluding Malaysia). But yes, the previous king was a 'good king', and did various good works for the people, along with living an overtly modest life. He gave the military propagandists good material to work with.

User avatar
veravista
Snowbonk
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 7:29 pm
Location: Directly above the centre of the earth

Re: The Royal Family

Post by veravista » Sun Feb 14, 2021 10:28 pm

Hooray, another parasite on the way to distract us plebs from the pandemic and brexit. Gawd bless em

User avatar
Gfamily
After Pie
Posts: 2227
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:00 pm
Location: NW England

Re: The Royal Family

Post by Gfamily » Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:40 pm

veravista wrote:
Sun Feb 14, 2021 10:28 pm
Hooray, another parasite on the way to distract us plebs from the pandemic and brexit. Gawd bless em
They don't have a lot of choice in how these things are presented.
As I think I've said in another place, I am pretty sure that both of the main grandchildren would seriously consider being given a pass against having to do that job of being Head of State.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!

Post Reply