The King

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2647
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: The King

Post by plodder » Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:23 am

meh, keep the monarch for now, take away their money and power, job's a good un for most people I'd suspect.

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3513
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: The King

Post by Grumble » Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:28 am

plodder wrote:
Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:33 am
TopBadger wrote:
Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:30 am
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Tue Sep 13, 2022 11:40 pm

As a large rural landowner he can do loads, again non-politically, e.g. he's been overseeing Curlew reintroductions at Sandringham this year, and hosts meetings of farmers etc. interested in various topics.

I wouldn't choose for him to be in charge of that land - it should be managed for the public benefit by people accountable to the public.
IIRC Sandringham is privately owned by the Monarch, and not Crown Estate (owned by the public but given to the Monarch). So it's likely much less contentious for them to do these things on their private property...
f.ck off private property - the entire seabed below high water out to a few miles? Doesn't even pay inheritance tax. Ridiculous stance to take.
That’s Crown Estate, owned by the government rather than the monarch.
A bit churlish

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2647
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: The King

Post by plodder » Wed Sep 14, 2022 11:44 am

A chunk of the profit goes to the crown. This whole grovelling mentality is so, so damaging.

User avatar
Trinucleus
Catbabel
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:45 pm

Re: The King

Post by Trinucleus » Wed Sep 14, 2022 3:30 pm

Couple of positive things from him, going back some years:

Challenged a gaurds officer about the lack of black faces in the ranks. Told 'no one applies' , came back with 'I want to see your plan to tackle it'

Will be 'defender of the faith' but apparently wants to be 'defender of faiths' which is a nice idea but I guess the Anglicans will veto

Then cheated on his wife....

Herainestold
After Pie
Posts: 1857
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: The King

Post by Herainestold » Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:48 pm

The more horrible Charles is revealed to be...the sooner we have a Republic.
Masking forever
Putin is a monster, Russian people are not.

Millennie Al
Dorkwood
Posts: 1460
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am

Re: The King

Post by Millennie Al » Wed Sep 14, 2022 11:13 pm

bjn wrote:
Wed Sep 14, 2022 7:13 am
The household staff were employed directly by the Queen. There are something like 800 of them. Charles had/has about 100 of them for himself. Duchy of Cornwall is a separate thing, as are his various charities. Chuck will be stepping into the role of Monarch and be taking over those 800, because they know what’s they are doing for a monarch. This leaves 100 people without a role. Some may go with Charles, some may go to the new Prince of Wales, some will literally be redundant.
And if those who wish to abolish the monarchy have their way, all of them will be redundant.

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2647
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: The King

Post by plodder » Thu Sep 15, 2022 7:41 am

It's a well known republican plot to sack them all on Christmas Eve, too. Every last one of them. And we'll wave banknotes at them from our Christmas windows in the snow.

purplehaze
Fuzzable
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:27 pm

Re: The King

Post by purplehaze » Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:06 am

Suggest watch series 4 of The Crown. It's an honest portrait of a marriage that was doomed to fail from the start. Charles did not cheat on his wife, he simply carried on his relationship with Parker Bowles.

He is a spoilt, entitled brat and isn't giving this up, not under any circumstances.

Lew Dolby
Snowbonk
Posts: 534
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:59 pm
Location: Shropshire - Welsh Borders

Re: The King

Post by Lew Dolby » Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:27 am

purplehaze wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:06 am
Charles did not cheat on his wife, he simply carried on his relationship with Parker Bowles.
How's that not cheating on his wife ???

And because of the affair, he gave his word to people with no intention of keeping it. [Powys Castle]
WOULD CUSTOMERS PLEASE REFRAIN FROM SITTING ON THE COUNTER BY THE BACON SLICER - AS WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE BEHIND IN OUR ORDERS.

purplehaze
Fuzzable
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:27 pm

Re: The King

Post by purplehaze » Thu Sep 15, 2022 10:06 am

Lew Dolby wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:27 am
purplehaze wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:06 am
Charles did not cheat on his wife, he simply carried on his relationship with Parker Bowles.
How's that not cheating on his wife ???

And because of the affair, he gave his word to people with no intention of keeping it. [Powys Castle]
Because all three knew what was going on. Be of no doubt, I find the whole thing totally bizarre, however this was a 19 year old teenager engaged to be married to the next monarch and she was only 20 when they married. Charles was 32 and Camilla 34 years old at this juncture and both of them exploited a young woman in the knowledge they could manipulate her because of her youth and immaturity.

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2647
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: The King

Post by plodder » Thu Sep 15, 2022 10:15 am

you're *this* close to saying "it was of a time and things were different" - please don't.

there was general outrage at the time and huge sympathy for Diana, hence the public's response when she died.

Charles has been coming across as a total tw.t all this life. The only people who sympathise with him are vague spiritual types and desperate environmentalists who'll rightly clutch at any straw they can get.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9569
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: The King

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Sep 15, 2022 10:38 am

I was surprised to learn that he met Diana when she was 16, and he was 29 and dating her older sister.

If by "surprised" you mean "unsurprised".

Hard drive checks for all royals methinks.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

purplehaze
Fuzzable
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:27 pm

Re: The King

Post by purplehaze » Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:25 pm

plodder wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 10:15 am
you're *this* close to saying "it was of a time and things were different" - please don't.

there was general outrage at the time and huge sympathy for Diana, hence the public's response when she died.

Charles has been coming across as a total tw.t all this life. The only people who sympathise with him are vague spiritual types and desperate environmentalists who'll rightly clutch at any straw they can get.
On the contrary, I'm saying as a person who watched the wedding and the engagement from Ireland, the whole spectacle most certainly was viewed as being appalling.

purplehaze
Fuzzable
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:27 pm

Re: The King

Post by purplehaze » Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:30 pm

To also mention Lady Diana Spencer's father sealed the fixation that she was a virgin. Gross, and the Royal Family went with this.

They all knew he was in a relationship with Camilla at this time.

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2647
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: The King

Post by plodder » Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:32 pm

purplehaze wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:25 pm
plodder wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 10:15 am
you're *this* close to saying "it was of a time and things were different" - please don't.

there was general outrage at the time and huge sympathy for Diana, hence the public's response when she died.

Charles has been coming across as a total tw.t all this life. The only people who sympathise with him are vague spiritual types and desperate environmentalists who'll rightly clutch at any straw they can get.
On the contrary, I'm saying as a person who watched the wedding and the engagement from Ireland, the whole spectacle most certainly was viewed as being appalling.
my bad - sorry!

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3513
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: The King

Post by Grumble » Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:41 pm

purplehaze wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:30 pm
To also mention Lady Diana Spencer's father sealed the fixation that she was a virgin. Gross, and the Royal Family went with this.

They all knew he was in a relationship with Camilla at this time.
The Spencers are another shower of bastards.
A bit churlish

User avatar
Little waster
After Pie
Posts: 2184
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:35 am
Location: About 1 inch behind my eyes

Re: The King

Post by Little waster » Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:48 pm

Grumble wrote:
Wed Sep 14, 2022 5:28 am
I would suggest handing people redundancy notices at the first opportunity isn’t the mark of someone who cares about the little people.
As a telling example of the sort of bubbles people (we?) exist in Mrs Waster is a hardcore, Tory-voting, DM-reading monarchist who is up to date (and keeps me up-to-date whether I want to or not) with every tedious, mind-numbing detail about the extended Royals goings-on (as well as being a fully signed up member of the "Kate is Wonderful, Meghan is Black Dreadful" Club courtesy of the aforementioned far-right sh.t-rag).

As you can imagine the long winter nights just fly by in our house.

Anyway the conversation the other night went:-

LW: You see today's news about the Royals?
MW: What? The thing about the cloud in the shape of the Queen?
LW: No.
MW: About where the corgis are going?
LW: No.
MW: About Zara Philips dress?
LW: No. The bit about Charles sacking 100 people at Clarence House as they were working extra hard to deal with the funeral and ease his transition into the monarchy literally during one of the Queen's funeral services.
MW: No never heard of it, not even a whisper, the King would never do that, are you sure you didn't just make it up? La-la-la-la-not-listening.

And that's why we are in the state we are in. :|
This place is not a place of honor, no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here, nothing valued is here.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us.
This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.

User avatar
wilsontown
Clardic Fug
Posts: 180
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:51 am

Re: The King

Post by wilsontown » Thu Sep 15, 2022 2:42 pm

I was struck by the Guardian reporting today - apparently several people they spoke to in the Great Patriotic Queue simply refused to believe the story about Clarence House redundancies.
"All models are wrong but some are useful" - George Box

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9569
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: The King

Post by Bird on a Fire » Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:15 pm

Little waster wrote:
Thu Sep 15, 2022 1:48 pm
Grumble wrote:
Wed Sep 14, 2022 5:28 am
I would suggest handing people redundancy notices at the first opportunity isn’t the mark of someone who cares about the little people.
As a telling example of the sort of bubbles people (we?) exist in Mrs Waster is a hardcore, Tory-voting, DM-reading monarchist who is up to date (and keeps me up-to-date whether I want to or not) with every tedious, mind-numbing detail about the extended Royals goings-on (as well as being a fully signed up member of the "Kate is Wonderful, Meghan is Black Dreadful" Club courtesy of the aforementioned far-right sh.t-rag).

As you can imagine the long winter nights just fly by in our house.

Anyway the conversation the other night went:-

LW: You see today's news about the Royals?
MW: What? The thing about the cloud in the shape of the Queen?
LW: No.
MW: About where the corgis are going?
LW: No.
MW: About Zara Philips dress?
LW: No. The bit about Charles sacking 100 people at Clarence House as they were working extra hard to deal with the funeral and ease his transition into the monarchy literally during one of the Queen's funeral services.
MW: No never heard of it, not even a whisper, the King would never do that, are you sure you didn't just make it up? La-la-la-la-not-listening.

And that's why we are in the state we are in. :|
Suddenly, I get where your energy comes from, to write these excellent off-the-wall anti-establishment diatribes: an escape valve to maintain marital bliss.

dont tell plodder]
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
Tessa K
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3876
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: The King

Post by Tessa K » Fri Sep 16, 2022 11:22 am

My neighbour is a hardcore Royalist and even she thinks Charles is a waste of space. The only child of the Queen she has any time for is Anne.

From what I've read and seen of Chas over the years, he's what happens if no one close to you ever tells you you're wrong and you're sufficiently insulated by wealth and privilege to ignore the rest.

On the upside, he'll have to keep his mouth shut a lot more now. It will be interesting to see if William takes on any of his causes.

I'm a lot less worried about him than what the current government of less rich poshers is doing to us all.

User avatar
jimbob
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4175
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: The King

Post by jimbob » Fri Sep 16, 2022 2:25 pm

^^ Yup
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

IvanV
Dorkwood
Posts: 1430
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 11:12 am

Re: The King

Post by IvanV » Fri Sep 16, 2022 4:08 pm

plodder wrote:
Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:23 am
meh, keep the monarch for now, take away their money and power, job's a good un for most people I'd suspect.
Unfortunately there won't be much taking money away from them, as under a deal made as recently as 1993, and reaffirmed in 2013, the sovereign has immunity from inheritance tax. Clearly it would be silly to have an inheritance tax charge on "crown assets" that they hold only in name and are really state assets. But they are immune on their privately held estate also. Given the sovereign receives a sovereign grant to be able to carry out their public functions, it seems quite unnecessary that they should be immune from inheritance tax on their private wealth. Heads of State of other countries do the job on an awful lot less.

User avatar
jimbob
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4175
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: The King

Post by jimbob » Fri Sep 16, 2022 4:16 pm

IvanV wrote:
Fri Sep 16, 2022 4:08 pm
plodder wrote:
Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:23 am
meh, keep the monarch for now, take away their money and power, job's a good un for most people I'd suspect.
Unfortunately there won't be much taking money away from them, as under a deal made as recently as 1993, and reaffirmed in 2013, the sovereign has immunity from inheritance tax. Clearly it would be silly to have an inheritance tax charge on "crown assets" that they hold only in name and are really state assets. But they are immune on their privately held estate also. Given the sovereign receives a sovereign grant to be able to carry out their public functions, it seems quite unnecessary that they should be immune from inheritance tax on their private wealth. Heads of State of other countries do the job on an awful lot less.
And exemptions from several laws.

I don't mind my taxes helping those worse off than me but paying for someone who is far richer and with a tax exempt income has always grated
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

Allo V Psycho
Catbabel
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:18 am

Re: The King

Post by Allo V Psycho » Sun Sep 18, 2022 9:24 am

Charles the Turd treated my colleague Edzard Ernst vindictively and disgracefully back in the day. He recently (2018, I think) became Royal Patron of the Faculty of Homoeopathy, and if you think his crank ideas are not going to be facilitated by his new position and control of certain honours, I think you are going to be disappointed. He thinks that homoeopathy can replace antibiotics. His behaviour over the leaky pen shows he has no impulse control even in high-profile public settings. His acceptance of carrier bags full of cash from dubious sources, and selling honours in exchange for 'charitable' donations to his property and projects, is corrupt. I'm no moral paragon, and no Diana fan, but I think his treatment of her was disgraceful.
He should be awarded the honoray prefix "Fu" in all public settings.

User avatar
Tessa K
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3876
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: The King

Post by Tessa K » Sun Sep 18, 2022 9:52 am

Allo V Psycho wrote:
Sun Sep 18, 2022 9:24 am
He recently (2018, I think) became Royal Patron of the Faculty of Homoeopathy,
With any luck his reign will be so watered down it will have no effect at all.

Post Reply