Royal Gossip
September 22, 2017, 09:17:15 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 [21] 22 23   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: British Royal Finances  (Read 40826 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2238



« Reply #400 on: January 10, 2016, 09:18:34 pm »

She has income for two reasons:

Her private income and fortune that pays for the private expenses of everyone except the Wales branch of the family and the official expenses for everyone from Andrew down in the line of succession.

Her public income to pay for her and Philip's official expenses - called the Sovereign Grant. This is also to pay for the repairs to the publicly owned palaces that she uses - BP, Windsor, KP, St James' and Holyrood. This money has to pay for events like State Visits, Trooping the Colour, Investitures, overseas tours for herself and Philip not picked up by the visited country.

Why should The Queen pay for the upkeep and maintenance of BP when she doesn't own it? Would anyone expect the President of the USA to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of the White House for instance?
Logged
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 13037



« Reply #401 on: January 10, 2016, 09:33:05 pm »

^The US would never support a Presidential residence in addition to a showy monarchy and its descendants, so that argument doesn't quite work.  If we had a monarchy in the States, which is kind of a good laugh today, they would be on their own.  It's the paying for a PM and Parliament in addition to a monarchy that I find absurd.

However, for those of us, including myself, which find the BRF funding extremely murky and like pounding nails in jello, there's this article from the NYT that kinda helps:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/15/opinion/sunday/malik-britains-welfare-queen.html?_r=0
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Countess of Holland
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2050


« Reply #402 on: January 11, 2016, 02:28:23 pm »

^^

But since the Queen doesn't own BP, why give her money for maintenance in the first place? People who live in rental houses don't get money from their landlord to pay for maintenance or repairs: the landlord handles that himself.

So why not keep the money for the maintenance at a dedicated government agency who is responsible for the upkeep? That will also make the who discussion about the price of the monarchy more straightforward since the money for the upkeep of a palace isn't really money for the monarchy: in a republic that palace would also have to be maintained; as a presidential palace, a musuem or something else.

In The Netherlands, the Dutch King doesn't get the money that is destined for the maintenance of the palace. That money is directed to the Rijksgebouwendienst who is not only responsible for the royal palaces, but also for national museums, buildings of government departments etc. The people working there are professionals who have studied things like architecture, engineering etc. And as they are a proper government agency, the annual financial statements are open to anyone. Although some of the expenses are adressed as a group, like security costs because you don't want people to know what security measures are in place; not at the royal palaces and not at our national bank  tehe
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 36182


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #403 on: January 11, 2016, 02:31:18 pm »

This is what I don't understand about HM and Co.; they claim they don't owe any of this, but they change things around when they want to and live there often, so how on earth is it not theirs? They are the BRF and to me they're just shirking their responsibility to keep up the palaces.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
gingerboy24
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 9550


« Reply #404 on: January 11, 2016, 03:17:09 pm »

The trouble is they want it both ways, cake on the plate and eat it as well.  Sheer greed is my opinion  -  they sould be galled the Gimmee Family, all they want to do is take, take, take.  A wonderful luxurious and undreamed of life at the taxpayer expense, yet for what the return is it is well over-priced.  One of the reasons she was over budget a couple of years ago was because of the renovations at KP and AH  -  and no, chucky did not pay for the renvoations at AH, that is what they want us to us to think, however it all came from the public purse along with all the money spent on KP. There was an article on one of the papers a good while back, stating that the renovation costs for AH and KP totalled approx 8 million sterling.  Started off at a low figure and grew higher and higher. 
Logged
gingerboy24
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 9550


« Reply #405 on: April 24, 2016, 11:06:12 am »

Queen Elizabeth II, the United Kingdom’s monarch who turned 90 on Thursday, costs the British taxpayers 1,900 percent more than previously estimated, an analysis by the British press revealed.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160421/1038391817/spending-queen-uk.html#ixzz46jlNs4bS
 
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20160421/1038391817/spending-queen-uk.html
Logged
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14034



« Reply #406 on: June 28, 2016, 07:38:49 pm »

Monarchy Cost UK Taxpayers £40m Last Year

http://news.sky.com/story/1718608/monarchy-cost-uk-taxpayers-40m-last-year

Queen in line for £2.8m pay rise in 2017-18

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/28/queen-28m-pay-rise-taxpayer-sovereign-grant

Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Akasha 85
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 298


Aren't we a cuty queen.


« Reply #407 on: June 29, 2016, 12:24:51 am »

Yup but now that ppl have numbers for the bottomless-european-money-pit to compare it with, most of the comments are along the line of
 "A cost of 40M a year?! Pfft that's peanuts compared to the 300M a week we send to the EU! I say it's a good deal we get from HM in return in tourism etc"

Perspective is everything I guess  sigh
What a difference a year makes.... gotta love the short term memories of the commenting ppl easter-lol
the palace PR ppl must be relieved that they won't have to spend as much time on this topic so they can use all of their effort to try and prop up willnot and kannot some more bored3

« Last Edit: June 29, 2016, 12:29:09 am by Akasha 85 » Logged

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”
― Stuart Chase

“To see a World in a Grain of Sand
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour.”
― William Blake, Auguries of Innocence

“Four things you can't recover:
The stone after the throw, The word after it's said, The occasion after it's missed, The time after it's gone.”
― Deanna Wadsworth
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 13037



« Reply #408 on: June 29, 2016, 02:07:33 pm »

I'm sure there are a number of us who have spent some time on a board, committee, what have you and have spent half the night arguing over the price of something worth $25 (argue/unimportant) v $100k (pass/important).  Numbers in the millions have little or no meaning in the real world so they're easy to dismiss, which is a real shame. 

What will become important is how the economy goes and what the cost of a liter of milk/petrol/rent becomes.  That is what people can relate to.  So, until that dust settles and people feel that they're getting some kind of a bang for their buck, all will be well and those millions will be just ducky.  If not?  People get hungry, broke and, inevitably focus their anger.  The monarchy, of late, are making themselves an all-too-easy (and justifiable) target. 

No more moving tennis courts, iow, plz.
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Akasha 85
courtier
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 298


Aren't we a cuty queen.


« Reply #409 on: June 29, 2016, 10:03:54 pm »

Yeah I know what you mean, they should prune the tree and get those real estate, travel and security costs under control. thumbsdown

Focus your upkeep efforts, for example: Highgrove and Balmoral as private family palace (home), Windsor and Holyrood as official state palace (office), hand other residences over to the gov and/or open it up permanently for public.
If a family member wants a new separate place or live an old one let them pay a normal market rent for it or buy out of their own pocket. (wonder how long WK would stay in a 20 room app at KP if they had to pay market rent for it)

If you reduce the active royals, travel and security costs should come down automatically although visits around the country and to charities would be lesser and further in between.
I heard that Charles wants cut severely into active royals once he becomes king, now that's not a bad idea in theory but if you consider the practical side..
I don't know how many patronages HM, DoE, Anne, the Yorks and the Wessexes have between them but I'm pretty sure Will Kate Harry Charles and Camilla won't be able to continue all of them.
There's only so many things Harry and his eventual wife can do and since Kate can't even be bothered to hand out some shamrock for an hour or two every year... Shocked bignono

Charles is gonna need Anne and the Wessex couple at least on a half time basis to keep the royal appearances more or less going.
Logged

“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.”
― Stuart Chase

“To see a World in a Grain of Sand
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour.”
― William Blake, Auguries of Innocence

“Four things you can't recover:
The stone after the throw, The word after it's said, The occasion after it's missed, The time after it's gone.”
― Deanna Wadsworth
india
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6273


« Reply #410 on: June 29, 2016, 10:05:56 pm »

Charles needs to unload Worthless and The Idiot Potato Head.
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 36182


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #411 on: June 30, 2016, 12:15:24 am »

I think Charles needs to target his relatives less and deal more decisively with his own immediate family. If he wants to deal with titles, maybe he should strip Fergie of her courtesy title, since it's been nothing but tool for her to freeload off of. If Charles wants to get creative, as King he can set a new standard stating that titles are no longer to be considered part of a surname and have divorced wives known as "Ms. X Windsor" and then have that cord cut completely.


Second, if a royal wants a new place, they should just get apartments in one of the zillions of palaces and castles they own.

List of British Royal residences:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_royal_residences

These places are palatial and frankly there is no reason for someone to have so many when they don't live there all the time. Camilla shouldn't be allowed to keep Raymill as her own retreat. She has more than enough now, time to cut ties with the past and move forward.

Quote
I heard that Charles wants cut severely into active royals once he becomes king, now that's not a bad idea in theory but if you consider the practical side..
I don't know how many patronages HM, DoE, Anne, the Yorks and the Wessexes have between them but I'm pretty sure Will Kate Harry Charles and Camilla won't be able to continue all of them.

The real issue is that the majority of these gestures are for PR, not about being realistic about the realities of the expectations that will cover the royals. There is the expectation of charity work and while I think the Yorkies should be allowed to decide, realistically, a lot of charities are going to still want royals and culturally, Britain is all about their royals.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 13037



« Reply #412 on: June 30, 2016, 01:27:19 am »

If I happened to live in a country where there was such a lack of transparency involved such as there seems to exist with the BRF's finances, it would become a huge problem for me if I couldn't meet my own expenditures no matter how hard I or my family worked.  Other than the Queen and Her finance ministers I doubt there is anyone who really has a firm grasp of just how much wealth exists nor how it is spent.  They keep it muddied just enough and control the media handily enough to keep those pesky matters quite fluid and out of reach.

So, what you end up with here is a situation of real money vs perceived money.  The government can throw around the words "budget restrictions", "times of austerity", and "infrastructure depletions" until he## freezes over but it never really matters until there are empty stomachs pitched against golden carriages.

I believe there are going to be two different modern ages in GB and those are the days before HM and after.  No matter how much people have to tighten their belts or be struggling with this/that, there is a perception that Queen Elizabeth has put in years of steadied devotion to her People, God and Country and as long as that exists, the BRF is safe and secure.  It's an understandable point of view.  She was there during the War, she takes the train, she, herself, remains scandal-free, she does everything in her power to appear steadfast and conscious of her role and its appearance.  If we looked behind the curtain, I don't know that it would be quite as comforting.

With the world going the way it is now, and nobody has a crystal ball, then we are going to be faced with a collapsing and drastically changing world economy that will eventually affect every human being and it will become an immovable Truth that the party is over.  How important will Kate's new hat be at that point?  It will be a challenge for the BRF to prove their own worth, iow.  Will they be able to justify their existence?  I don't know.  But, I do believe a time will come in the not so distant future when it will be imperative that they do so.  Long history?  Yes.  Long bread lines?  Another matter in the instant info age.
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 36182


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #413 on: June 30, 2016, 02:19:31 am »

Thing is, HM has a habit of going wild over her 'state' stuff, but when it comes to her homes and such, she slacks off. Buckingham Palace is falling to pieces and when Windsor castle burned, she ended up asking taxpayers instead of paying for it out of her own fortune. It's not like the public is allowed to go and see the palaces and interact with the BRF. What doesn't make sense is how 'state' stuff is and which stuff is private since after all, the BRF uses it the most often and they get piles of money to maintain and protect these historical places. I wonder how Buck House could be in such a state of disrepair since after all, HM has been getting money for decades to maintain and keep it intact.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
india
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6273


« Reply #414 on: June 30, 2016, 06:19:28 pm »

BP is in a state of disrepair because HM has been funneling tons of moolah to all of her spawn big time.
Logged
HRHOlya
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1740



« Reply #415 on: June 30, 2016, 11:41:24 pm »

^ This is also why the monarchy, if it stays, needs to be cut down to only monarch + spouse and heir. Any spare should go their own way once adults. The problem with the BRF and why they need so many people is bc they still have the commonwealth. Many plan on cutting ties once the queen is gone and rightly so. Due to the commonwealth they kind of need more members for keeping up appearances. Best thing the other monarchies have going for them is that they can concentrate on their own country, bc there are no others attached to them and thus keep it short and sweet. It is also ridiculous that they have so many residences. The monarch should have only one official residence which fine the public helps to keep up and that's it. All other residences they should pay for themselves. As some also said, no one gets to set a foot into Windsor castle, but the Windsors demanded the public pay for repairs. Sometimes they don't look like it, but they are one of the richest families. There is loads of money and estate stashed away somewhere. I keep repeatedly reading how many jewels the queen has which have never seen the light of day (at least officially), like pearl necklaces and tiaras. Ridiculous. Really wish the monarchy gone tbh. The small people struggle and yet one of the richest families gets public financial support. Laughable.
Logged
leogirl
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3195


« Reply #416 on: July 01, 2016, 08:08:43 am »

^ They should really invest their money in businesses (or something else?) to become self-sufficient (pay their own bills without public assistance). There are too many people living in poverty, who really need the help, to give all that money to one of world's richest families. Millions of dollars that could go much further if given to the poor. Think of all that money spent on all those expensive homes they don't even live in, that could go to housing programs to give homes to many families in need. In better economic times, I think there could be a small budget for home repairs for a single main residence, travel expenses, guards, food and clothing. But right now the taxpayer money needs to go to the people who actually need it. Food, jobs/training, education, housing.
Logged
Val
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4955


« Reply #417 on: July 01, 2016, 09:23:15 am »

^

They need to sort things out before Willy takes over (although the Republicans predict that there won't be a monarchy by then).  It is reported that Ma Midd is already spending the money she is planning to get her hands on through dumb weak manipulated Willy.
Logged
HRHOlya
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1740



« Reply #418 on: July 01, 2016, 08:49:23 pm »

^^ Fully agree.

^ No wonder ma spends already as much as she can, she won't be around forever and she can't be so stupid as to not see that people want the monarchy gone after Charles. There'll be nothing to spend then.
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 36182


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #419 on: July 01, 2016, 09:04:07 pm »

I think HM's private finances need to be audited and then revealed to the public; F-her if she yelps about being a private citizen. If she's skimming public funds (likely) and pleading poverty while leaving Buckingham Palace to shambles, she deserves to get her arse kicked around.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 [21] 22 23   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!