Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple CEO Tim Cook Hosts King Charles III at UK Headquarters

Ctrlos said:
They represent a bloodline that goes back over 1000 years*. Its a living link to our shared history on both sides of the atlantic. They royal family costs the average taxpayer £1.29 per annum, hardly enough to buy a bar of chocolate. They bring in a net £2bn in tourism annually.

*Some Pedant will point out that the current dynasty started when William the Conquerer planted his flag after the Battle of Hastings in 1066, however the current house is simultaneously descended from Harold Godwinson who lost. His lineage goes back even further to the House of Wessex (865 or further)
Click to expand...
The financial arrangement surrounding the UK royal family is a glaring example of privilege at its worst. Security and policing costs, estimated at an astronomical £100–150 million annually, are funded separately from the Sovereign Grant, yet the exact figures remain hidden from public scrutiny under the guise of "security reasons." This lack of transparency is unacceptable, especially when the public is footing the bill.

Critics rightly point out that the monarchy's true cost is far higher, factoring in indirect losses such as the untapped revenue from Crown lands diverted to the Treasury and the generous tax exemptions granted to the royal family. Adding insult to injury, they continue to receive the Sovereign Grant from taxpayers while sitting atop vast private investments and estates generating tens of millions, shielded from taxes. Perhaps most egregious is the fact that King Charles paid no inheritance tax on the immense fortune he inherited from the late Queen—an extraordinary privilege denied to ordinary citizens. This entire system reeks of inequity, with the monarchy's financial arrangements operating in a way that seems both archaic and fundamentally unfair.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Disagree
Reactions: The-Real-Deal82, SFjohn, SuzyM70 and 4 others
jimmy_uk said:
The financial arrangement surrounding the UK royal family is a glaring example of privilege at its worst. Security and policing costs, estimated at an astronomical £100–150 million annually, are funded separately from the Sovereign Grant, yet the exact figures remain hidden from public scrutiny under the guise of "security reasons." This lack of transparency is unacceptable, especially when the public is footing the bill.

Critics rightly point out that the monarchy's true cost is far higher, factoring in indirect losses such as the untapped revenue from Crown lands diverted to the Treasury and the generous tax exemptions granted to the royal family. Adding insult to injury, they continue to receive the Sovereign Grant from taxpayers while sitting atop vast private investments and estates generating tens of millions, shielded from taxes. Perhaps most egregious is the fact that King Charles paid no inheritance tax on the immense fortune he inherited from the late Queen—an extraordinary privilege denied to ordinary citizens. This entire system reeks of inequity, with the monarchy's financial arrangements operating in a way that seems both archaic and fundamentally unfair.
Click to expand...
There needs to be a national referendum every time a monarch passes away as to whether we want the circus to continue. Preferably held before we spend billions on the next coronation.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
  • Love
Reactions: The-Real-Deal82, Expos of 1969, SFjohn and 5 others
jennyp said:
It's fashionable to be anti-royal, but the benefits of monarchy are seldom considered. It provides cohesion, unity and continuity to the nation above and beyond the vicissitudes of mere politics. It acts as a psychological buffer against overweening political power (q.v. Putin). For that it's worth every penny.
Click to expand...
I agree. In the UK the monarchy unites where politicians divide. The US can keep Donald Trump, we will keep King Charles. I’m a pragmatic royalist - here in the UK we have a system which works very well and we have a head of state whose duty is to the people. Let’s leave it well alone.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Disagree
Reactions: The-Real-Deal82, colinwil, Razorpit and 4 others
jennyp said:
It's fashionable to be anti-royal, but the benefits of monarchy are seldom considered. It provides cohesion, unity and continuity to the nation above and beyond the vicissitudes of mere politics. It acts as a psychological buffer against overweening political power (q.v. Putin). For that it's worth every penny.
Click to expand...
Yeah, exactly. It's not as if the everything else in the UK is going swimmingly - whether or not to have a royal family is possibly the least interesting argument to have in the UK right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scgf
cocky jeremy said:
Maybe those people interested could try something crazy, like getting their own lives to worry about.
Click to expand...
Hey Jeremy, I understand what you say and get behind ya.
However it’s clear that people get starstruck for all things royal, rewarding and being proud for a situation that had zero efforts behind it: just being born into the right family.
That’s like celebrating and being proud of having been born with brown eyes and black hair and getting a diploma or something for it.

While everybody would be throwing a fit if a single politician had special tax exemptions that anybody else would be jailed for if it wasn’t paid, when it is the monarchy with said exemptions, then suddenly it’s fine and celebrated.

Even after clear posts like
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-iii-at-uk-headquarters.2445327/post-33625540
where he explains better the true costs and the secret dealings and privileges going on, people still want their monarchy.

In this case it is just better to let it be, and allow those relish, waste time and money on the royalty.
It is time and money that you got to keep and others didn’t.
Some might get lucky mind you, like that actress that married the prince, but 99.999999999% of them just get scammed.

(And yes, I know I’m wasting time myself on the topic, but it’s a fraction and felt it was warranted)
 
jimmy_uk said:
The financial arrangement surrounding the UK royal family is a glaring example of privilege at its worst. Security and policing costs, estimated at an astronomical £100–150 million annually, are funded separately from the Sovereign Grant, yet the exact figures remain hidden from public scrutiny under the guise of "security reasons." This lack of transparency is unacceptable, especially when the public is footing the bill.

Critics rightly point out that the monarchy's true cost is far higher, factoring in indirect losses such as the untapped revenue from Crown lands diverted to the Treasury and the generous tax exemptions granted to the royal family. Adding insult to injury, they continue to receive the Sovereign Grant from taxpayers while sitting atop vast private investments and estates generating tens of millions, shielded from taxes. Perhaps most egregious is the fact that King Charles paid no inheritance tax on the immense fortune he inherited from the late Queen—an extraordinary privilege denied to ordinary citizens. This entire system reeks of inequity, with the monarchy's financial arrangements operating in a way that seems both archaic and fundamentally unfair.
Click to expand...
In an age of criminal presidents bankrolled by narcissists, despots, autocracies and rogue democrats supergluing their rears to the seats of government, even if the exaggeration and untruths that abound were even remotely true, the monarchies of this world are proving a safe bet
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Sad
  • Disagree
Reactions: SFjohn, Dissident70, CausticSoda and 1 other person
We asked Siri what time we had to meet the dreadful Apple Cook man and, would you believe it, it said it didn’t know how to cook Apples?! Then it prompted me with irrelevant things it found on the inter-thingy.
 
jimmy_uk said:
The financial arrangement surrounding the UK royal family is a glaring example of privilege at its worst. Security and policing costs, estimated at an astronomical £100–150 million annually, are funded separately from the Sovereign Grant, yet the exact figures remain hidden from public scrutiny under the guise of "security reasons." This lack of transparency is unacceptable, especially when the public is footing the bill.

Critics rightly point out that the monarchy's true cost is far higher, factoring in indirect losses such as the untapped revenue from Crown lands diverted to the Treasury and the generous tax exemptions granted to the royal family. Adding insult to injury, they continue to receive the Sovereign Grant from taxpayers while sitting atop vast private investments and estates generating tens of millions, shielded from taxes. Perhaps most egregious is the fact that King Charles paid no inheritance tax on the immense fortune he inherited from the late Queen—an extraordinary privilege denied to ordinary citizens. This entire system reeks of inequity, with the monarchy's financial arrangements operating in a way that seems both archaic and fundamentally unfair.
Click to expand...
Sadly a one-sided argument, that couldn't even get the facts right. Just like any other individual/company/family, wealth is accumulated over the years, and the Royal Family is no exception. How they achieved their wealth, is no different to how many others have.Essentially they are, Head of State, and so many similar public figures, don't pay tax.
The value of the Royal Family, is estimated to be around £8 Billion, if you add up, all the supposed costs of the Royal Family (and that includes everything, not just the individual members, but the organisation) it would even reach £500 million.
 
darthbane2k said:
There needs to be a national referendum every time a monarch passes away as to whether we want the circus to continue. Preferably held before we spend billions on the next coronation.
Click to expand...
The government couldn't remove the monarchy, nor could the royal family denounce themselves. You clearly lack a knowledge of the various acts and government instruments that keep a 'royal' head of state. And even if you could, financially, they would be better off, as you (if you are even British) and others, who pay tax, will have to pay for the land, and properties of the monarchy, that they own. As the UK government reside in crown estate, that will add up to billions each year.
 
Madonepro said:
Sadly a one-sided argument, that couldn't even get the facts right. Just like any other individual/company/family, wealth is accumulated over the years, and the Royal Family is no exception. How they achieved their wealth, is no different to how many others have.Essentially they are, Head of State, and so many similar public figures, don't pay tax.
The value of the Royal Family, is estimated to be around £8 Billion, if you add up, all the supposed costs of the Royal Family (and that includes everything, not just the individual members, but the organisation) it would even reach £500 million.
Click to expand...
How many "other individuals/companies/families" receive money from the public purse while already sitting on £8 billion in wealth? The comparison doesn’t really hold up when we’re talking about an institution uniquely subsidised by taxpayers to the tune of hundreds of millions annually, while also being exempt from many taxes that others are required to pay. Shouldn’t we question why the public is funding an organisation of this scale at all, especially when so much of its wealth isn’t directly contributing back to society in a meaningful, measurable way?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Razorpit
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back