To To be appalled at all the royal palaces.

[purplehazed]

I've just watched Ant and Dec with Prince Charles. The sheer opulence of those numerous palaces. Just how many do they need? So so wrong imo.
Surely in these times of massive hardship for so many it is time they were scaled right back.

The Royals didn't use taxpayers' funds to acquire them.

depends if you count generations of peasants and exploited working people here and in our glorious 'empire' as tax payers.

The royal residences are full of very important 'stuff'
quite alot of important 'stuff' in the national gallery, British museum etc. etc., plus all those former(?) royal palaces managed by Historic Royal Palaces. That all seems pretty well looked after....

Royal residences are all privately owned.

are they privately maintained?

Royal wealth is also inherited wealth

has it been subject to inheritance tax?

Once you start any form of interference with private wealth, where do you stop?

once you start giving special tax and government positions to one family, where does it stop?

The Royals bring in £500 million each year in tourism. Plenty of stats on the web- if you'd only do your homework.

If you are going to make claims like this then the onus is on you to provide evidence, not tell people to Google it or as you rather condescendingly put it 'do their homework'

Royal residences are not privately owned, the only ones that are "privately" owned by the Queen are Bamoral and Sandringham, hence why they had to be bought from Edward VIII when he abdicated.

Everything else, Buckingham Palace, Windsor, St James' and Clarence House are part of the royal properties owned by the government, along with the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster which provide private incomes to the Prince of Wales and the Queen.

Imagine the revenue we could generate if all those places were open to the public all year round? How much money could be saved by the profits from the Royal Estates going back into the state rather than to influence rpivate wealth.

Oh and the current Royal family are descended from George ! who was "invited" to be King here, despite being about 54th in line to the throne, much of their "private" wealth is linked to being in possession of the Royal Estates for generations.

Get rid of them.

Ok so they bring in 500 million.
The protection bill is about a billion.

Need a presidential home? Chequers anyone?

Not all palaces are privately owned. Certainly some are ie Highgrove, Sandringham. Therefore those properties are nothing to do with anyone other than the owner. Those that are property of 'the Crown' are maintained by the public purse and therefore should be opened to the public. They certainly wouldn't be homeless! Palaces could still be used for state functions if not lived in.

HoP open as a tourist attraction while spending minimal money.

Well that's doomed to failure right there. One of the things rich people are for (in my opinion) is to pay for the maintenance on these huge, ancient buildings, because it is just mind-bogglingly expensive.

And re this comment I don't see why anything would have to be destroyed. - you must be out of your mind, they would be run down to nothing - damaged, looted wrecked, because people don't value what they don't pay for. I think it would be a tragedy to destroy all the history. It was here (in France), and it would be there.
And people trumpeting the virtues of the Révolution don't seem to know much about it - it was a vile orgy of blood, ending in a welter aroung 1793. Neither Louis XVI or Marie d'Autriche deserved execution; their most besetting sin was stupidity, and especially in Marie's case, she had virtually no opportunity to be otherwise.

Don't think anyone is suggesting a revolutionary bloodbath?

I am!!

Off with their heads

YANBU.

Off with their heads
I think thats a bit harsh, just release them into the wild, see how they get on with the vicissitudes of normal life

oh come on. Might as well make an event out of it.

some sort of reality tv show where they have to fend for themselves might make for better entertainment though?

yes! sort of hunger games?

yay!

I mean
YAY!
pull up a chair
get

I am terrified by the kneejerk, cap-doffing, "ooh I love the Royals" monarchists on here. I am a meritocrat and a republican. I don't mind people being eye-wateringly rich by dint of their own talent, work, and endeavours - and so long as they pay their fair share to society by means of taxation. But to have an obscene amount of wealth purely because you were squeezed out of a vagina that is assumed to have a direct line to God is archaic, iniquitous, and - frankly - bat-shit crazy.

And people trumpeting the virtues of the Révolution don't seem to know much about it - it was a vile orgy of blood, ending in a welter aroung 1793.

nobody is seriously suggesting it. 1793 is a long time ago, and half the population loves the royalty here.

Given all the national treasures run by the government to be viewed for free (i.e. national gallery), I don't see why we couldn't have the same for any of these palaces. Or, if you wish, charge a fee to see them like any museum.

No history is lost. The paintings, the treasures, the jewels, the history (who says rewrite all the history books?) is still there. We just want one of the most offensive and archaic institutions to get pushed to where it belongs - the past.

What royals do is entirely private
Unfortunately for them that is not true.

The Royals bring in £500 million each year in tourism. Plenty of stats on the web- if you'd only do your homework.
If you're going to make wild claims like that the onus is on you to provide proof.

"I am terrified by the kneejerk, cap-doffing, "ooh I love the Royals" monarchists on here"

And the knee jerk lets get rid of the royals by having a revolution or hunger games style competition is no better

I simply can't get worked up about them. I don't mind the queen, but neither do I have a massive chip on my shoulder about some people being born into massive wealth and privilege.

Going back to the point about using the palaces for the homeless, they were talking on the local radio this morning about making all the empty buildings in Sheffield available for the homeless to use over the winter.

Someone who works with the homeless said it wouldn't work because most of them don't like being lumped together with a load of other people. He also said they dislike each other and there would be a lot of fights, therefore they would need a lot of staff to keep the peace and it is unworkable.

I've always felt sorry for the Queen and Prince Philip, it doesn't look much of a life, and it will never end. I would much rather be free to do what I want with my life. I can never understand why people are so envious, you don't get happier the richer you get, and non of them look very happy.

I think sea green's point is a good one and supports the abolition of the whole pack of cards. It's actually unfair on them. Imagine having a baby and decreeing it must become a nurse or a librarian. Being born to do a role you haven't chosen is a ridiculous notion.

*Royal residences are all privately owned.

are they privately maintained?

Royal wealth is also inherited wealth

has it been subject to inheritance tax?

Once you start any form of interference with private wealth, where do you stop?

once you start giving special tax and government positions to one family, where does it stop?*

Very well said Redstrawberry. You have thought this through very clearly. How do we start the Revolution?

seagreengirl why feel sorry for them, the queen could step down anytime she wants. I have more sympathy for ordinary women of her generation, worn out after a lifetime of toil and money worries. As for envy, I've never come anyone envious. Unless you mean people who don't agree with a monarchy?

Kerala do you remember princess Margaret? she had the choice of marrying for love and giving up her Royal status and privilege, or abandoning the love of her life for all the indulgences and excesses that being a Royal princess gave her. Guess which she chose?