When will pointless King abdicate

[IhateHPSDeaneCnt]

in favour of another bastion of the Monarchy? Loathe them all but assume it will take another generation to allow them to bow out in some sort of graceful manner - and hang onto loads of Titles, Land, Jewels, money etc. How has someone given the title of 'Queen Consort' i.e ex Mistress is now referred to as Queen and bestowed privileges e.g being allowed to allocate Royal Warrants? Don't know how she's got the gall to wear jewellery that previously adorned previous incumbent let alone the late Queen. Luckily, she does bugger all but retire to the home settled in the Divorce, smoke fags, drink Gin and Dubonnet (smells just like Granny!) and ensures stock of fully functioning Mont Blanc Fountain Pens are to hand - ready to be despatched to King at the faintest sign of a tremulous lip.

Their accounts are definitely mysterious. What happens during the coronation while the new King or Queen are in their pjs hidden behind a screen are a bit mystifying. But protocol, while very complicated in some cases, antiquated and often misogynistic has been happening for hundreds of years and very, boringly predicable. Don't mistake ignorance with mystery.

Same for the passing of power, cant have a vacuum someone with a stronger claim to the thrown might come forward and cause a scuffle. It's always swift as it can be. History demonstrates that any hesitation and there is trouble.

Sorry now, but where did I claim I understood all about the monarchy and then apologised for not understanding and using LOLs etc. Are you sure that was me!

I'm enjoying the thread, and throwing in the odd comment here and there but I don't recall posting what you say. Are you confusing me with another poster?

Not that I care very much but if I did, so be it. I'm playing around a bit here and enjoying the high dudgeon and patronising explanations from some I have to admit.

Not everything the King does is 'pointless'. Here in Scotland the King's support (and in his former role as PoW) has made a significant difference to many lives with his Dumfries House project, which has saved a major historical house for the nation, provided free 24/7 access to extensive and beautiful gardens, provided training and apprenticeships in a wide range of skills, saved the open air swimming pool, and benefitted many trades, local suppliers, and the local population.
https://dumfries-house.org.uk/about

You didn’t. I was talking g to a poster with a different name……🤔

No problem. But you responded to my post with observations (on me apparently!) at 11.56. That's why I got into a bit of high dudgeon myself 😊

Onwards and upwards.....

I stand corrected, thank you. Not her title, her position.

£72 million we paid for that coronation.

£8.77 billion we spent showing off for the Olympics (or so says Google AI). Showing off is always expensive.

What was the income generated by it?
Eg TV rights, sales of coronation "tat", hotel stays, snack sellers, street parties, policemen doing extra hours etc etc - all which would have contributed income from taxes (VAT/income tax/corporation tax.....)

He became King the minute Queen Elizabeth took her last breath. Everything else is just paperwork, bureaucracy and a knees up

Who gives a stuff. That amount of money invested appropriately could produce a better return than nebulous tourism receipts.

Fair enough, but why rush around like a headless chicken all over the land to sign this and that immediately then?. He was exhausted by the looks of him and the Queen was still warm I'd say. That could have waited until after the funeral if he was King the minute the Queen took her last breath anyway. It was all done in unseemly haste to my eyes anyway.

But I'm sure there are some obscure rules that meant he had to place his seal on this or that toot sweet (😊) to get the crown on his head later and have the hooley.

Abdicate? Over my dead body!

Actually, that might be a good time to wind the whole caboodle up.

I think it was simply that it was the first time all of that stuff had been done on camera in the modern world and in the planning for it - years prior to the Queen actually dying it probably seemed like a great idea without accounting for how tiring grief is.

I imagine everyone learned a lot and they’ll adjust for William’s time.

It's always been as immediate as possible. Historically to ensure the succession, nowadays just because it always has been. Not really in a rush, just efficient.

Same with US presidency and I assume other heads of state. LBJ was swore in on an aeroplane while JFK was pretty much still warm as well.

This comment alone shows how completely uninformed you are about royalty.

It was adjusted a bit this time because the Queen’s death was announced late in Thursday and there wasn’t time to organise everything for Friday. I’m not sure that they can wait too long for the official accession proclamation because Parliament has to hang around and suspend its business so that MP’s can swear allegiance. Unfortunately for the new monarch, this is part of their new job, even whilst grieving

And your comment my dear shows a complete surfeit of condescension. Which is kind of typical in some posts in defence of Royal archaism.

But then again I am just a peasant so what do I know!

The US President is elected in November and sworn in in January. Pretty quick eh?

Obviously if a tragedy happens to a President mid term then the handover is immediate.

Yes, exactly. The handover between monarchs is because of death so not a planned time. So JFK - LBJ which was the same and outside of the normal November to January period is the parallel. Both a new monarch and a new president in the event of death prior to the end of the term of office are immediate and done with what has apparently been perceived as undue haste. It isn't undue haste, it's just immediate and expected to be immediate.

Yes but - how much did we earn from global TV rights?

No - whatever your or my personal opinion, that sort of publicity, coverage etc is hugely important in boosting the UK's image worldwide.

And they've elected a criminal as their next president. The joys of democracy, eh?

Oh - and no Prince Andrew whataboutery, PLEASE! He may be a creepy,unsavoury and revolting specimen but he's not a convicted criminal and he's not the King (and never would be in the current situation).

Yes - I mean adjusted in terms of how it’s covered / filmed which creates a different kind of pressure.

I think with Charles because no one was quite sure how well the public would take to him as King after QEII - remember all the republicans saying how it would definitely be the end of the monarchy after the Queen died etc - that he did an awful amount of traveling to all the different parts of the country straight away. He looked shattered for most of it.

You can only speak for yourself. My personal opinion is that it’s not particularly important in any meaningful or economically productive way other than tourism which is tricky to quantify.