Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Royals Across the Pond  (Read 2228 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25118
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #20 on: January 29, 2020, 02:55:54 pm »

It is a British territory that the Dutch prefer to call the Netherlands. So, no, the Ginger won’t get it.


Goodness, what confusion. And what a Socialist overtone!

:-)

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2171
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #21 on: January 29, 2020, 07:49:52 pm »

Rob brings up a couple of interesting questions, but he also has a misapprehension. We do, of course, have a continuing equivalent to the royals: money. Everything you can say about the royals, money does in the US. By money, I don't mean the *monied* -- I mean the actual thing: the filthy lucre, the gelt, the moolah. Greenbacks. But going the other way, with the personification of money, we also have some quite long bloodlines -- a century and a half after John D. started making the big bucks, many of his descendants are still filthy rich and effective political manipulators as well. Nelson Rockefeller was governor of New York for 14 years and later a US vice-president. Jay Rockefeller was governor of West Virginia and then a US Senator until five years ago, a hundred and seventy five years after the birth of John D (which came a year *before* the royal marriage that led to the House of Windsor.) The House of Rockefeller has a worth estimated currently at $11 billion.

As for the Royals who have now departed for Canadia, I don't think they'll be eating cat food any time soon. They had an extremely powerful weapon in their negotiations with Crown: what if Harry *did* endorse, say, a brand of cat food, or, god help us, a brand of condoms. That would certainly be unthinkable to the holders of the Royal Purse, and I'm sure they made a nice financial arrangement for the ex-royal highnesses, to prevent any such calamity.
 
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25118
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #22 on: January 30, 2020, 11:43:27 am »

Rob brings up a couple of interesting questions, but he also has a misapprehension. We do, of course, have a continuing equivalent to the royals: money. Everything you can say about the royals, money does in the US. By money, I don't mean the *monied* -- I mean the actual thing: the filthy lucre, the gelt, the moolah. Greenbacks. But going the other way, with the personification of money, we also have some quite long bloodlines -- a century and a half after John D. started making the big bucks, many of his descendants are still filthy rich and effective political manipulators as well. Nelson Rockefeller was governor of New York for 14 years and later a US vice-president. Jay Rockefeller was governor of West Virginia and then a US Senator until five years ago, a hundred and seventy five years after the birth of John D (which came a year *before* the royal marriage that led to the House of Windsor.) The House of Rockefeller has a worth estimated currently at $11 billion.

As for the Royals who have now departed for Canadia, I don't think they'll be eating cat food any time soon. They had an extremely powerful weapon in their negotiations with Crown: what if Harry *did* endorse, say, a brand of cat food, or, god help us, a brand of condoms. That would certainly be unthinkable to the holders of the Royal Purse, and I'm sure they made a nice financial arrangement for the ex-royal highnesses, to prevent any such calamity.
 

But the huge difference with the British royals is that they may be relatively rich, but can have no actual political power; poor old Charles has only to make some discerning, usually accurate comment about architecture, for the tabloids to jump upon him and tell him to keep his nose out of it. They have a wonderful handle on mockery and the quick quip: sells their rubbish sheets for them.

British popular papers have developed the ability to love and hate the very same people entirely on whim and marketing requirements.

Rob

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5511
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #23 on: January 30, 2020, 09:30:27 pm »

But the huge difference with the British royals is that they may be relatively rich, but can have no actual political power; poor old Charles has only to make some discerning, usually accurate comment about architecture, for the tabloids to jump upon him and tell him to keep his nose out of it. They have a wonderful handle on mockery and the quick quip: sells their rubbish sheets for them.

British popular papers have developed the ability to love and hate the very same people entirely on whim and marketing requirements.

Rob

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe they were just trying to escape Brexit?
Logged
--
Robert

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #24 on: January 30, 2020, 11:07:12 pm »

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe they were just trying to escape Brexit?
Yes, I thought of that too.  :)

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9260
    • site
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #25 on: January 31, 2020, 03:59:15 am »

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe they were just trying to escape Brexit?

No.

Jeremy
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #26 on: January 31, 2020, 04:07:37 am »

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe they were just trying to escape Brexit?

Yes, of course. They would be among the first Brits to starve because of the inevitable food shortages, and suffer from the collapse of social services and civil unrest.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #27 on: January 31, 2020, 08:35:21 am »

From guys’ angle:

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #28 on: January 31, 2020, 12:08:26 pm »

From guys’ angle:

Poor guy.  She's not done yet.  He'll be begging his grandmother to welcome him back into the fold. 

Cornfield

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 442
Re: Royals Across the Pond
« Reply #29 on: February 07, 2020, 05:57:40 pm »

An update from the BBC site today.

"Currently, 95% of the couple's income comes from Prince Charles's income from the Duchy of Cornwall, a vast portfolio of property and financial investments, which brought in £21.6m last year.

It is believed the couple will continue to receive money from Prince Harry's father under the new agreement, although it is unclear whether this will come from the Duchy, his personal wealth, or a combination of the two.

However, the Sussexes will stop receiving money from the taxpayer-funded Sovereign Grant, which makes up the other 5% of their income."


"from Prince Harry's father,"  I wonder what the writer was thinking when he came up with this!
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up