General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsKing Charles III is the 5th oldest sitting British Monarch ever already
and he is 2 days into his reign. Only Elizabeth II, Victoria, George III, and George II were older sitting monarchs. Testament to modern medicine if nothing else. https://monarchy-of-britain.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_British_monarchs_by_longevity
Sneederbunk
(14,290 posts)Demovictory9
(32,453 posts)PJMcK
(22,034 posts)When he passes, the monarchy will finally change and move into the 21st century.
Monarchies are a throw-back to Medieval times. They really have no place in the modern world. If a country wants to continue to foot the bill for these pampered "royals" to continue their ridiculous life styles, that's their call to make. I find it a silly waste of time and resources.
Just my opinion, of course.
edhopper
(33,575 posts)I wonder what the pay-return is in terms of tourist dollars for the UK?
PJMcK
(22,034 posts)That cannot be the reason they keep the royalty. If so, that's truly pathetic.
edhopper
(33,575 posts)but that is up to the British people.
It will be interesting to watch as under him (though he has nothing to do with it) the UK dwindle as Scotland and possibly Northern Ireland leave the Union. The Tories and their ill begotten Brexit will be to thank for that.
Any decision about the monarchy is up to the British people. I wrote as much in my first response.
You raise an interesting point: How much does the royal family influence the British economy whether positively or negatively?
treestar
(82,383 posts)There was this part of the ceremony yesterday where the King committed the royal money to the country in return for the "sovereign grant."
The family would of course have built up its ownership of land over the centuries. They have wealth just like Dukes, etc. A lot of information is coming out because it hasn't been relevant for 70 years, so it gets forgotten.