[Finance] Snouts in the bloody trough..

[pastafarian]

I prefer the Jess Phillips MP line: “I enjoy being angry!”
it‘s called justice and it’s worth fighting for.

I cant see the benefit in enjoying being angry either
Seems very negative and counter productive to me

Each to their own though eh............... some people clearly love beeing angry

 

[schmunk]

How about the BBC climate editor, Justin Rowlatt flying out to Spain to report just how hot it was. Beggars belief that they would do such a thing, well maybe not. All have their snouts well and truly stuck in the pot.

Whilst wasteful and thoughtless, it's not clear why you'd consider this "snouts in the pot"?

 

[fly high]

To be fair, it’s the nearly 50% rise in the money for the Royals which gets me most. I’d like to see the justification. Has the price of caviar gone through the roof? The price of champagne rocketed?

Technically, as I understand it, it isn't tax payers money they get. They receive 12% percentage of the profits from crown estates, the government gets the rest. Any rise or fall is all down to how much the profits are.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

One Think Tank or similar did recently cite the pay rises of top earners as a factor in fuelling inflation

I thought it was more excessive profits rather than just pay rises for the elite.

 

[The Clamp]

Technically, as I understand it, it isn't tax payers money they get. They receive 12% percentage of the profits from crown estates, the government gets the rest. Any rise or fall is all down to how much the profits are.

Lord Turnbull, a former cabinet secretary, Whitehall’s most senior civil servant, who was involved in official discussions over royal financing, accused the Treasury of seeking to obfuscate how the monarchy was funded.

He said that linking the royal finances to the profits of the crown estate was “silly” and was motivated by a desire to promote the idea that the king was paying for himself and was reducing the burden on the taxpayer.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Technically, as I understand it, it isn't tax payers money they get. They receive 12% percentage of the profits from crown estates, the government gets the rest. Any rise or fall is all down to how much the profits are.

But this really is a technicality.
In reality George III gave the estates to the Government to manage, when it was fairly worthless, in return for the civil list.

The monarchy may now get a fixed percentage, but at the time they were handed over, it was a government bail out for the King.

 

[The Clamp]

Basically the money for the royals comes from a grant funded by our taxes.

That size of that grant is determined by how much profit their estates make. The money does not come from that profit. It is a grant on top of that profit. Funded by us.

It is hidden in complicated procedure designed to fool the taxpayer into thinking this is self generated money. It is not. It is funded directly by the taxpayer.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I thought it was more excessive profits rather than just pay rises for the elite.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2...ners-driving-inflation?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

i think this is what I had read.

but it basically points out that the ONS shows pay rises for “ordinary” people on average are below inflation. It‘s big earners who get above the rate of inflation pay rises - sometimes (often?) considerably above.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I cant see the benefit in enjoying being angry either
Seems very negative and counter productive to me

Each to their own though eh............... some people clearly love beeing angry

Being angry can actually provide the motivation and spur you on to do something worthwhile!
I guess it ties up loosely with the protestant work ethic ……. Other work ethics are available.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Basically the money for the royals comes from a grant funded by our taxes.

That size of that grant is determined by how much profit their estates make. The money does not come from that profit. It is a grant on top of that profit. Funded by us.

It is hidden in complicated procedure designed to fool the taxpayer into thinking this is self generated money. It is not. It is funded directly by the taxpayer.

Again the term "their estates" is very loose.
They own them in name only. They can't sell them and aren't directly liable for the costs incurred by them.

 

[junior]

Bear pit?

 

[Horses Arse]

There probably does need to be some sort of revolution, but y’know Love Island is on and the Daily Mail said not to so…

When the filling stations run dry of fuel, the streets will be full and the government will fall.

Nothing else will galvanise the masses

 

[The Clamp]

Bear pit?

First on the right. You can’t miss it, it’s next to the Woolworths

 

[BBassic]

Bear pit?

Just because a thread is provocative / controversial doesn't make it a Bear Pit contender.

 

[RandyWanger]

What time does the revolution kick off or has it been postponed?

 

[WATFORD zero]

Bear pit?

Desperate ?

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

“Details published by Treasury show royal family’s grant is expected to increase from £86m to £125m in 2025”.


Ballpark figure for a 21 year old Ecuadorian footballer.

 

[beorhthelm]

Again the term "their estates" is very loose.
They own them in name only. They can' sell them and aren't directly liable for the costs incurred by them.

likewise, most of the funds go to maintenance of parts of the estate, various palaces.

funny people getting upset about something that happens in 2025, and the amount received as % of crown estate profit will half. seems "king's grant halves" wasn't the angle for Guardian readers, though FT did see it more that way, title "British Royal Household faces cut in share of government funding"
(google will take to unblocked page)

​

British royal household faces cut in share of government funding

Sovereign grant level to be lowered to 12% of Crown Estate’s profits after wind farm boon

www.ft.com

 

[Uh_huh_him]

likewise, most of the funds go to maintenance of parts of the estate, various palaces.

funny people getting upset about something that happens in 2025, and the amount received as % of crown estate profit will half. seems "king's grant halves" wasn't the angle for Guardian readers, though FT did see it more that way, title "British Royal Household faces cut in share of government funding"
(google will take to unblocked page)

​

British royal household faces cut in share of government funding

Sovereign grant level to be lowered to 12% of Crown Estate’s profits after wind farm boon

www.ft.com

Or we could go back to 2016 when the funds were increased from 15-25% to pay for the renovation of Buckingham Palace.

 

[The Clamp]

likewise, most of the funds go to maintenance of parts of the estate, various palaces.

funny people getting upset about something that happens in 2025, and the amount received as % of crown estate profit will half. seems "king's grant halves" wasn't the angle for Guardian readers, though FT did see it more that way, title "British Royal Household faces cut in share of government funding"
(google will take to unblocked page)

​

British royal household faces cut in share of government funding

Sovereign grant level to be lowered to 12% of Crown Estate’s profits after wind farm boon

www.ft.com

The arbitrary linkage of the sovereign grant with crown estate profits – which despite the name are public monies – was made all the more egregious by a “golden ratchet” clause stating that while the grant would rise in line with them, it would never fall. Thus democratic oversight was replaced by a pseudo-market mechanism that was free of risk.