I can't wait for the queen to die. She's been living off our taxes for 65 years, yet contributes nothing.
Is there a need for monarchy any more? What would be the harm in getting rid of the monarchy and trading it for a president?
I don't wanna hear "hurrdurr the character of the country" fuck off. Our countries identity was diminished when we decided to let ample amounts of immigrants in.
immigrants have destroyed your country
you literally have sharia law courts
>sort yourselves out m8
Yes it's time to end the monarchy desu.
50%
Then the immigrants are the fault of democracy and the will of the people, not the monarch. I'm not a monarchist, but don't blame Her Majesty for something she didn't directly decree.
Stop re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. You're being invaded. Do something about that.
you're assuming the op is british
t. Mohamed
But he claims to be. No need to point it out, Paco.
That's Alberto Barbosa, not Paco.
...
>contributes nothing
They're living tourist traps and probably help sell billions of magazines to women with their styles and antics.
I know it's silly, but I would bet that the rate of return on the monarchy in Britain is not negative.
I agree monarchy needs to go. Federalise Great Britain and Ireland
>yet contributes nothing
I think you might want to take another look at how the monarchy is funded, m8.
The Crown estate writes a huge cheque for slightly over £1bn to the exchequror, and then Westminster votes the Royals in the region of £45million back again.
We still gain by a huge factor on this ongoing dance of money.
Not to mention she owns a fifth of the dry land on the planet. That's power incarnate. Probably best not provoke her.
>Is there a need for monarchy any more? What would be the harm in getting rid of the monarchy and trading it for a president?
Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a Trinitarian Monarch. I don't personally hold anything against the Queen, but my loyalty to the gods is higher.
>What would be the harm in getting rid of the monarchy and trading it for a president?
What would be the benefit? You will pay just as much for them. The only difference is that they are elected every few years and you run the risk of something like President Sadiq Khan, the first Muslim President of Britain.
She's given more money back to the UK government than she's given by them in terms of any allowance.
Even Parliament knows that's a fucking fact. She's the last remaining tie to the great United Kingdom of old, and when she's gone, you can enjoy the fact that you have that cuck Charles for your new King- who really isn't worth shit to the British public or the world.
A country needs a moral center, a national symbol it can build around. Queen Elizabeth qualifies in spades.
Was going to respond, but this guy basically got the jist of it.
Also, the constitutional security of having a non-partisan head of state is invaluable. There is a reason why we are the longest running uninterrupted democracy.
I've never met a republican who can explicitly tell me what it is that is wrong with a parliamentary monarchy and what it is explicitly they want to replace it with, and how that will make the situation any better.
It fucks with my OCD. Why in the hell is he Prince Philip instead of King Philip? Elizabeth II's mother went by Queen Elizabeth when she was the consort, did she not?
On the contrary my friend. We need to move more toward monarchies rather than away from them. The people can't be trusted with the task f governance.
thedarkenlightenment.com
Patriachy. People assume a King outranks a Queen so if he was King Phillip it would make him sound superior or even just equal to her, when he is not.
>Yeah fuck the monarchy let us live the chaos of republicanism because it can never go wrong!
Presidents just represent the local aristocracies, don`t trade the most stable system for a republic.
King is a higher rank than Queen. Can't have the monarchs husband be a higher rank.
According to Doctor Who, pic will be the Queen in a few centuries.
Alright, I see. I wonder if that will ever change. But it seems like the succession is all male for the rest of our lives anyway.
>The Crown estate
Which they received legitimately and would therefore go back to the people
Cucks
If the bitch actually invoked her power on warmongering Tony Blair she would be worth the tax money.
Why would it go to "muh people", it's private property.
Also, it's less valuable without the monarchy.
desu they should have sharia courts exclusively for sandniggers and have it so they have to face their sentencing in a muslim country like Saudi or Iran. Maybe then we would have an excuse to clean up our society because we could just throw unruly sandniggers off the boat back in their shithole countries
Queen Regent and Queen Consort are not the same thing even though both are commonly just titled as queen.
Fake Brit
HHHHHNNNNGGGGGGGGG That Navajo-Kayenta contact in the background HNNGGGGGG
No. The Crown Estate is more powerful than God.
Even scratching the surface of research, it is the powersource of the City of London. New York and Dubai.
You ain't taking shit from it. It owns you. You are property whether you know it or not.
You know that parliament gets the rent from her estates right? These numbers come in at something like 160 million pounds. It costs 40 million a year to pay for the queen and her family to keep living as they do.
I'm no mathematician, but I think 160 million is bigger than 40 million...
Not to mention that mad tourist money