It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: odzeandennz
How about getting rid of the monarch completely... That's a viable solution for the 21st century.
originally posted by: schuyler
No, you don't want to get rid of royalty, simply because of the tourist draw. They more than pay for themselves with that alone. England doesn't have much going for it other than the tourist industry. People travel to the UK to see the old houses now in the National Trust, since the owners were taxed out of them. Regarding being "set up" what do you think is going to happen? The Queen is old. She might live as long as the Queen Mother did, but that is statistically unlikely. OF COURSE Charles is next in line, unless he defers to his son. Even if he does not, he'll only have a few years on the throne. He's already nearly 70. This is not rocket science.
Canada is a Crown Corporation . Maybe there will be a hostile take over by some other large Corporation and Canada will get liquidated . Oh the possibilities or maybe probabilities .
Go check out the queens diamond, and egg, collections. Their land holdings. Etc. And you tell me.
originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Bluntone22
£££££££. Need I say more. But Charles is totally different to the Queen. The Queen plays along with parliament but Charles is a different kettle of fish. Before he has been warned about overstepping his authority and if he becomes King he WILL try to exercise more power he hasn't got. It can lead to constitutional problems.
originally posted by: schuyler
No, you don't want to get rid of royalty, simply because of the tourist draw...
originally posted by: Beyond Creation
Let's remember all of the unjustified, immoral and illegal wars she prevented.