Weird to see all the non-pro Royal family comments censored on here. Why? What has the royal family got to do with Hacker News and why does it matter if people on here are pro or anti Philip?
Of course there are exceptions! Most people are empathetic and few openly celebrate the death of a 99-year-old. But I think it's fair to say that a large percent of the community here has reason to not be overly sentimental about the passing of Prince Philip.
0. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-que...
"The Queen successfully lobbied the government to change a draft law in order to conceal her “embarrassing” private wealth from the public, according to documents discovered by the Guardian."
> They are literally net contributors on the basis of this alone.
How can you know this? Without a comprehensive and independent accounting of their donations and expenses, it's literally impossible to say whether they are "net contributors" or not.
It's nice to think that the monarchy is looking out for the people of the Commonwealth. But if that were the case, why would the Queen be lobbying--in secret!--to keep her vast wealth obscured from the public?
Last I checked it didn’t matter how one acquired something as long as one owns it. It’s really irrelevant how they came into that land.
[0] https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/media-and-insights/ne...
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/372882/uk-royal-family-e...
The sovereign does not own it, but takes part of the profit from it to fund the royal family, and gives the rest to the treasury.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate has a good background.
Where did your assets come from? If you own land, you bought it from someone. They bought it from someone. Go far enough back in history, and you'll find the beginning of that chain starts with someone being fucked over violently. Generally, we put it down to "time immemorial" and leave it at that. But if you want to give up your assets to those they were stolen from, go right ahead.