Given how old, the crown jewels are. IE when that Money was spent.
How much difference do you think selling them or even never having purchased them would make.
Selling them. Divided between 66m people. Pennies,
Never having purchased them. Remember money doesn’t disappear. The people making them were paid. Hired others and spread the money through society.
Land purchases are less of an asset to society. But spending on building palaces has always resulted in money going to the rest of society and improving the lives of the rest of the nation. Not somehow removing it from people
I’d say the modern royal post George III spending deal. Where all crown land is managed by the government and its income goes towards the general tax fund, In exchange for (currently 20%) being used to maintain palaces and funding crown/royal family events etc.
Is under austerity governments. More harmful, in preventing that income, funding jobs for lower income people.
Corporate trickle-down economics argument to reduce taxation may be utter crap.
But the history of royal spending and more modern (1940s+) government spending def has a trickle down effect ignored by modern capitalism supporting governments.
Yet the king sits on a golden throne and wears jewels worth more than those kids will earn in their life times
Given how old, the crown jewels are. IE when that Money was spent.
How much difference do you think selling them or even never having purchased them would make.
Selling them. Divided between 66m people. Pennies,
Never having purchased them. Remember money doesn’t disappear. The people making them were paid. Hired others and spread the money through society.
Land purchases are less of an asset to society. But spending on building palaces has always resulted in money going to the rest of society and improving the lives of the rest of the nation. Not somehow removing it from people I’d say the modern royal post George III spending deal. Where all crown land is managed by the government and its income goes towards the general tax fund, In exchange for (currently 20%) being used to maintain palaces and funding crown/royal family events etc.
Is under austerity governments. More harmful, in preventing that income, funding jobs for lower income people.
Corporate trickle-down economics argument to reduce taxation may be utter crap.
But the history of royal spending and more modern (1940s+) government spending def has a trickle down effect ignored by modern capitalism supporting governments.