The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > Royal House of Sweden > Current Events Archive

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #841  
Old 10-05-2010, 04:58 PM
doric44's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: toronto, Canada
Posts: 152
well there is always the possibility that in 15-20 years when Victoria could become queen. there may no longer be a monarchy or a great desire to keep it in Sweden and other European countries.

thats always a legitimate possability as well Victoria may never become queen. so the debate over PCP and Sofia getting married might be a mute point at that time



Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
My guess is that PCP won't make any move toward an engagement with Sofia(if that is where this is headed) UNTIL Victoria and Daniel have a child.

He knows that the birth of a child would remove him further from the Succession and take some of the pressure off of him to find a more suitable spouse.

I simply cannot imagine that the King, Queen or Parliament would consider accepting a future Queen Sofia!
__________________

  #842  
Old 10-05-2010, 06:36 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 191
maybe one day they will abolish the monarchy..dont you think its about time.....are they a constitutional monarchy? maybe they should be like the BRF minus the taking taxpayers money....win-win situation perhaps?

Quote:
Originally Posted by doric44 View Post
well there is always the possibility that in 15-20 years when Victoria could become queen. there may no longer be a monarchy or a great desire to keep it in Sweden and other European countries.

thats always a legitimate possability as well Victoria may never become queen. so the debate over PCP and Sofia getting married might be a mute point at that time
well even so...whether he is a prince or not...doesnt disregard the fact that this pair might not be good together for the long run....not to sound pessimistic.
__________________

  #843  
Old 10-06-2010, 09:27 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathalie Cox View Post
^That makes sense. If everything goes fine for them (CP and Sofia) they will probably get engaged after Victoria has a child. Well, it's a possibility.
Yes, unlike getting engaged before Victoria have a child which seem pretty much impossible.
  #844  
Old 10-06-2010, 02:02 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemonaco View Post
maybe one day they will abolish the monarchy..dont you think its about time.....are they a constitutional monarchy? maybe they should be like the BRF minus the taking taxpayers money....win-win situation perhaps?
It is a constitutional monarchy, and I don't understand what you mean by "be like the BRF minus taking the taxpayers money"?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #845  
Old 10-06-2010, 05:32 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemonaco View Post
maybe one day they will abolish the monarchy..dont you think its about time.....are they a constitutional monarchy? maybe they should be like the BRF minus the taking taxpayers money....win-win situation perhaps?
I am not Swedish, so I don't get a vote. But if I was, I'd much rather have a Republic than a former soft porn model as my Queen, representing the nation and it's people.

It just boggles the mind.
  #846  
Old 10-06-2010, 05:42 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
It is a constitutional monarchy, and I don't understand what you mean by "be like the BRF minus taking the taxpayers money"?
lol just abolish the monarchy
  #847  
Old 10-06-2010, 05:44 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemonaco View Post
lol just abolish the monarchy
Why?
And you still haven't answered my question about your comment relating to the BRF?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #848  
Old 10-06-2010, 06:39 PM
KitKat2006's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Oldenburg, Germany
Posts: 593
I don't understand all this talk about abolishing the monarchy. Why? What's wrong with it? Just so there'll be no-one to life of the taxpayers money? There will still be someone to represent the country, no matter if it is king or a president. And a Mr. Obama / Sarkozy / Wulf is getting paid by the people of his country, too. So what is the big difference?

Honestly, I'm always a little bit sad that there isn't a monarchy in Germany anymore. I'd rather have a royal family representing my country then a new president every 5 years (or sooner if one resigns before his 5 years are over like it happened this summer in Germany). A royal family would be a nice constant. They would be faces that absolutely belong to their country and everyone would know that. I'm sure there are a lot of users here that don't know who's head of state in Germany right now. And that's just why I quiet like the idea of a royal family for Germany (even if it's just for representing) and why I'm absolutely pro-monarchy. Absolutely.

That said, I'd really like to know the answer to Lumutqueens question, too.
  #849  
Old 10-06-2010, 06:43 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,329
I can't speak for iluvmonaco, but I BELIEVE that the British taxpayer only techically pays for the The Queen and the DoE via the Civil List. Oh...and security for the royal family.

Prince Charles is paid from the revenue of the Duchy of Cornwall. Which is VERY VERY old...goes back to the The Black Prince (so that is about 600 years old).

The Queen pays for the remaining members of the royal family thru the Civil List. But that only goes for engagements that they keep and their staff.

I believe that it is the way its done. Not sure if its the same in Sweden or not.

For the record, the cost of a democracy is just as expensive as a monarchy. As an American, not only do we pay for the current President but we also pay both Bushes, Clinton, Betty Ford, Lady Bird Johnson, and the Carters. They receive a salary (pension if you like) and lifetime Secret Service security for everyone except the last Bush (he only gets it for 10 years). At one time we were paying for like five or six ex Presidents! So it basically evens itself out if you ask me in terms of cost. That doesn't bother me but no one ever talks about it.
__________________
.

  #850  
Old 10-06-2010, 07:10 PM
KitKat2006's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Oldenburg, Germany
Posts: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
For the record, the cost of a democracy is just as expensive as a monarchy. As an American, not only do we pay for the current President but we also pay both Bushes, Clinton, Betty Ford, Lady Bird Johnson, and the Carters. They receive a salary (pension if you like) and lifetime Secret Service security for everyone except the last Bush (he only gets it for 10 years). At one time we were paying for like five or six ex Presidents! So it basically evens itself out if you ask me in terms of cost. That doesn't bother me but no one ever talks about it.
That's just what I meant with my last posting. So I don't see the need in abolishing a monarchy, that's a nice sign of a long lasting tradition. I like traditions. They're something like an anchor. And I think we all need an anchor in fast times like those we're living in today.
  #851  
Old 10-06-2010, 07:16 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,329
Well I agree to a point. I certainly think you can have traditions in a democracy. For the states (a relatively new country) a democracy is all we know so we do have traditions.

I can understand the differences for countries that used to have a monarchy and you are going to the transition of a democracy. Its interesting and challenging at the same time. And for Germany, its been what...a 100 years....and then the spilt between the two Germanies....maybe thats why the German tabloids have such a fascination for the Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian royal families? Do they follow the German royals the same way?

Getting back to the topic....I think many who have concerns for a Carl Phililp/Sofia pairing believe (and I am sure they will correct me if I am wrong) that such a relationship will cheapen the monarchy and the concept of royalty. And thus, allow those republican minded Swedes in calling for the monarchy to be disposed of. Because really, if the royals are just like us, why do you need a royal family.
__________________
.

  #852  
Old 10-06-2010, 07:40 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 6,460
Thank you Zonk...you have explained this so many times that I am baffled why posters keep asking "WHY??" we think the concept of monarchy is in very real danger...if not for the current generation then most certainly for the future.

It has been, and is still being CHEAPENED by the choices some of the Royals are making with their personal lives.

BTW...the magnificent Lady Bird Johnson died three years ago. She was almost 100 yrs old. The taxpayers paid for her expenses a long time but every penny was worth it, imo...she gave this country a lot!
  #853  
Old 10-06-2010, 07:48 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,329
Thats right Moonmaiden....I forgot that Lady Bird Johnson passed.She certainly was a treasure. I love driving down the GW Parkway and seeing Lady Johnson's Grove (I think that's what it is called...its very beautiful!). But you certainly remember paying for all the Presidents and First Ladies don't you? And let be said, Americans can complain about certain things....but I have never heard anyone complaining about supporting our previous First Families. Maybe its out of sight out of mind. We literally pay Clinton 100 plus K a year in a pension but we pay the Secret Service for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, 365 days a year. ROUND THE CLOCK SECURITY. For him and Hillary!

I agree that some of the most recent Royals have made some somewhat questionable choices in partners. Those who have, however, have managed to make it work. I am thinking about Daniel and Mette Marit whose backgrounds were questionable but they seem (at least in MM's case its too early for Daniel) to be fitting in well. Again, Sofia can be a very nice girl.....and they can be in love or falling...its not that.

I wonder if Sofia is the proverbial straw that brakes the camel's back. Daniel was okay but Sofia might just end the whole shabang.
__________________
.

  #854  
Old 10-06-2010, 08:00 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 191
well the way people have been speaking of sweden's disapproval of the cost of victoria's wedding ....i thought they were heading towards abolishing the monarchy...especially because some sweds are annoyed by PC's antics...
  #855  
Old 10-06-2010, 08:18 PM
KitKat2006's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Oldenburg, Germany
Posts: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I can understand the differences for countries that used to have a monarchy and you are going to the transition of a democracy. Its interesting and challenging at the same time. And for Germany, its been what...a 100 years....and then the spilt between the two Germanies....maybe thats why the German tabloids have such a fascination for the Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian royal families? Do they follow the German royals the same way?
Well, we had a very exciting century for Germany (Monarchy, Weimarer Republic, Nazi Germany (unfortunatly), Democracy in two Germanys (even if the Democracy it was more in the name of the state of East Germany), Reunification (which still baffles me, because it wasn't a bloody one)). It's hard to get your head around that many concepts of a country. That much I can tell you. It's interesting but sometimes it's just to much and I envy others for their constant concept.

And yes, the German tabloids do follow the German royals too, but not as much as the foreign royals. The foreign ones are known better by the people, because they're in TV, newspapers, etc more often than the German royals. Maybe this is because the royal status isn't officially a status in Germany anymore, which means that their titles are just an add-on to their names nowadays and nothing more (as I'm sure you're aware of). German royals are royals without any right to exist contrary to those royals of the other European countries where the concept of "Royalty" still exists. That's why they're more interesting to the people in Germany.

But I have to admit, our German tabloids are one of the worst. It's no wonder that the royals always sue them (most likely the Scandinavians. I remember Madeleine winning a proceeding (? right word? I'm not sure) a few years ago and getting a lot of money out of it. And she deserved every cent of it)
  #856  
Old 10-07-2010, 03:53 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I can't speak for iluvmonaco, but I BELIEVE that the British taxpayer only techically pays for the The Queen and the DoE via the Civil List. Oh...and security for the royal family.

Prince Charles is paid from the revenue of the Duchy of Cornwall. Which is VERY VERY old...goes back to the The Black Prince (so that is about 600 years old).

The Queen pays for the remaining members of the royal family thru the Civil List. But that only goes for engagements that they keep and their staff.

I believe that it is the way its done. Not sure if its the same in Sweden or not.

For the record, the cost of a democracy is just as expensive as a monarchy. As an American, not only do we pay for the current President but we also pay both Bushes, Clinton, Betty Ford, Lady Bird Johnson, and the Carters. They receive a salary (pension if you like) and lifetime Secret Service security for everyone except the last Bush (he only gets it for 10 years). At one time we were paying for like five or six ex Presidents! So it basically evens itself out if you ask me in terms of cost. That doesn't bother me but no one ever talks about it.
Your quite correct that the taxpayer only pays for the Queen and DoE via the Civil List which the money from the Duchy of Lancaster is paid into. I believe it costs us 67p a year or something like that.

William and Harry or looked after by their rather, but as you said The Queen pays for her other children via the civil list and the in turn pay for their children eg, Beatrice and Eugenie.

I like the point you make about how a democracy costs just as much or more than a Monarchy and we get less tiaras on show.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #857  
Old 10-07-2010, 04:21 AM
SpeedDial's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitKat2006 View Post
That's just what I meant with my last posting. So I don't see the need in abolishing a monarchy, that's a nice sign of a long lasting tradition. I like traditions. They're something like an anchor. And I think we all need an anchor in fast times like those we're living in today.
But that's just the thing - the SRF isn't even following most of the traditions anymore! So why bother?
  #858  
Old 10-07-2010, 04:23 AM
PetraHel's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
For the record, the cost of a democracy is just as expensive as a monarchy.
Very true. People don´t often realize that even republic isn´t free of charge. Therefore is absolut nonsense to abolish monarchy because of money, with republic there will be no savings. Buildings have to be kept, whoever is in, either King or President, the same with security, salaries. Republic is the same expenses, much less glitter and no continuity.
The other think is that some royals´ personal life doesn´t look very regal. At first it could be accepted positively like approaching the people, but what is much, is much. Now royals are so close to people that people start to ask, why to have them at all, when they are so common. I think the money are used here as a substitionary argument, that in fact people are bothered by non-royal behaviour of some of them.
  #859  
Old 10-07-2010, 06:39 AM
KitKat2006's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Oldenburg, Germany
Posts: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedDial View Post
But that's just the thing - the SRF isn't even following most of the traditions anymore! So why bother?
What traditions aren't they following anymore? I see a lot of traditions. They're attending the nobel price ceremony every year and also the opening of the parliament and Victoria day in july. Victoria is kind of an ambassador of the Arctic together with Haakon and Frederik, Silvia and Madeleine are doing a lot for World Childhood foundation, Madeleine has also "My big day" on her regular agenda and every 2 years, Silvia, Carl Gustav and Carl Philip are rooting for their Olympic teams. And they all make a lot of visits to foreign countries and represent Sweden. That's traditions enough for me.

And I'm sure there are a lot of other little traditions we don't even realise. For example, what's with the car that Victoria used on her wedding day? It was an oldtimer. Maybe it's an important car for important events in the royal family. Or the carriage they used after the wedding. Also something traditional. Or the whole thing with the engagement or wedding. That's a big traditional thing in itself, because no kid of a President would declare their engagement and celebrate their wedding that openly. It was not only a wedding but a declaration that the dynasty will last a generation longer. It's just the same as when Victoria was introduced officially as the heir of Carl Gustav when the became off age. That's something traditional, too.

You don't have all that in another state status.
  #860  
Old 10-07-2010, 06:54 AM
Iva's Avatar
Iva Iva is offline
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: -, Slovakia
Posts: 514
There have been some very good points made in the last posts, the costs of monarchy and democracy are about the same. The problem is most people do not realize that and those (politicians) who are yelling the loudest do not want ordinary people to realize that. They point out just how expensive the monarchy is, but do not talk that in democracy you have to pay the cost for the president, his wife, his office, former presidents, their office etc. Why? Because it could be them who will be in the position of the new president and get paid by the taxpayers. In monarchy, they have no chance to get there.
In these days the position of president and monarch (in Europe) is about the same, they represent their country with no real political power. What I see as advantage in monarchy is that they are brough up to represent their country, they are educated for it, speak several foreign languages, whereas presidents often come and go, with no education in diplomacy.
Once I’ve heard someone said that monarchy coming closer to people (marrying commoners) is necessarily in these days and I fully agree with them. These days’ people are often irritated by those privileged ones. The old kings and queens can turn in their graves, but if the tradition of royalty marrying royalty only would continue the monarchy would have been already abolished several years ago. Other thing is that there is no real reason to do it these days. In the past royal marriages have been used to gain political power. What would be the point to do it nowadays? What would be the point to marry someone, you don’t love, who is not supporting you, who does not make you feel safe, but has blue blood? What would happen if for example, Swedish Princess marries a Danish Prince? Nothing, Sweden or Denmark as country would gain nothing from it, the Swedish or Danish taxpayers would gain nothing from it, only royal watchers would be excited.
So why being so opposed to royalty dating/living with/marrying commoners? Not just speaking about Sofia, I don’t think it’s important to judge someone’s past and where is he coming from. I don’t think that all people around the world are saints and never did something they regret now and for sure won’t do it in the future. What is IMO important is presence and future. Being royal is not just about wearing tiaras, expensive dresses, going to theater, handing prizes, it’s also about representing your country, living in the constant spotlight of the media, having limited private life, being publicly criticized for something you did or didn’t do etc. Not all people can handle that, not even all those who are born as royals can handle that. I think at some point all the commoners realize that and revalue if they are willing to give up their freedom to some extent and change their whole life to be with someone they love and what’s the most important thing to represent his/hers country, not for 5 years as president, but for their whole life. Yes, the taxpayers are for sure entitled to question them, question their ability to represent them, but what I find funny is that it's mostly people outside the "insert the country you wish" who are criticizing and questioning these commoners.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
prince carl philip, relationship, relationships


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Press Reports about Carl Philip and Sofia Hellqvist, Part 2: April 2012 - June 2014 Marengo Current Events Archive 2016 06-27-2014 12:18 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style christening of prince alexander coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll fashion suggestions gothia cup grand duke jean greece hereditary grand duchess stéphanie's fashion & style kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania casual outfit royal fashion september 2016 sheikha moza state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:06 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises