Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He absolutely will get rid and of the housing for the moocher royals. He’ll keep Edward and Sophie as working royals until he doesn’t need them. Sophie was working hard to get close to the queen to get something better for her kids but she can kiss that notion bye bye.
Charles is not generous and will get rid of as many as he can.
Ha! You know absolutely nothing yet you talk like you are his confidante.![]()
Just wait!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can’t think of ne Commonwealth nation that plans to stay.
There are significant minorities wi th in commonwealth governments that want to stay. Also, many are grateful Britain was a far better colonial power than most and did a good job investing in infrastructure and democracy.
It is not that commonwealth citizens want nothing to do with them - many of us want to retain the cultural ties but in a grown up type way - we have grown up and left home but still want to come and visit for a cup of tea and scones.
Quite a bit of delusional white washing…….
Anonymous wrote:He absolutely will get rid and of the housing for the moocher royals. He’ll keep Edward and Sophie as working royals until he doesn’t need them. Sophie was working hard to get close to the queen to get something better for her kids but she can kiss that notion bye bye.
Charles is not generous and will get rid of as many as he can.
Anonymous wrote:Im curious as to when he’ll revoke Beatrice and Eugenia’s titles. I also wonder when he’ll kick the Duke of Gloucester, Prince and Princes Michael of Kent, and others out of their housing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can’t think of ne Commonwealth nation that plans to stay.
There are significant minorities wi th in commonwealth governments that want to stay. Also, many are grateful Britain was a far better colonial power than most and did a good job investing in infrastructure and democracy.
It is not that commonwealth citizens want nothing to do with them - many of us want to retain the cultural ties but in a grown up type way - we have grown up and left home but still want to come and visit for a cup of tea and scones.
Quite a bit of delusional white washing…….
How so?
Not everyone within commonwealth countries wants to cut ties but a small majority do. Many don’t want to let go of their cultural heritage altogether.
How is this delusional?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A tone deaf one? Looks like a 100 of his staff received notice of possible termination during the royal mourning period.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62897488.amp
Already been posted. It’s the queens old staff. Who cares? Charles should keeps his staff and the queen’s staff?
Some of us don’t live our lives on DCUM’s entertainment thread.And obviously the 100 down sized staff do care. Any competent institution should have a better process for downsizing staff so it doesn’t become a reputational risk.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A tone deaf one? Looks like a 100 of his staff received notice of possible termination during the royal mourning period.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62897488.amp
Already been posted. It’s the queens old staff. Who cares? Charles should keeps his staff and the queen’s staff?
Some of us don’t live our lives on DCUM’s entertainment thread.And obviously the 100 down sized staff do care. Any competent institution should have a better process for downsizing staff so it doesn’t become a reputational risk.
Don't be dense. They would have been planning for this a long while. It came as a shock to know one. You don't care about any of these people you just want another reason to pick and whine.
Its “no one”, not “know one.” And where is the evidence that this had been planned and communicated for a long time? If it had been, the public workers union probably wouldn’t have been so quick to denounce the layoffs. There are experts who manage layoffs so they don’t become problems.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A tone deaf one? Looks like a 100 of his staff received notice of possible termination during the royal mourning period.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62897488.amp
Already been posted. It’s the queens old staff. Who cares? Charles should keeps his staff and the queen’s staff?
Some of us don’t live our lives on DCUM’s entertainment thread.And obviously the 100 down sized staff do care. Any competent institution should have a better process for downsizing staff so it doesn’t become a reputational risk.
Don't be dense. They would have been planning for this a long while. It came as a shock to know one. You don't care about any of these people you just want another reason to pick and whine.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A tone deaf one? Looks like a 100 of his staff received notice of possible termination during the royal mourning period.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62897488.amp
Already been posted. It’s the queens old staff. Who cares? Charles should keeps his staff and the queen’s staff?
Some of us don’t live our lives on DCUM’s entertainment thread.And obviously the 100 down sized staff do care. Any competent institution should have a better process for downsizing staff so it doesn’t become a reputational risk.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A tone deaf one? Looks like a 100 of his staff received notice of possible termination during the royal mourning period.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62897488.amp
Already been posted. It’s the queens old staff. Who cares? Charles should keeps his staff and the queen’s staff?
And obviously the 100 down sized staff do care. Any competent institution should have a better process for downsizing staff so it doesn’t become a reputational risk. Anonymous wrote:A tone deaf one? Looks like a 100 of his staff received notice of possible termination during the royal mourning period.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62897488.amp
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
If a pen bled ink all over you, any normal person would be frustrated. It probably stains everything in sight.
+1 Stays on the skin for days.
Signed,
Fountain pen enthusiast
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Im curious as to when he’ll revoke Beatrice and Eugenia’s titles. I also wonder when he’ll kick the Duke of Gloucester, Prince and Princes Michael of Kent, and others out of their housing.
He will do none of those things. In regards to Beatrice and Eugenie (the correct name) he literally cannot. They are princesses by birth, born the grandchildren of a sovreign through the male line.
DP. Just as a side comment, the other people PP mentions - Duke of Gloucester, Duke of Kent - are also princes by birth. They are also grandsons of a monarch (George V). Their titles won’t be revoked either, although they probably will be kicked out of their housing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I can’t think of ne Commonwealth nation that plans to stay.
There are significant minorities wi th in commonwealth governments that want to stay. Also, many are grateful Britain was a far better colonial power than most and did a good job investing in infrastructure and democracy.
It is not that commonwealth citizens want nothing to do with them - many of us want to retain the cultural ties but in a grown up type way - we have grown up and left home but still want to come and visit for a cup of tea and scones.
Quite a bit of delusional white washing…….