Fair enough. Full disclaimer...I have planted my feet with regards to most of this. I'm a stubborn girl that way and will probably never be dissuaded from my beliefs but I can respect that we all have different thoughts on these topics. As always luvcharles, your knowledge is incredible.
Update...I was saying all the KP stuff as part of a longer transition plan not just kicking everyone to the curb tomorrow. And the Sandringham bit was a random thought given that it's barely used now and that I can't see Charles using it all that much given how he prefers Scotland for the holiday season. I think I was also remembering old articles about either Balmoral or Sandringham's tourist numbers not covering the expenses...so basically running at a lose. Sure that's not the taxpayer's issue but it's also not sustainable. That was more a random thought.
I have to admit, I was posting partly as a devil's advocate thing. But I will say this: I'm not against the slimming down of the monarchy and 5 years ago would not be arguing for the Yorks, but Charles saw himself and his siblings being followed by his sons & their spouses. That now is not going to happen. I think that slimming down, to potentially just William and Kate as their kids would be too young, will be too drastic for people's expectations. I disagree fundamentally with the existence of royalty, but if it is there, it should be exploited fully. Get the value out of them. Make sure the entire country gets visits and attention. (I don't personally agree with being patrons and never visiting, but if those charities benefit from that arrangement and want it to continue, then do still put names to charities.) Open hospitals. Visit fishing villages from Shetland to the Scillies. Visit charities both large and small. There is work enough to include the Yorks on even a part-time basis, and they seem to be two pleasant people who could do this well without making a huge fuss about it.
I love playing devilís advocate...and probably has a touch of that myself so one more thought and then I promise Iíll go back to my corner. Sometimes I get the impression that the thought is that Beatrice and Eugenie could pick up all the slack thatís been left which is easily some 500 engagements a year before add Philips numbers and adjusting for William and Catherine increase since 2017...just to keep doing thousands of engagements a year. But, why should the thought be that they should be busting their butts so William can focus on his passion projects and Catherine can be a hands on mom (with her own passion projects). Arenít they entitled to the same leniency that the Cambridges are getting? If so it could be another decade before theyíve built their respective families and all their kids are in school. So why is there so much support for them to leave their jobs and save the monarchy when itís easily another decade before they should be expected to carry out a medium-heavy schedule. By the time theyíd be expected to be doing more William and Catherine would be approaching theyíre 20th anniversary and the Cambridge kids would be 17, 15, and 13 so William and Catherine will be expected to be doing 300-500 engagements each in addition to support 1-2 major passion projects.
Iím all for Beatrice and Eugenie supporting charities on their own time, and for that support to be recognized in the CC. Iíd also love to see them at larger events like state banquets, for no other reason than weíd get more tiaras. But sometimes the FT working royal idea floated around not just here but other forums and in the media, just doesnít make sense. And I really donít want either Beatrice or Eugenie to get the workshy press that the Cambridges got when they were part time (and William had his part time pilot job). Lord knows the media will go at both of them like crazy.
Now...maybe the BRF will never get to just the sovereign and heirs working but with three kids that would still mean that the roster in Williamís reign (and towards the very end of Charlesís) could be 6-8 adults (assuming George is married and depending on what Charlotte and Louisís spouses do). Sure thatís less than 15 but that might be ok.
Thereís also a good chance that Iím overly cynical about the whole thing with a combination of overly optimistic about the effects of fewer working royals. Itís a vile combination.
Ok Iím sure that some people are done with this and with my thoughts on this so Iím going to try really hard to return to my corner. I might just PM people who want to continue the discussion.