this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025

240 points (99.2% liked)

Not The Onion

15969 readers

1350 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

240

Belgian prince loses legal battle to receive social security benefits on top of royal allowance (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by RockBottom@feddit.org to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://feddit.org/post/10436441

top 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] lemmus@lemmy.world 101 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Social security benefits should be universal. Royal allowances should stop immediately. Monarchy should end immediately.

[–] Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago

One cant be democratic if the head of state is unelected and nobility still has influence!

[+] huppakee@lemm.ee -18 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I don't know much about how Belgian royalty behaves, but I argue it would be fair not to end this tradition until they fuck up. Royal allowances and costs of ceremonies etc aren't that high if you consider the diplomatic weight royalties have in foreign countries, even more so in foreign monarchies.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

if you consider the diplomatic weight royalties have in foreign countries

They shouldnt have any diplomatic weight. They should be stripped of anything that separates them from normal citizens.

[–] huppakee@lemm.ee 0 points 2 weeks ago

But they do though. I'm not saying it's fair, just that we better use it since we pay for it.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah you wanna read a little about the shit that the Belgian royal family has caused. Or just about all royal families, for that matter...

[–] huppakee@lemm.ee -1 points 2 weeks ago

If they cause shit than I'd say there is an actual reason to kick them out, as I said I don't know anything about Belgian royals. What I think is that the financial argument is weak, especially compared to the moral argument on whether it's fair or not. I think it'd be better this 'tradation' dies slowly.

Also, I think this guy wanting extra money is a douchebag move. Feel like I need to stress that with all these downvotes.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

I really don't care for that excuse.
They are a buch of parasites and there's no need to give them our money.

[+] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -18 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Yes, we need an elected head of state so we can elect an orange alt right dictator with unchecked power

[–] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 16 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Monarchists being absurd to defend a deplorable family that’s actively shielding a (alleged) pedophile sex trafficker.

Idgaf if the Windsors continue to exist as a bloodline, but they shouldn’t hold significant if unexercised powers, shouldn’t play any role or advocacy in politics, and shouldn’t be whinging about not having enough money to fund their property and land portfolio.

Can’t pay the bills? Oh no, I guess the public/National Trust can take ownership and maintain those building like all the other stately homes that went into administration decades ago.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

The Brits are one of the biggest monarchist bootlickers.
And this for a horrible German family.
Call these fascist parasites Saxen-Gotha, not whatever they opportunistically changed their name to bcs it was 1914.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -4 points 2 weeks ago

Republicans being absurd to suggest we should elect 10x more deplorable people who are sex traffickers into their office.

Also, the Windsor's will profit from their land and property instead of having to give the vast majority of that revenue to the government, as it currently stands

[–] oktoberpaard@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

We could take countries like Finland as an example and keep the power in the parliament. It would be very similar to how constitutional monarchies work, but without the monarchs.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

They get what they deserve

[–] Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 weeks ago

Its always a weird reminder that there are still so many monarchies

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

No more yankee my wankee.