this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026

89 points (95.9% liked)

United Kingdom

6769 readers

274 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

Royal Family to get a 94% surge in taxpayer-funded income whilst 'it's subjects' must expect less (www.thecanary.co)

submitted 16 hours ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Taxpayer funding for the Royal Family is set to rise by 94%, as public services are cut and households told to 'tighten their belts'

top 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] IPeaceInYourFace@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

The FGC-9 is free, and can solve this problem.

[–] matelt@feddit.uk 2 points 4 hours ago

I'm not (and never will be) a subject yet the taxes I pay go towards the monarchy. How I wish there was a way to opt out!

[–] MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works 20 points 9 hours ago

The phrase "working royals" always gets my goat. Standing around smiling gormlessly after cutting a ribbon isn't "work", you divots.

Don't want to live in Buckingham palace? Fine, it'll make a great hostel for the homeless.

[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 27 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Take asylum seekers. Politicians love complaining about the cost of putting people in hotels, but they created that cost. If you stop people from working while their claims are processed, of course they’re going to need somewhere to live and support to survive.

💯

[–] fakeman_pretendname@feddit.uk 18 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Fun fact: Those hotels aren't exactly giving their "best deals" either. They (or the companies managing them) are charging the government £140 per night for rooms that would normally be less than half of that, or wouldn't be used at all because they're not up to standard.

The anger for some reason is directed at the people "just trying to live" and not at the companies deliberately doubling their prices to steal from the country.

[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago

There's a similar thing in homelessness. Landlords are taking £900/m from the councils per person in 4+ people homes with barely working utilities and health and safety violations.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 7 points 9 hours ago

Parasites

[–] osanna@lemmy.vg 28 points 13 hours ago

Fuck the royals so fucking hard. Getting paid millions or even billions to sit in their golden throne with their billion dollar Crown Jewels while the rest of us starve. Fuck them. Fuck all of this shit.

[+] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz -8 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Are we expecting less? Minimum wage has increased above inflation on average over the past decade. Plus as the economy has become more stable since Truss got kicked out my mortgage rate has dropped pretty significantly, saving £200 a month. I expect it is similar for others too although the exact amount probably varies a fair bit. As far as % goes mine is likely one of the larger examples as we bought at the peak interest rates on a 2 year fix.Q

But yeah fuck the royal family

[–] tenebrisnox@feddit.uk 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Food has increased by nearly 40% in 5 years and, according to projections, will rise to 50% by the end of 2026. Energy has increased by 75+% in the same period. Rents have increased approximately 40% as well.

Wage increases are not keeping up with these costs. Combined with increases in tax plus benefits freezes and cuts most people are putting up with less. Parents skipping meals so their children can eat and the exponential rise in food bank use are only two examples.

Unfortunately, the reaction to this is largely taking the form of "raising the flags" and blaming immigrants.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz -2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

How much of those rent increases are because of Truss as you are using a 5 year period? Mortgage rates are a pretty big contributor to rent rates and they are getting cheaper compared to 3 years ago.

I don't know about you, but for us food/energy is pocket change compared to housing. So even if they have increased 40% that makes fuck all difference compared to the reduced mortgage.

[–] tenebrisnox@feddit.uk 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It's not "pocket change". For most households in UK, food, energy and rent/mortgage take up about 70% of income. That doesn't include anything else or other bills (or alcohol or going out or clothing etc). For a lower-earning familiy it takes up considerably more than that.

Truss' budget accelerated for a short-term period what was happening to the economy (and mortgages). Economists believe that the rises would have happened anyway. If mortgages are going DOWN why are rents going UP?

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

For most households in UK, food, energy and rent/mortgage take up about 70% of income.

Did you actually read what I said? Put it another way, if rent is 55% of income and energy+food is 15%, the problem really is rent, not food/energy.

[–] tenebrisnox@feddit.uk 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

By focusing on mortgages (which is how you started) you miss the extent of the problem. That's why you feel that things for YOU aren't that bad. It's not true that 55% goes on rent/mortgage. The numbers are roughly 20% for households with mortgages, 35% for rent (slightly lower for social housing). Low-earners, as I said earlier, get hit the hardest and spend much more of their income on mortgages/rent. The problem is the perfect storm of food + energy + rent\motgage + taxation + low-levels of welfare support in UK.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 1 points 53 minutes ago

Wtf are you buying to eat if only 20% of your income goes on mortgage and 50% on food/energy?